Is there a way to support the work?
Dissecting the Apple M1 GPU, Part III
21–30 of 131 posts
Re: Dissecting the Apple M1 GPU, Part III
#22Unrelated - All this work is done by an 18 year old. Absolutely incredible. Some people are simply built differently and admittedly, it makes me jealous.
Something about this comment on each of Alyssa’s posts[1] rubs me the wrong way. I find her work remarkable even without the context of her age. Why mention it? Highlighting it is almost diminutive, even though I know that the comment is not intended to be that way. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25875552
You're right, though, people are in fact capable of strong work at many ages, including their teens, and it can be good to remember that.
Re: Dissecting the Apple M1 GPU, Part III
#23Unrelated - All this work is done by an 18 year old. Absolutely incredible. Some people are simply built differently and admittedly, it makes me jealous.
I would like to know how it came to pass. Are her parents CS professors??
Re: Dissecting the Apple M1 GPU, Part III
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple are doing it because there’s no benefit to them in doing it the way that you want them to. Apple Pay the piper, and Apple call the tune. Whether you like it or not is immaterial.
Apple has every right to do that as they control their stack. And people who favor FOSS projects have every right to criticize Apple for exercising their control in a way that adversely impacts FOSS.
> ...pointless NIH and lack of collaboration here. > Apple are doing it out of rather sickening lock-in culture in the company and Metal is far from the only example like that.
Re: Dissecting the Apple M1 GPU, Part III
#25Re: Dissecting the Apple M1 GPU, Part III
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's an advantage to sabotage the adoption of common API like Vulkan. It holds the progress back and I totally blame Apple for pointless NIH and lack of collaboration here. Apple are doing it out of rather sickening lock-in culture in the company and Metal is far from the only example like that.
Apple are doing it because there’s no benefit to them in doing it the way that you want them to. Apple Pay the piper, and Apple call the tune. Whether you like it or not is immaterial.
Re: Dissecting the Apple M1 GPU, Part III
#27Re: Dissecting the Apple M1 GPU, Part III
#28Unrelated - All this work is done by an 18 year old. Absolutely incredible. Some people are simply built differently and admittedly, it makes me jealous.
Something about this comment on each of Alyssa’s posts[1] rubs me the wrong way. I find her work remarkable even without the context of her age. Why mention it? Highlighting it is almost diminutive, even though I know that the comment is not intended to be that way. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25875552
Re: Dissecting the Apple M1 GPU, Part III
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple has every right to do that as they control their stack. And people who favor FOSS projects have every right to criticize Apple for exercising their control in a way that adversely impacts FOSS.
Sure, but comments like this attribute hostility instead of simple practicality. > ...pointless NIH and lack of collaboration here. > Apple are doing it out of rather sickening lock-in culture in the company and Metal is far from the only example like that.
Re: Dissecting the Apple M1 GPU, Part III
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the advantage of building your hardware and your software under the same roof. You can make optimizations (such as not including hardware that makes OpenGL faster, but doesn't impact Metal nearly as much.) The "standard" here is the Metal API, not the GPU hardware.
I don't think it's an advantage to sabotage the adoption of common API like Vulkan. It holds the progress back and I totally blame Apple for pointless NIH and lack of collaboration here. Apple are doing it out of rather sickening lock-in culture in the company and Metal is far from the only example like that.
Alyssa clearly explained how avoiding fixed-function hardware means they can cram more shaders in which means they can increase performance; we have no idea, at this stage, whether this ends up being a net gain or a net loss for, say a Vulkan app. And we probably never will, because we don't have an "AGX-but-it-has-this-stuff-and-fewer-shader-cores-in-the-same-silicon-area" to compare with. And it doesn't matter. In the end OpenGL and Vulkan apps will run fine.
If we ever end up with empirical evidence that these design choices significantly hurt real-world OpenGL and Vulkan workloads in ways which cannot be worked around, you can start complaining about Apple. Until then, there is absolutely no indication that this will be a problem, never mind zero evidence for your conspiracy theory that it was a deliberate attempt by Apple to sabotage other APIs.