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

601–610 of 734 posts

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#601

Post by chaostheory »

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.…

If they were actually listening, they would have a more affordable, configurable Mac Pro like the old refrigerator models. I don’t care about compactness for a desktop model. I also don’t like components being soldered like it was an appliance instead of a computer.

If it wasn’t for Mac OS, and the fact that the alternatives suck more; I would have been gone last generation.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#602

Post by chaostheory »

jdgoesmarching wrote: post #418
npunt wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure about game developers, but gamers are a low-margin, high-touch, low-satisfaction-score, garish-aesthetic, speeds-and-feeds market. Pretty much antithetical to Apple's core focus and I think they rightly avoid them. Despite personally wanting more games on Mac :)

Also I feel like everyone is missing their AR/VR push right around the corner. VR headsets with these chips will be dramatically more powerful than other devices on the market. Combine that power with Apple product marketing, and devs will be there regardless of how much the Metal APIs suck.

Games on Apple will always be treated as 2nd class citizens. I don’t feel it will be any different on their new XR platform which is both good and bad because it’ll mean that we’ll have an XR device that the masses will finally accept if the price is right.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#603

Post by chaostheory »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #469
forgotmyoldacc wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My workstation build with Epyc is ~$5,000 and has more cores (24 core), more memory (256 GB), faster GPU (3090), a 2TB pcie 4 SSD and I suspect will perform better on standard benchmarks. Definitely not as compact as the Studio though but lot more extendable.

> I suspect will perform better on standard benchmarks. I wouldn't be so sure about that. These M1 chips have some crazy benchmark performance. What they don't have, is a standard x86 ISA, which means that a lot of applications run emulated (and still tend to beat many Intel specs, anyway). I keep reading people complaining that "It's faster, but not that much faster. What's the big deal?", when they are talking abou…

I feel that the M chips are awesome at saving power while providing performance which makes them perfect for laptops and portables. I’m not seeing their value proposition for desktops though. I don’t care about something that saves space. The only time I care about that is for portables.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#605

Post by Gigachad »

dylan604 wrote: post #470
nextos wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is very interesting because PC workstations have been stagnating for quite long! It'd be cool to be able to bring medium-sized tasks back from clouds to personal computers. The CPU performance is impressive but I wonder how well it'd fare against say an AMD ThreadRipper or a dual socket system with an equivalent price? It'd be also interesting to see a deep learning benchmark against Nvidia. Branding and RAM lim…

Even if they stagnate, you can at least pull out a GPU and replace it with another (when they're available for purchase) even if you don't change RAM/CPU which you could replace when faster is better as well. You can even change storage options. None of that swapability is available on any of the Apple systems, so when they stagnate there's nothing that can be done.

Practically this doesn't often happen, especially on work machines. All the parts are loosely linked by generation. It's not often you want to jump forward 5 years in GPU tech but not want an upgrade in every other field. Unless you are swapping parts out yearly for the absolute latest bit, there is not a whole lot of benefit over selling your existing device and getting the new one where you will see improvements across the board.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#606

Post by Gigachad »

fomine3 wrote: post #585
efficax wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try and price out a PC with those specs, it will come in around $6k minimum, but much more power intensive and very very loud

High performance PC can't be too laud unless you designed as loud, but can be too big.

If you packed those specs in to something twice the size of the mac studio it would sound like a loaded up server rack on your desk. Yes you can get absolutely massive coolers which are quiet but nothing nearly as portable as this.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#607

Post by bee_rider »

assttoasstmgr wrote: post #484
dylan604 wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

just connect that USB-A hub you know you already have and plug in all the USB-A thumb drives you can fit.

Apple is one of the world's biggest proliferators of e-waste through indirect means. No charger with the new phone huh? Well it's USB-C cable won't fit your old charger or computer either. USB-A is the de-facto standard for thumb drives. Are we all just supposed to throw them away overnight because Apple blessed us with computers without USB-A ports? Or, they'll sell you a dongle for $19 which can be had on Aliexpres…

This brick-computer sounds neat. I wonder if anyone has really cracked -- in a user friendly way -- sending video over wireless.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#608

Post by 1123581321 »

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.

Mobile games have been bigger than PC or console for awhile, and a few of the titles are massively popular and profitable. Though App Store review policies differ in permissiveness, the approach from below has been the industry model both on iOS and Android. Remind me what you were saying needs to change.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#609

Post by enoch2090 »

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.…

As a programmer, data scientist and macOS user, I have to say I'm just annoyed by Apple these years. They've built a preset of users who may use their products, on that list are "Creative producers", etc. I'm not saying creative works aren't important - I personally enjoy poems, movies and photography very much. But just imagine how many MacBook Pros and other products Apple sell each year - does the world need that much creative producers, so we can indulge ourselves in Tiktok and other things? This is crazy. And I also feel excluded from their potential customer.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#610

Post by timpattinson »

schleck8 wrote: post #428
criddell wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's cheap for what it is. If you need a machine like this, then what else could you buy? The Studio starts at $2k. If you are going to use it for the next 4 years, that's less than $1.50 / day. No trust fund required.

32 GB of unspecified frequency ram? 512 GB of unspecified speed and type ssd? That's not a 2000 dollar configuration. For reference, that memory capacity costs 120 euros with 3200 Mhz

"unspecified frequency" is LPDDR5-6400. Better than anything else you can get for a reasonable price, and well into the experimental range with a 12th gen Intel cpu
Post reply on HN