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

Apple M5 chip

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

751–760 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple M5 chip

#751

Post by whimsicalism »

kenjackson wrote: post #611
port11 wrote: post #572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's incredible what the hardware teams at Apple have been doing. I imagine they also feel let down by the software that's driving these beasts. It's as if they're 2 completely different companies.

The latest iPhone OS (iOS 26) is embarrassing. The number of glitches and amount of UI sloppiness is crazy for a company that historically prided itself on the details. It's the first major iOS update I've taken that just seems almost strictly worse than its predecessor.

i've never had such a major downgrade as this one

Re: Apple M5 chip

#752

Post by gr4vityWall »

if only the Linux support was good. Or any other UNIX-like that made it usable without having to deal with macOS. It's a shame, because the hardware is top tier.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#753

Post by hinkley »

ViktorRay wrote: post #282
alexanderson wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple has always been a hardware company first - think of how they sell consumers computers with the OS for free, while Microsoft primarily just sells the OS (when comparing the consumer business; I don’t want to get into all the other stuff Microsoft does). Now that they own the SoC design pipeline, they’re really able to flex these muscles.

Steve Jobs himself said that Apple sees itself as a software company https://youtu.be/dEeyaAUCyZs The above link is a video where he mentions that. It is true that Apple’s major software products like iOS and MacOS are only available on Apple’s own hardware. But the Steve Jobs justification for this (which he said in a different interview I can’t find right now so I will paraphrase) is that he felt Apple made the bes…

But Steve also clearly believed in Alan Kay's old aphorism:

If you care about software you have to make your own hardware.

I'll allow that perhaps Apple considers hardware a means to an end. But what an end.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#754

Post by hinkley »

fnord123 wrote: post #148
Hamuko wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Back in the day you wouldn't buy a MacBook because it was powerful. Most likely it had a very shitty Intel CPU with not a lot of cores and with thermal challenges, and the reason you bought it was because macOS.

The intel laptops also grounded into the user. I still can't believe they didn't have a recall to sort that out.

The tingling just lets you know you're alive.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#755

Post by hinkley »

steve1977 wrote: post #261
eloisant wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple have always been a hardware company, like Google have always been a software company even if they're doing hardware too now.

Google has always been a advertising company

advertising company/feedlot to hoard good engineers and keep them from wandering off and writing a competitor.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#756

Post by 333c »

jsheard wrote: post #431
croes wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn’t MacOS favor an 60Hz output? Gamers prefer much higher rates. And don’t forget they made an VR headset without controllers. Apple doesn’t care about games

> Doesn’t MacOS favor an 60Hz output? Kind of? It does support higher refresh rates, but their emphasis on "Retina" resolutions imposes a soft limit because monitors that dense rarely support much more than 60hz, due to the sheer bandwidth requirements.

The MacBook Pro has had a 120 Hz screen for nearly half a decade. And of course, external displays can support whatever resolution/refresh rate, regardless of the OS driving them.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#757

Post by bfrog »

walterbell wrote: post #327
bfrog wrote: post #204

The big win would be a linux capable device. I don't have any interest in mac os x but the apple m parts always seem amazing. In theory this would be where qualcomm would come in and provide something but in practice they seem to be stuck in qualcomm land where only lawyers matter and actual users and developers can get stuffed.

Apparently the Windows exclusivity period has ended, so Google will support Android and ChromeOS on Qualcomm X2-based devices, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45368167

I mean if the experience is as good as any x86 laptop I'd try it in terms of installing any linux distro I want. No interest in android/chromeos myself.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#758

Post by testing22321 »

B1FF_PSUVM wrote: post #571
hereme888 wrote: post #563

Base models only: - M1 | 5 nm | 8 (4P+4E) | GPU 7–8 | 16-core Neural | Memory Bandwidth: 68.25 GB/s | Unified Memory: 16 GB | Geekbench6 ~2346 / 8346 - M2 | 5 nm (G2) | 8 (4P+4E) | GPU 8–10 | 16-core Neural | Memory Bandwidth: 100 GB/s | Unified Memory: 24 GB | Geekbench6 ~2586 / 9672 - M3 | 3 nm (first-gen) | 8 (4P+4E) | GPU 8–10 | 16-core Neural | Memory Bandwidth: 100 GB/s | Unified Memory: 24 GB | Geekbench6 ~296…

Thank you. Looking at replacing an Intel MacBook Air, I hope there are price drops on the "outdated" M4s (although an M2 phased out early this year would do well enough...)

I replaced an intel MacBook Pro with a used m1 air. By far the fastest computer I have ever used. Massive, massive leap.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#759

Post by NetMageSCW »

hamdingers wrote: post #476
Hamuko wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Back in the day you wouldn't buy a MacBook because it was powerful. Most likely it had a very shitty Intel CPU with not a lot of cores and with thermal challenges, and the reason you bought it was because macOS.

Nope, many bought it in spite of macOS because it was a durable laptop with an excellent screen, good keyboard, and (afaik still) the only trackpad that didn't suck.

I think “many” is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.

Re: Apple M5 chip

#760

Post by NetMageSCW »

leptons wrote: post #532
Hamuko wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Back in the day you wouldn't buy a MacBook because it was powerful. Most likely it had a very shitty Intel CPU with not a lot of cores and with thermal challenges, and the reason you bought it was because macOS.

>the reason you bought it was because macOS. That is probably the least of reasons why people buy Apple - to many it's just a status symbol , and the OS is a secondary consideration.

You have funny ideas about why people spend money on laptops.
Post reply on HN