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

671–680 of 734 posts

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#671

Post by thirdsun »

TheRealPomax wrote: post #141
minimaxir wrote: post #7

The Mac Studio's HDMI doesn't support 120Hz out (so likely HDMI 2.0?) and it also doesn't come with a keyboard and mouse.

The complete lack of what HDMI port it uses is indeed pretty bizarre, but why would it come with a keyboard and mouse? The people who buy this already have those, or know which ones they need far better than Apple does, and will buy the exactly models they want on their own.

> The complete lack of what HDMI port it uses is indeed pretty bizarre

Isn't "Support for one display with up to 4K resolution at 60Hz" as stated on their specs page[1] pretty clear? It's an HDMI 2.0 port and I think mentioning the supported resolution and refresh rate is more helpful to customers than the HDMI spec version.

[1] https://www.apple.com/mac-studio/specs/

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#672

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

KptMarchewa wrote: post #669
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd love to see what they have in store for designers and programmers next. We're not really their target audience. Back when they had a rack server, they had something that looked good to us, but we're not really the ones that will buy a maxxed-out Studio. It's an interesting machine. It definitely is aimed at folks that would get Pros, beforehand. With the hint dropped at the end of the Studio presentation, I sus…

>We're not really their target audience. It's really interesting, because I'd estimate there are 10x more programmers than "video professionals". I could be extremely wrong though.

Yes, but not so many that choose Apple, as their platform. Of those that do, they like laptops (like me). They are the target for the MacBook Pros.

Creatives, on the other hand, probably have a 50% or more Apple platform user base, and also like fixed workstations.

I used to run a dev shop for a photographic equipment manufacturer, and the Apple platform (even relying on the users having beefy workstations), was quite important.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#673

Post by TameAntelope »

eertami wrote: post #643
TameAntelope wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not my experience at all, docker works just fine on this M1 Mac Mini, and I use docker heavily.

A test suite that takes under 2m to run under Linux docker takes over 4m when I run it on the M1. Yet the M1 is marginally faster than this i7-1185g7. For regular development reloading apps etc it's similarly sluggish. "Just fine" sure, but that time adds up. The M1 is an interesting CPU, but OSX is less popular than Linux for software development. Apple working to support Linux on the M1 would increase sales, though…

MacOS is very popular for software development, do you have a citation for it being less popular than Linux?

And that sounds like your specific test suite. For me, tests run a little quicker on my m1 than on my boss’s Linux equivalent.

Do you have any better, more objective tests that I could replicate?

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#674

Post by dagmx »

andjd wrote: post #193
rovr138 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There has to be overhead to not have to deal with the multi-cpu architecture in software. It's impressive

I don't work in the relevant space, but what makes coding for multi-cpu substantially harder than programming for multiple cores? Is it just having to manage separate memory for each CPU?

Essentiality you're fighting cache coherency.

When you work with multiple cores they'll likely share the same L2 or at least L3 cache. Multiple CPUs often you pay the cost of copying that L3 cache over or need an L4 or worst case you go back to system RAM.

Each level that you go out further can drastically reduce performance, so you need to try and stay on nearby cores where possible.

Most devs don't account for that since dual CPU machines are in the vast minority

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#675

Post by egypturnash »

AlanYx wrote: post #431
egypturnash wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want looking at a dense page of code to look as beautiful and comfortable as reading a magazine I am trying to imagine what a page of code laid out by a professional designer would look like and I can hear a million programmers screaming bloody murder in my head about the thoughtful use of whitespace, proportional-width fonts (even though they are ones chosen to clearly differentiate between confusing characters li…

>I am trying to imagine what a page of code laid out by a professional designer would look like.... You'll probably love this paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.06030 Nicolas Rougier has also implemented a few of those ideas in a series of packages for Emacs called "NANO Emacs"; the actual implementation goes beyond what's discussed in the paper and is worth checking out.

