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

M4 MacBook Pro

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

731–740 of 1001 posts

Re: M4 MacBook Pro

#731

Post by donavanm »

41995701 wrote: post #110
fckgw wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the standard M4 processor. If you move the M4 Pro it tops out at 48gb or moving to the M4 Max goes up to 128gb.

Weird that the M4 Pro in the Mac mini can go up to 64GB. Maybe a size limitation on the MBP motherboard or SOC package?

It looks like different versions of the ‘Pro’ based on core count and memory bandwidth. Im assuming the 12c Mini M4 Pro has the same memory bandwidth/channels enabled as the 14c MBP M4 Pro, enabling the 64GB. My guess would be related to binning and or TDP.

Re: M4 MacBook Pro

#732

Post by rowanG077 »

astrange wrote: post #691
gjvc wrote: post #325

As a proud user of an ARM3 in 1992, I'm pleased to be able to see and say that ARM won in the end.

ARMv8 is not much like previous ARMs. But it has won - Intel's latest x86 extension basically turns it into ARMv8. https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/t...

I couldn't disagree more, the defining difference between ARMv8 and x86 is the memory model.

Re: M4 MacBook Pro

#733

Post by jorvi »

traceroute66 wrote: post #658
abrookewood wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their repair policy, from what I can see, is a thinly veiled attempt to get you to either pay for Apple Care or to upgrade. I got a quote to repair a colleague's MacBook Pro, less than 2 years old, which has apparent 'water damage' and which they want AUD $2,500 to repair! Of course that makes no sense, so we're buying a new one ...

> to get you to either pay for Apple Care The problem with many self-repair people is they effectively value their time at zero. I value my time realistically, i.e. above zero and above minimum wage. It is therefore a no brainer for me to buy AppleCare every ... single ..time. It means I can just drop it off and let someone else deal with messing around. I also know how much hassle it is. Like many techies, I spent p…

> The problem with many self-repair people is they effectively value their time at zero.

Back in 2010 Apple quoted me €700 for a topcase replacement because of shattered display glass. Instead I paid €50 for a third party replacement pane and did 15 minutes of work with a heat gun.

What's more, they fold most of the cost of the repair into the price of parts. So you can either get a replacement screen for €499 and install it yourself, or have it officially repaired for €559. This effectively subsidizes official repairs and makes DIY repairs more expensive.

Apple does extreme gouging with repairs, its hogwash to claim anything else.

Re: M4 MacBook Pro

#734

Post by ColonelPhantom »

alberth wrote: post #219
vishnugupta wrote: post #104

Can someone please help me out with this? I'm torn between Mac mini and and MacBook Pro, specifically the CPU spec difference. MBP: Apple M4 Max chip with 16‑core CPU, 40‑core GPU and 16‑core Neural Engine Mac mini: Apple M4 Pro chip with 14‑core CPU, 20‑core GPU, 16-core Neural Engine What kind of workload would make me regret not having bought MBP over Mac mini given the above. Thanks!

Since the only real difference is number of GPUs, it'd be: - photo/video editing - games, or - AI (training / inference) that would benefit from the extra GPUs.

The Max also has much more memory bandwidth. Especially for running local LLMs, that is the limiting factor much more than the number of GPU cores is.

Re: M4 MacBook Pro

#735

Post by sooheon »

derefr wrote: post #656
GeekyBear wrote: post #632

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mac OS calls home every time you execute an application Consulting a certificate revocation list is a standard security feature, not a privacy issue.

Further, there is a CRL/OCSP cache — which means that if you're running a program frequently, Apple are not receiving a fine-grained log of your executions, just a coarse-grained log of the checks from the cache's TTL timeouts. Also, a CRL/OCSP check isn't a gating check — i.e. it doesn't "fail safe" by disallowing execution if the check doesn't go through. (If it did, you wouldn't be able to run anything without an…

Why is it that non app store apps refuse to run until I explicitly allow it in settings then?

Re: M4 MacBook Pro

#736

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

tomrod wrote: post #402
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I miss Linux, it respected me in ways that MacOS doesn't. But maintaining a sane dev environment on linux when my co-workers on MacOS are committing bash scripts that call brew... I am glad that I gave up that fight. And yeah, the hardware sure is nice.

