[flagged]
They... do? Or rather, they built a system where they don't need to; macs happily run Linux on bare metal or VMs. (Whether Linux supports Apple hardware well is another matter)
Apple approves driver that lets Nvidia eGPUs work with Arm Macs
131–140 of 262 posts
Re: Apple approves driver that lets Nvidia eGPUs work with Arm Macs
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's normal behavior when your server is being reverse-engineered or abused. Video bandwidth is not free. Apple's decision is not constrained by server logic or ballooning costs, it is entirely a client-based policy to not sign CUDA drivers.
> That's normal behavior when your server is being reverse-engineered or abused. Video bandwidth is not free. Microsoft rewrote their Windows Phone native client to pass through Google's ads. Google still blocked it. Was it normal behavior when Google blocked Amazon Fire devices from connecting to YouTube with a web browser during the Google/Amazon corporate spat? To be fair, Google did back down almost immediately w…
Again - servers are always offered at-will. If the service provider wants to boot you out, their TOS usually won't give you the right to renegotiate service.
Clients are not offered at-will, they either work or they don't. Nvidia ships AArch64 UNIX drivers, Apple is the one that neglects their UNIX clients.
Re: Apple approves driver that lets Nvidia eGPUs work with Arm Macs
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's normal behavior when your server is being reverse-engineered or abused. Video bandwidth is not free. Apple's decision is not constrained by server logic or ballooning costs, it is entirely a client-based policy to not sign CUDA drivers.
There hasn't been any abuse in this story as far as I know, it's not like mass downloads of videos happened with their client.
That's besides the point, you don't own the server. You cannot expect the server to work forever, or demand a right to access it.
You do own the client though. In the example upstream, the failure to support macOS clients can't be blamed on Nvidia because they already wrote AArch64 UNIX support.
Re: Apple approves driver that lets Nvidia eGPUs work with Arm Macs
#134A good technical project, but honestly useless in like 90% of scenarios. You want to use an NVidia GPU for LLM ? just buy a basic PC on second hand (the GPU is the primary cost anyway), you want to use Mac for good amount of VRAM ? Buy a Mac. With this proposed solution you have an half-backed system, the GPU is limited by the Thunderbolt port and you don’t have access to all of NVidia tool and library, and on other…
I misunderstood eGPU for virtual GPU. But I was wrong it means external GPU.
Re: Apple approves driver that lets Nvidia eGPUs work with Arm Macs
#135Re: Apple approves driver that lets Nvidia eGPUs work with Arm Macs
#136Re: Apple approves driver that lets Nvidia eGPUs work with Arm Macs
#137Re: Apple approves driver that lets Nvidia eGPUs work with Arm Macs
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That's normal behavior when your server is being reverse-engineered or abused. Video bandwidth is not free. Microsoft rewrote their Windows Phone native client to pass through Google's ads. Google still blocked it. Was it normal behavior when Google blocked Amazon Fire devices from connecting to YouTube with a web browser during the Google/Amazon corporate spat? To be fair, Google did back down almost immediately w…
Again - servers are always offered at-will. If the service provider wants to boot you out, their TOS usually won't give you the right to renegotiate service. Clients are not offered at-will, they either work or they don't. Nvidia ships AArch64 UNIX drivers, Apple is the one that neglects their UNIX clients.
Using your monopoly market share video service as a weapon against companies offering platforms that compete with your own is textbook antitrust behavior.
Google used YouTube as a weapon against both Windows Phone and devices running Amazon's Fire fork of Android.
Re: Apple approves driver that lets Nvidia eGPUs work with Arm Macs
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
There hasn't been any abuse in this story as far as I know, it's not like mass downloads of videos happened with their client.
That's besides the point, you don't own the server. You cannot expect the server to work forever, or demand a right to access it. You do own the client though. In the example upstream, the failure to support macOS clients can't be blamed on Nvidia because they already wrote AArch64 UNIX support.
You cannot use a monopoly market share product like YouTube as a weapon against companies who compete with you in other areas.
This is as basic as antitrust law gets.
Re: Apple approves driver that lets Nvidia eGPUs work with Arm Macs
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
Again - servers are always offered at-will. If the service provider wants to boot you out, their TOS usually won't give you the right to renegotiate service. Clients are not offered at-will, they either work or they don't. Nvidia ships AArch64 UNIX drivers, Apple is the one that neglects their UNIX clients.
Using your monopoly market share video service as a weapon against companies offering platforms that compete with your own is textbook antitrust behavior. Google used YouTube as a weapon against both Windows Phone and devices running Amazon's Fire fork of Android.
> monopoly market share video service
A "monopoly" "service"? What have they monopolized, laziness? It's not the App Store, you can go replace it with DailyMotion at your earliest convenience.
You're still retreading why your original comment was not at all relevant to the critique being made. We have precedent for prosecuting monopolistic behavior in America, but it doesn't encompass services even when they're mandatory to use the client. It does have a precedent for arbitrarily preventing competitors from shipping a runtime that competes with the default OS, incidentally.