"It is as if typography recommendations had been frozen sometime during the eighties and nothing has ever changed since then." hahahhaah YEP

I love the exploratory screenshot of a function reformatted with the comments floating on the left of a hairline instead of next to the source, with the function name nice and big and bold right next to the version control info.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#676

Post by chaostheory »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #657
chaostheory wrote: post #603

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Remember when people were talking about "ARM rack servers"? The idea was to have dozens of daughterboards, jammed into a 2U chassis, providing massive parallelism. The low power draw would make this possible. Wouldn't surprise me, if Apple is thinking about doing something like this, maybe with a new API/SDK, focused on this. They would probably sell it as an ML machine.

The issue for that is that it’s not cheap, commodity hardware. It’s a risk to build a server farm with Apple given their historical penchant to arbitrarily cancel entire product lines that were doing ok. Apple is best as a workstation or personal machine.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#677

Post by AlanYx »

egypturnash wrote: post #675
AlanYx wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I am trying to imagine what a page of code laid out by a professional designer would look like.... You'll probably love this paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.06030 Nicolas Rougier has also implemented a few of those ideas in a series of packages for Emacs called "NANO Emacs"; the actual implementation goes beyond what's discussed in the paper and is worth checking out.

"It is as if typography recommendations had been frozen sometime during the eighties and nothing has ever changed since then." hahahhaah YEP I love the exploratory screenshot of a function reformatted with the comments floating on the left of a hairline instead of next to the source, with the function name nice and big and bold right next to the version control info.

I agree, that's a really great example. It would be even more natural for tags in org-mode, which already supports drawing tags away from the text itself to a far-right column, but they really could be moved in the other direction to the left of a hairline next to the bullets, and they'd be more readable.

BTW, Nicolas has a lot of interesting packages exploring use of graphical design elements in Emacs apart from the Nano Emacs stuff; for example, there's https://github.com/rougier/svg-tag-mode. I love how he chooses to represent dates and dates with times attached, and to distinguish active vs. inactive dates with shading rather than "[" and "<". That actually makes it easier to spot a common org-mode mistake without having to call up the agenda.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#678

Post by JohnTHaller »

chaostheory wrote: post #593
yborg wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your setup is also probably 5x larger and uses 100W more power. It's a question of priorities.

No one outside of SF, Tokyo, & NYC cares about saving power or space for desktops which is why people panned the old garbage can pro. This is a slightly better direction, but I’m still waiting for a slightly more affordable bigger box Mac that isn’t an exorbitant Mac Pro. The old refrigerator models were reasonable. I don’t want an improved Mac garbage can model

I work from home in a 1 bedroom in NYC and a normal sized desktop works just fine under my standing desk with dual monitors here. Even if my PC were Mac Studio sized, I'd have it under my desk to maximize desk space.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#679

Post by unfocussed_mike »

pvarangot wrote: post #437
kiratp wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of the reasons why - pro audio - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIQINCWMd6I

There's USB-C MADI/DANTE stuff already and it handles a lot of bandwidth with similar latency to those PCIe cards. That guys setup is a niche in the niche.

This is just what I mean, yes.

A friend told me last night that he thinks there's really a lot of generic resistance to the idea of using thunderbolt in this way, and that is what makes the Mac Pro necessary.

Reading more replies I think it's also clear that people still question Apple's GPU claims, and maybe there is more of a market for whatever-PCI-bus GPU cards.

Moreover I think if you look at the Mac Studio, it is difficult to imagine Apple thinking that a straightforward M1/M2 cheese grater is a remotely satisfactory product design.

But I've been told enough times that I am wrong, (albeit by people who were blown away by a keynote -- am I just old?) that I'm cheerfully willing to admit that I probably will be.

Re: Apple Mac Studio

#680

Post by 1123581321 »

jstummbillig wrote: post #619
1123581321 wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Mobile games have been bigger than PC or console for awhile Of course mobile games are "bigger" than PC games. It's because today 18yos use mobile phones to "type" their homework. It's because they have never actually used or owned a computer/mac keyboard. It's because +80% of visitors of all web pages come from mobile. It's because everyone has a mobile phone, and relatively fewer people use or own a classic compu…

It's not just about reach, though it wasn't actually inevitable that popular small communication devices would become a major gaming platform. The quantity of games and number of standouts (whether measured by quality/profitability/talent of creators/license/something else) is also high.
Post reply on HN