M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness • Hacker News Board

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#681

Post by kuhsaft » Fri, Dec 04, 2020, 3:36 AM UTC

SulfurHexaFluri wrote: post #617

chipotle_coyote wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While Apple likely has no motivation currently to make a UEFI-based ARM computer, there's nothing that prevent anyone else from doing so. UEFI is not x86-specific. (I also think it's a bit too early to say definitively that no ARM-based Apple computer will ever be able to boot into Linux. I don't think Apple has any motivation to make that easy, but that may not be the same as making it impossible.)

There is also nothing pushing OEMs to do this and in the decades we have had ARM SoCs we have not seen this happen.

Windows Mobile/phones actually had UEFI bootloaders with Windows Boot Manager [1]. For some Windows mobile devices, people have managed to unlock the bootloaders and load other EFI applications.

[1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/br...

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#682

Post by thayne » Fri, Dec 04, 2020, 3:36 AM UTC

mikepurvis wrote: post #667

kag0 wrote: post #630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree in general, but is this really true? > the legacy chip makers have a business model that doesn't work It seems like this implicitly assumes that everyone switching to Apple silicon is a possibility. But it doesn't seem likely that all the android users are going to switch to iphones or that all the windows/linux users are going to switch to macs. This is hugely embarrassing for Intel and Qualcomm in particula…

It proves the viability of ARM for desktops, laptops, and probably eventually servers too. Intel having been humiliated by this will loosen their grip on OEMs who will now be under pressure in the inevitable rush to produce appealing, performance-oriented ARM laptops, as the current market has basically been Chromebooks and some half-hearted Windows ARM tablets, all based on chips adapted from phones. And of course t…

ARM is already pretty viable for servers. At least viable enough that most of the major cloud providers have arm64 based instances available.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#683

Post by ntsplnkv2 » Fri, Dec 04, 2020, 3:36 AM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #643

coldtea wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would like the people downvoting you to explain why they think it's truly revolutionary. For one, it's the first PC chip with these kind of thermals and power combo. Second, it brings many new design decisions, from unified memory, to the SoC design, various coprocessors, etc, that have not been available in the form of laptop/desktop PCs. The last of this kind in the mass market would be something like the Amiga…

These all strike me as evolutionary changes. People will be doing about the same things as before. They will do them a bit faster, and not have to plug in as often. I expect revolutionary changes to overturn an existing order. E.g., the Mac was revolutionary. Smartphones were revolutionary. This is a solid and impressive evolutionary change. Kudos to them, of course. But when actual revolutions happen, I would like t…

It's not necessarily revolutionary, but it's not just a small evolutionary step. But either way it's just pedantic.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#684

Post by ogre_codes » Fri, Dec 04, 2020, 3:39 AM UTC

kag0 wrote: post #630

YesThatTom2 wrote: post #615

Patrick Moorhead is a stock analyst for the chip industry. In Wall Street terms, he is aligned with Intel others who are shaking in their boots right now. He's not going to say that the M1 is great until Intel/NVidia/etc. allow him to. These pundits know which side of his bread is buttered. He knows that his clients were caught off-guard by the M1 announcement. He needs to give his clients enough time to sell their I…

I agree in general, but is this really true? > the legacy chip makers have a business model that doesn't work It seems like this implicitly assumes that everyone switching to Apple silicon is a possibility. But it doesn't seem likely that all the android users are going to switch to iphones or that all the windows/linux users are going to switch to macs. This is hugely embarrassing for Intel and Qualcomm in particula…

> It seems like this implicitly assumes that everyone switching to Apple silicon is a possibility.

Apple has flipped the tables. They went from being way behind the pack in terms of price/ performance pile in the 90s and 00s to the point where Apple's base MacBook Air is now competitive in terms of performance with laptops that cost twice as much.

I suspect they will absolutely pick up share. I also expect AMD will gain some share here as OEMs look to compete with Apple's offerings and Intel has come up short.

Also, by losing Apple, Intel is also losing one of their most profitable customers. While Apple isn't Intel's biggest customer in terms of units shipped, Apple tended to buy Intel's higher end CPUs which other OEMs avoided.

Everyone isn't switching to Apple, but the competitive scene is changing a lot and it doesn't favor Intel.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#685

Post by the_af » Fri, Dec 04, 2020, 3:39 AM UTC

ogre_codes wrote: post #317

cestith wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Work has already begun to port Linux to M1 Macs. Linux for ARM and Windows for ARM are already running as PoC on the M1 Macs with QEMU (running ARM-on-ARM). https://www.techradar.com/news/you-can-now-run-linux-and-win...

I suspect people interested in "superfast, supercool ARM-based Linux laptops" are looking more for running on bare metal, not in a VM.

If Linux can be made to run on M1 bare metal, I expect it will. And computing history shows us Linux can be made to run on anything ;)

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#686

Post by the_af » Fri, Dec 04, 2020, 3:42 AM UTC

mypalmike wrote: post #337

the_af wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I can get it to run Linux not on a VM, but natively and without coexisting with macOS at all, then it'll be good enough for me!... ...except I cannot afford a macbook. The one I'm using now was paid for by my employer. More generally, I'd love to see fast ARM platforms not built by Apple.

