211–220 of 567 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HDMI connectors cost a lot of money to the HDMI licensing authority. This payment is very painful if you have a small quantity of shipments. DisplayPort is free. And as others have pointed out, you just need to buy a cable.
Wouldn't display over USB-C solve this as well?
And here's the difference between Microsoft and Apple: When Apple switches to ARM, people believe them. When Microsoft switches to arm, people ignore them. Why? Because Microsoft only ever half-asses such changes (see the terrible SOC in this).
They have no better choice. Name me, today, a desktop class ARM SoC that isn't made by Apple and represents the median performance band of the class. Fundamentally, ARM Holdings is what Antitrust legislation was supposed to break down. They own the "ARM" name and control who can license the ARM IP and most importantly, how . Ampere, the folks behind a lot of ARM servers, are by contract barred from getting into the m…
apple was part of the original ARM joint venture and gave it its initial capital
it's been there since day 0
And here's the difference between Microsoft and Apple: When Apple switches to ARM, people believe them. When Microsoft switches to arm, people ignore them. Why? Because Microsoft only ever half-asses such changes (see the terrible SOC in this).
They have no better choice. Name me, today, a desktop class ARM SoC that isn't made by Apple and represents the median performance band of the class. Fundamentally, ARM Holdings is what Antitrust legislation was supposed to break down. They own the "ARM" name and control who can license the ARM IP and most importantly, how . Ampere, the folks behind a lot of ARM servers, are by contract barred from getting into the m…
> For ARM to try and sue Apple for breach of contract for developing the Mx series of desktop class ARM processors and get away with it, they'd be putting their market share dominance in four different major markets at risk.
As I understand, Apple has a special license with a lot more leeway than those held by other companies thanks to Apple having been one of ARM's founders[0], so they may not have had to do any negotiations at all since they had the rights from the get-go.
With most of the important Microsoft software already compiled to ARM, and with those kits available to developers to do compile theirs at a competitive price, I won't doubt that future could be possible.
The difference here is that the M1 in the M1 mac mini is faster than Apple's phone SoC (the A16). The Qualcomm 8cx gen 3 (what a terrible name) in this machine is NOT faster than even Qualcomm's phone SoC (the 8 gen 1), let alone Apple's phone SoC. It's absurd to be selling a desktop PC that's weaker than a phone.
You don't need top shelf performance for browsing the web, checking your emails or writing some docs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Microsoft was there first, but handled it so poorly it got memory holed. edit: I forgot about the A in ARM.
I think the Newton was the first major use of the architecture outside the Acorn Archimedes. "...an advanced, low-power processor was needed for sophisticated graphics manipulation. He found Hermann Hauser, who had developed the Acorn RISC Machine that utilized what became known as the ARM architecture, and put together Advanced RISC Machines, now Arm Ltd." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Newton Around this time,…
The difference here is that the M1 in the M1 mac mini is faster than Apple's phone SoC (the A16). The Qualcomm 8cx gen 3 (what a terrible name) in this machine is NOT faster than even Qualcomm's phone SoC (the 8 gen 1), let alone Apple's phone SoC. It's absurd to be selling a desktop PC that's weaker than a phone.
Prefer 32GB than a better CPU. By the way When the fuck did 32GB become an entry requirement, I am so saddened by the crappy software and stacks that treats memory like an infinite resource
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would I buy a Mac Mini for Linux when devices like this exist? The Qualcomm chip is officially supported and much cheaper than buying the Mac. Seems to be much less hassle and better value on the Microsoft side of things.
Where does it say Linux is officially supported?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a chicken or the egg dilemma. Non-Apple ARM is too slow, so nobody wants Windows ARM, and nobody wants Windows ARM, so nobody is seriously working on consumer-targeted ARM. It will probably fail because Microsoft is generally bad at managing and marketing their hardware projects and coordinating with manufacturers and retail partners. Also, yeah, the pricing and performance is abysmal. But there is some sense to…
The solution to chicken-or-egg problems is known: you spend money to just overpower the problem. But MS and Qualcomm aren't doing that; they're half-assing their ARM hardware to save a little money.
Compare this to Apple's $499 ARM Dev test kit that you could return for a $200 credit.
If Microsoft is serious about ARM, they need a very low barrier of entry for those willing to port their software.