71–80 of 1001 posts
I was interested by the GPU that was mentioned in the slide, does this mean that Apple is thinking that they have the expertise to take on Nvidia and AMD in that space?
Probably only focused on the iGPU segment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Curious that they said nothing about virtualizing Windows. That can’t be a mistake or oversight. Odd.
I noticed that too. Might have trademark or legal reasons though. Technically, if they're able to dynamically translate x86 to ARM as they've explicitly stated (with JIT of JS and the JVM as the example) they should be able to dynamically translate x86 VMs regardless of what OS they contain, which would allow x86 Windows to be virtualized with better-than-interpreted performance. Or at least that's what I hope ;-) I'…
I was interested by the GPU that was mentioned in the slide, does this mean that Apple is thinking that they have the expertise to take on Nvidia and AMD in that space?
Tim Cook just said they have new intel macs in the pipeline. Those will go over like a lead balloon.
What is really sad is that I don't think the majority of Apple consumers really understand what this means for the Intel macs in the long run. I fear a number of people will buy them not realizing they have a very limited lifespan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't be so sure, there are a fair number of people who want a machine that will run x86 for various reasons. Windows support/ Linux support. Even considering how impressive x86 VMs looked in the demo, lots of people will prefer using intel silicon for guaranteed compatibility.
Linux and Windows have both supported ARM for a while now.
MacMini with an A12 chip. Available now as a part of a developer kit. Will be fun to see what that can do.
That sounds ambitious as the bigger Apple desktop machines are quite powerful. But suppose you could just fit them with multiple chips.
Tim Cook just said they have new intel macs in the pipeline. Those will go over like a lead balloon.
What is really sad is that I don't think the majority of Apple consumers really understand what this means for the Intel macs in the long run. I fear a number of people will buy them not realizing they have a very limited lifespan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't be so sure, there are a fair number of people who want a machine that will run x86 for various reasons. Windows support/ Linux support. Even considering how impressive x86 VMs looked in the demo, lots of people will prefer using intel silicon for guaranteed compatibility.
Linux and Windows have both supported ARM for a while now.
Tim Cook just said they have new intel macs in the pipeline. Those will go over like a lead balloon.
I'm in the market for a new laptop, and if I knew how long the Intel macs would be supported, I could see myself picking one up. Unfortunately, nothing was said about that so I guess I'm holding off.
My comment from a week ago: "What would keep Apple from shipping machines with both ARM and Intel CPUs in them? The ARM CPU would run the OS and decide when to ship jobs over to the Intel CPU. I can’t imagine that the home-grown ARM CPU would add much to the total price of the computer." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23530084
It would restrict it so you can never remove the Intel CPU. It is best to just emulate the Intel CPU for a while until everyone ports their code across.