Local compensation practices where you live must really suck if you can't afford a $1000 laptop. :(

I don't live in the US and I must politely ask you to see how the rest of the world lives.

The macbook I was given costs, after customs, taxes and everything, $4000. Not $1000. Are there cheaper macbooks? Sure. Why would I want them, though?

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#687

Post by kuhsaft » Fri, Dec 04, 2020, 3:42 AM UTC

chipotle_coyote wrote: post #466

heavyset_go wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> x86 is no more "Open" than ARM. Pinebook and Raspberry Pi both use no bullshit ARM setups. They're ARM SoCs, meaning that you can't just download the Ubuntu ARM ISO[1] and run it on either device like you could with an x86 ISO and an x86 machine. To run Ubuntu or any Linux distribution, you need to use images that were specially crafted for either SoC. This is because ARM SoCs use custom bootloaders and don't have…

While Apple likely has no motivation currently to make a UEFI-based ARM computer, there's nothing that prevent anyone else from doing so. UEFI is not x86-specific. (I also think it's a bit too early to say definitively that no ARM-based Apple computer will ever be able to boot into Linux. I don't think Apple has any motivation to make that easy, but that may not be the same as making it impossible.)

UEFI can be just as closed as custom non-UEFI bootloaders. Windows Mobile devices were UEFI, but they had Secure Boot enabled making it almost impossible to boot non-OEM signed images. (Un)fortunately, their Golden Key was leaked allowing experimentation with some Windows Mobile devices [1].

[1] https://www.xda-developers.com/microsofts-debug-mode-flaw-an...

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#688

Post by the_af » Fri, Dec 04, 2020, 3:44 AM UTC

alwillis wrote: post #575

the_af wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I can get it to run Linux not on a VM, but natively and without coexisting with macOS at all, then it'll be good enough for me!... ...except I cannot afford a macbook. The one I'm using now was paid for by my employer. More generally, I'd love to see fast ARM platforms not built by Apple.

...except I cannot afford a MacBook You know, the M1 Mac mini is $699… And since you can attach up to 6 displays to it (or the MacBook Pro), you'd never have to look at macOS if really didn't want to. ;-) https://www.macrumors.com/2020/11/24/m1-macs-able-to-run-six...

But the M1 Mac mini is not a laptop. And in any case, if those are US prices, count about 4x in my country.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#689

Post by zmmmmm » Fri, Dec 04, 2020, 3:45 AM UTC

outworlder wrote: post #381

_abox wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah John Gruber has really become a shill over the last few years. His article reads like an Apple keynote transcript, everything is magical and amazing, a marvel and mindbogglingly great. No wonder they throw him so many exclusives ;) Yes M1 is great. But it's a closed system (no booting Linux or Windows at this time) and even under macOS you're having even less access to the system's internals than before. Also, A…

> Yes M1 is great. But it's a closed system It doesn't matter. Sure, that might mean that an Apple system is not for you. But the crux of the matter is: Apple did something truly revolutionary. How is the rest of the market going to respond? Specifically, how are Intel, AMD and Microsoft going to respond? Microsoft, at least, has Windows running on ARM, but it doesn't have Rosetta. Intel and AMD have nothing remotely…

> Yes M1 is great. But it's a closed system ... > Apple did something truly revolutionary

While I don't deny they deserve a lot of credit for this, I think it's important to keep in mind that in many cases Apple does this by exploiting its lack of openness. ie: these things are not unlinked.

So where some people see Apple innovating and achieving breakthroughs, I also see them exploiting and leaching off an ecosystem in a toxic way. It's like a chemical plant that dumps its waste into the local river - they get a free ride (not complying with interoperable / openness) which is fine if they are a small part of the ecosystem. But if every company was like that we would be living in technology hell. There would be no internet, no ecosystem of reliable affordable server infrastructure, there wouldn't be a single phone you could write an app for if it wasn't in the corporate interest of a mammoth entity, etc etc.

Re: M1 Macs: Truth and Truthiness

#690

Post by ntsplnkv2 » Fri, Dec 04, 2020, 3:47 AM UTC

ogre_codes wrote: post #411

bfgoodrich wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel's 10nm is approximately equal to TSMC's 7nm (even having advantages in some areas). The A-chips at 7nm (the A13) were already significantly ahead of Intel's offerings in efficiency and instructions per cycle. Intel went all in on a design that relegates performance to power gobbling turbo boost and here we are. Just generally too much is made about node size. It isn't a magic pixie dust that you can sprinkle on…

> Last year it was just that Apple had some easily replicated It feels like if you listen to the peanut gallery, Apple CPU advantage is always easy to replicate. They said the same thing when Apple bumped the A series to 64 bits and at pretty much every step between. If Apple's formula was easy to copy or as obvious as everyone seems to claim, then we wouldn't be in the position where Apple has the best mobile CPU, t…

Apple always gets people riled up on here, it's one of the few areas on HN that discussions just get rather poor quickly.

> If Apple's formula was easy to copy or as obvious as everyone seems to claim, then we wouldn't be in the position where Apple has the best mobile CPU, the best wearable CPU, the best tablet CPU, and the best ultrabook CPU.

Exactly. It isn't easy to do. Apple is in a unique position to push their platform to the absolute limit because of their vertical integration. And while that sacrifices openness, most people buying laptops just don't care.