Any word on whether this chip has "Memory Integrity Enforcement" capability, as included in Apple's A19/A19 Pro chips? https://security.apple.com/blog/memory-integrity-enforcement...
it's the same core, so more than likely yes.
Apple M5 chip
291–300 of 1001 posts
Re: Apple M5 chip
#292I wonder if they informed Jensen about it.
Re: Apple M5 chip
#293I appreciate Apple propping up the GPU performance of their SoC but it feels a bit pointless when all the libraries they provide are so insular and disconnected from the rest of the industry. I personally wish they would learn from the failure of Metal. Also unleashes ? Really? The marketing madness has to stop at some point.
Not that I've actually used any of these APIs, but supposedly Metal is the best designed Graphics API by a decent margin, it's just handicapped severely by how insular they and their ecosystem are.
Re: Apple M5 chip
#294The modern Apple feels like their hardware teams way outperforming the software teams.
I've been thinking whether it could be a reasonable move for Apple to launch a cheaper secondary brand, one that offers devices capable of running Linux or Windows to reach a broader market without cannibalizing its own.
Apple already sells pretty competitively priced computers. The base Mac mini for example. For most people that’s already overkill.
Re: Apple M5 chip
#295I am wondering if Apple's focus is off lately with this drive for AI. So far all they are showing in that presentation is that I can have "the ability to transform 2D photos into spatial scenes in the Photos app, or generating a Persona — operate with greater speed and efficiency." And by making Apple AI (which is something I do not use for many reasons, but mainly because of Climate Change) their focus, I am afraid…
> making Apple AI [...] their focus Are they really doing that? Because if it's the case they have shockingly little to show for it. Their last few attempts at actual innovation seem to have been less than successful. The Vision Pro failed to find a public. Liquid Glass is to put it politely divisive. At that point to me, it seems that good SoC and a captive audience in the US are pretty much all they have remaining…
Yeah, I agree, they have a captive audience for sure. But they still need to satisfy share holders. If people are failing to upgrade that is a problem. And the battery drain on my iPhone 16e on Glass was horrific. I know casual users who did not notice until I pointed it out and they were tracking it better. This, unfortunatly, makes me think conspiratorially. Even a modest about of extra battery use and degradation will mean more upgrades in the future.
But I think $500 billion is a lot of money for AI:
Apple accelerates AI investment with $500B for skills, infrastructure
https://www.ciodive.com/news/Apple-AI-infrastructure-investm...
Imagine using $500 for the operating system and squashing bugs or making the system even more energy efficient? Or maybe figuring out how to connect to an android tablet's file system natively?
Re: Apple M5 chip
#296> Apple 2030 is the company’s ambitious plan to be carbon neutral across its entire footprint by the end of this decade by reducing product emissions from their three biggest sources: materials, electricity, and transportation. But never, ever, through not shipping incremental hardware bumps every year regardless of whether there's anything really worth shipping.
second hand Apple market is very big, especially since M series MacBooks leapfrogged performance.
Re: Apple M5 chip
#297The M5 MacBook Pro still gets the Broadcom WiFi chip but the M5 iPad Pros get the N1 and C1X (Sweet). All in all, apple is doing some incredible things with hardware. Software teams at apple really need to get their act together. The M1 itself is so powerful that nobody really needs to upgrade that for most things most people do on their computers. Tahoe however makes my M1 Air feel sluggish doing the exact same task…
I’m still daily driving my M1 Max and have no reason to upgrade for a long time. There’s really nothing in my workflow that could be markedly improved performance wise. There’s only thing is maybe more ram as the need for that keeps growing - I’m isn’t just under 30 when running a bunch of containers.
Re: Apple M5 chip
#298Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thats true! I was referring to their wider line up, especially the iPad, where users will expect the same performance as on the Mac’s (they payed for an Mx chip) and they sold me an iPad Air this year that comes with a really fast M3 and still only 8 GB of RAM (you only get 16 on the iPad Pro btw if you go with at least 1TB of storage on the M4 Pro one)
Why would you expect the same performance on iPad and MacBook Pro? The latter has up to 128GB of memory?
You probably wouldn’t with a Pro but you might between an iPad Pro and an MacBook Air.
With the foundation models API they basically said that there will be one size of model for the entire platform, making smarter models on a MacBook Pro unrealistic and only faster ones possible.
Re: Apple M5 chip
#299Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple has always been a hardware company first - think of how they sell consumers computers with the OS for free, while Microsoft primarily just sells the OS (when comparing the consumer business; I don’t want to get into all the other stuff Microsoft does). Now that they own the SoC design pipeline, they’re really able to flex these muscles.
Apple has always been a software first company, and they only sell the hardware as a vehicle to their software. They regularly say this themselves and have always called themselves a software company. Compare their hardware revenues with that of the app store and icloud subscriptions, you will see where they make most of their money. EDIT: I seem to be getting downvoted, so I will just leave this here for people to s…
Apple has always? Sure, maybe today with collection % of sales from apps it looks like a software company. If there was no iDevcies, there'd be no need for app store. Your link is all about Cook, yet he was not always the CEO. Woz didn't care what software you ran, he just wanted the computer to be usable so you could run whatever software. Jobs wanted to restrict things, but it was still about running the hardware. Whatever Cook thinks Apple is now does not make it always been as you claim
Re: Apple M5 chip
#300Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sixteen years ago, John Gruber wrote: > Hardware and software both matter, and Apple’s history shows that there’s a good argument to be made for developing integrated hardware and software. But if you asked me which matters more, I wouldn’t hesitate to say software. All things considered I’d much prefer a PC running Mac OS X to a Mac running Windows. https://daringfireball.net/2009/11/the_os_opportunity At the time I…
That’s so wild to me - my personal laptop is still a Mac but I’m in windows all day for work. Some of the new direction of macOS isn’t awesome but the basics are still rock solid. Touchpad is perfect, sleep works 100% of the time for days on end, still has UNIX underneath.
> sleep works 100% of the time for days on end
In my case it works roughly ~50% of the time. Probably because of the Thunderbolt monitor connected to power it, idk.
> the basics are still rock solid
The basics like the OS flat out refusing to provide you any debugging information on anything going wrong? It's rock solid allright. I had an issue where occasionally I would get an error "a USB device is using too much power, try unplugging it and replugging it." Which device? Why the hell would Apple tell you that, where is the fun in that?
Key remapping requires installing a keylogger, nor can you have a different scroll direction between mouse and touchpad. There still isn't window management which for the sizes of modern monitors is quite constraining.
> still has UNIX underneath
A very constrained UNIX. A couple of weeks ago I wanted to test something (pkcs11-tool signing with a software HSM), and turns out that Apple has decided that libraries can only be loaded from a number of authorised locations which can only be accessed while installing an application. You can't just use a dynamic library you're linking to, it has to be part of a wider install.