Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Mac Studio

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 734 posts

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#561

Post by makeitdouble »

jachee wrote: post #87
Tiktaalik wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously. If Apple supported gaming more I'd be able to drop this PC. Could be the sort of thing that could cause an avalanche of switchers. You'd also pull over the entire games industry into the Apple space. Right now we code on PCs. As Apple silicon gets better, it's gonna be more and more painful to not be able to make use of that.

> If Apple supported gaming more You mean if gaming supported Apple more, right? The industry's reliance on DirectX and the frameworks that build on it are largely what keep gaming so PC-centric. If we saw AAA studios embrace macOS-compatible (or better yet Open Source) graphics architecture, the need to have separate gaming PCs (and the insanely expensive GPUs associated therewith) would evaporate.

Apple and the gaming industry is a long and complicated relationship, that is I think best surfaced by the Epic vs Apple trial.

Apple makes a huge part of its revenue from mobile gaming, while ferociously antagonizing the game makers and the main players of the industry (still remember their beef with Nvidia for instance) which makes it a bad bet to embrance Apple platform outside of the most dominant ones.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#562

Post by locusm »

canuckintime wrote: post #495
areoform wrote: post #22

I would like to highlight just how much Apple is focusing on their customers and use cases right now. It seems that they're targeting products to what their professional customers actually want. And in this case, it's a 3.7" little thing that can process 18 streams of 8k video (fully specced out). That's kinda crazy, and they're doing it at a price point that's competitive compared to all of the companies out there.…

Apple still doesn’t want to allow expandable internal storage. That’s my core requirement for a pro/sumer desktop

Yeah, I was really hoping this would take M.2 sticks.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#563

Post by novok »

npunt wrote: post #502
ask_b123 wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does high-touch market mean?

Entitled, difficult, immature, higher return & damage rate, undervalues 'just works', etc.

It's because they skew towards being children more. Apple already has a large children market via the iPad. "Serious games" on daddy's macbook pro and their iPads & apple TVs would further that stronghold. Games are their biggest money maker on the app store as it is, a real serious gaming department with 100-200 employees will pay for itself multiple times over. Apple arcade is another example. Apple Game Studios with first party games like nintendo would probably do better than Apple TV+ does today. They're alllllmost there.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#564

Post by ruined »

madrox wrote: post #518
quadcore wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thing is, as a former engine and graphics programmer, I have to say I agree with them, we got gaming software wrong. It took me years to actually see it but we do it wrong. A game like all software should be incredibly light and fast. A game that examplaries that is World of Warcraft which is incredibly light for a game of its stature. It took me years to understand that, you can picture a performance red line, and i…

If that was really a consideration that correlated strongly to success, the market would've shown that a while ago and the most successful projects would sail through Apple approvals. However, this is not reality, and when our philosophy fails to describe reality, only one of those two things is capable of changing.

parent did not suggest that good and correct correlated with market success. we all know a market only demands profitable, which is a distinctly different objective.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#565

Post by intrasight »

dylan604 wrote: post #458
yupper32 wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"With the limited space they have"? They chose how much space they had to work with...

Because nobody outside hardcore computer nerds wants a beige box tower with 14 drive bays sitting on their desk. People want quite little boxes that gets work done without having to have dedicated room for loud machines.

The advantage of a huge beige box ( mine is white actually) is that easy airflow and acoustic padding makes them pretty quiet. But yes huge. Mine is 24" x 20" x 10". And very heavy. Not on my desk.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#566

Post by intrasight »

twoWhlsGud wrote: post #399
MisterTea wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is very interesting because PC workstations have been stagnating for quite long! How have they stagnated?

Look at https://www.dell.com/en-us/work/shop/workstations-isv-certif... or the HP equivalent - they're still equipping them with Xeon's from 2 1/2 years ago. So pretty stagnant.

Lots of other vendors use new Xeons. You can build one at Titan Computers for under $2500.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#567

Post by thaw13579 »

srvmshr wrote: post #411
thaw13579 wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's too much to expect a $1K computer to do heavy video work? Even then, I've been using an M1 macbook air myself for computational work, and haven't run into any memory issues and am surprised by how much power it provides for the price, and without a fan. The only issue I've had with the M1s is the display support, i.e. the mini only supports two displays and the macbooks only support a single external displ…

Thats sounding more like being an Apple apologist. And there are certainly other uses of graphics without using PS or InDesign involved e.g Meshlab 3D renders, computer graphics & raytracing where more RAM definitely counts. Upselling the Studio definitely hits the academic bracket (mine) hard, when it was perfectly possible to just introduce M1 variants, with its advantage of ports & more RAM. That sort of upgrade w…

I suppose the M1 pro is such a variant with more ports and more memory? For the M1 itself, it seems there are interesting aspects of the chip design that limit the total memory:

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-new-Mac-mini-with-Apple-M...

I also make no apologies for saying nice things about the current lineup, it's a clear improvement over 2016-2020 which I think was a step back in several ways.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#569

Post by olliej »

azinman2 wrote: post #513
ejb999 wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but AFAIK, M1's will not support emulation of x86 based regardless of software vendor - and unfortunately, I still have to run some old VM's several times a week - include a very old Windows XP environment, and I don't think anyone's in any rush to support that anytime soon. Who knows, maybe get a Mac studio for my Mac work, and keep my MacBook Pro for when I need to run non-arm VM's

Why wouldn’t it support it? Rosetta is built to do exactly that?

rosetta emulates/translates at the app layer, it's a much easier problem than system level emulation, for a wide variety of reasons.

So you'd need a VM running windows/arm64, and then windows would have to use its rosetta equivalent to run the x86 binaries

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#570

Post by celeritascelery »

MBCook wrote: post #210
cyber_kinetist wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, as all NUMA machines do, one CPU can access all memory, both local (to the CPU) and global (through the interconnect). The problem is that there is a significant latency cost when a CPU accesses non-local memory (limitations of the interconnect). So the HPC people writing their algorithms make sure that this happens at a minimal amount, by enforcing that the data each CPU is using is allocated locally as possibl…

But IS there an interconnect? The way Apple presented it sounded more like the chips talked at a lower layer, much like if it was all built as one physical chip, than when you have two normal chips with an interconnect fabric. Someone will figure it out with benchmarks or something.

There is an interconnect. They just claim it is faster then competitors.
Post reply on HN