IIRC brew supports linux, but it isn't a package manager I pay attention to outside of some very basic needs. Way too much supply chain security domain to cover for it!

It does, but I prefer to keep project dependencies bound to that project rather than installing them at wider scope. So I guess it's not that I can't use Linux for work, but that I can't use Linux for work and have it my way. And if I can't have it my way anyway, then I guess Apple's way will suffice.

Re: M4 MacBook Pro

#737

Post by heavyset_go »

derefr wrote: post #656
GeekyBear wrote: post #632

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mac OS calls home every time you execute an application Consulting a certificate revocation list is a standard security feature, not a privacy issue.

Further, there is a CRL/OCSP cache — which means that if you're running a program frequently, Apple are not receiving a fine-grained log of your executions, just a coarse-grained log of the checks from the cache's TTL timeouts. Also, a CRL/OCSP check isn't a gating check — i.e. it doesn't "fail safe" by disallowing execution if the check doesn't go through. (If it did, you wouldn't be able to run anything without an…

> i.e. it doesn't "fail safe" by disallowing execution if the check doesn't go through. (If it did, you wouldn't be able to run anything without an internet connection!) Instead, these checks can pass, fail, or error out; and erroring out is the same as passing. (Or rather, technically, erroring out falls back to the last cached verification state, even if it's expired; but if there is no previous verification state — e.g. if it's your first time running third-party app and you're doing so offline — then the fallback-to-the-fallback is allowing the app to run.)

https://www.sentinelone.com/blog/what-happened-to-my-mac-app...

> Last week, just after we covered the release of Big Sur, many macOS users around the world experienced something unprecedented on the platform: a widespread outage of an obscure Apple service caused users worldwide to be unable to launch 3rd party applications.

Re: M4 MacBook Pro

#738

Post by JCharante »

GeekyBear wrote: post #632
dmz73 wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mac OS calls home every time you execute an application. Apple is well on its way to ensure you can only run things they allow via app store, they would probably already be there if it wasn't for the pesky EU. If you send your computer/phone to Apple for repair you may get back different physical hardware. Those things very much highlight that "your" Apple hardware is not yours and that privacy on Apple hardware does…

> Mac OS calls home every time you execute an application Consulting a certificate revocation list is a standard security feature, not a privacy issue.

Huh? It hashes the binary and phones home doesn’t it? Go compile anything with gcc and watch that it takes one extra second for the first run of that executable. It’s not verifying any certificates

Re: M4 MacBook Pro

#739

Post by JCharante »

abrookewood wrote: post #644
dmz73 wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mac OS calls home every time you execute an application. Apple is well on its way to ensure you can only run things they allow via app store, they would probably already be there if it wasn't for the pesky EU. If you send your computer/phone to Apple for repair you may get back different physical hardware. Those things very much highlight that "your" Apple hardware is not yours and that privacy on Apple hardware does…

Their repair policy, from what I can see, is a thinly veiled attempt to get you to either pay for Apple Care or to upgrade. I got a quote to repair a colleague's MacBook Pro, less than 2 years old, which has apparent 'water damage' and which they want AUD $2,500 to repair! Of course that makes no sense, so we're buying a new one ...

Why not pay for apple care? In the US it covers water damage

Re: M4 MacBook Pro

#740

Post by heavyset_go »

syndicatedjelly wrote: post #572
paulryanrogers wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> to purchase a machine that feels like it really belongs to me How true is this when they devices are increasingly hostile to user repair and upgrades? MacOS also tightens the screws on what you can run and from where, or at least require more hoop jumping over time.

> MacOS also tightens the screws on what you can run and from where, or at least require more hoop jumping over time. Can you explain what you mean by this? I have been doing software development on MacOS for the last couple of years and have found it incredibly easy to run anything I want on my computer from the terminal, whenever I want. Maybe I'm not the average user, but I use mostly open-source Unix tooling and…

> Can you explain what you mean by this? I have been doing software development on MacOS for the last couple of years and have found it incredibly easy to run anything I want on my computer from the terminal, whenever I want.

Try sharing a binary that you built but didn't sign and Notarize and you'll see the problem.

It'll run on the machine that it was built on without a problem, the problems start when you move the binary to another machine.

Post reply on HN