81–90 of 129 posts
Maybe building containers for one operating system and architecture from a completely different operating system and architecture is not the best idea.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rosetta 2 purely AOT? Where did you get that idea from?
It certainly still does some JIT/interpretation at runtime but it does indeed translate the executable upon first launch.^1 I can’t imagine how it would be able to fully translate a browser JavaScript engine that’s doing its own JIT, for example. 1: https://www.macrumors.com/2020/11/12/rosetta-2-translation-c...
Sounds a bit like Docker is at a loss. Caught between a closed source OS (rock) and an architecture change (hard place). Ideally, they could leverage Rosetta2 to run x64 containers under macOS on Apple Silicon ... but I guess Apple isn't playing ball (because otherwise they would have probably announced it at WWDC). At this point I see an Apple Silicon based Mac is just a consumer device, I don't think I'm going to b…
> At this point I see an Apple Silicon based Mac is just a consumer device Not everyone runs Docker or similar to do their work. If it turns out that Apple’s performance claims are true, I don’t see people easily letting it go, a snappy machine is a serious advantage. After all, we are in this deep trouble because of the endless layers of abstraction, so I don’t see it getting any speedier anytime soon for the status…
If Docker can run on Raspberry Pi's ARM chips, it can run on Mac ARM chips. I expect we'll see this working very soon after the new Macs start to arrive.
Here is a post saying that the latest beta release of Electron supports Apple Silicon: https://www.electronjs.org/blog/apple-silicon
And the GitHub issue tracking Go on AS, which mentions that support is coming in version 1.16 scheduled for release on Feb 1st 2021: https://github.com/golang/go/issues/38485
Sounds a bit like Docker is at a loss. Caught between a closed source OS (rock) and an architecture change (hard place). Ideally, they could leverage Rosetta2 to run x64 containers under macOS on Apple Silicon ... but I guess Apple isn't playing ball (because otherwise they would have probably announced it at WWDC). At this point I see an Apple Silicon based Mac is just a consumer device, I don't think I'm going to b…
I think Apple didn’t want to support x86 emulation at all, and made Rosetta 2 purely AOT compilation (which you can’t really do with virtual machines). It makes it so they don’t have to deal with having x86 VMs available but super slow making people think that Apple Silicon is slow (even if that’s untrue), and that’s kind of the growing pain that Microsoft is going through at the moment with Windows on ARM.
Saying "didn't want to support" implies that one can "just" repurpose binary translation with a few build settings. You're off by several orders of magnitude.
Sounds a bit like Docker is at a loss. Caught between a closed source OS (rock) and an architecture change (hard place). Ideally, they could leverage Rosetta2 to run x64 containers under macOS on Apple Silicon ... but I guess Apple isn't playing ball (because otherwise they would have probably announced it at WWDC). At this point I see an Apple Silicon based Mac is just a consumer device, I don't think I'm going to b…
> At this point I see an Apple Silicon based Mac is just a consumer device Not everyone runs Docker or similar to do their work. If it turns out that Apple’s performance claims are true, I don’t see people easily letting it go, a snappy machine is a serious advantage. After all, we are in this deep trouble because of the endless layers of abstraction, so I don’t see it getting any speedier anytime soon for the status…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> At this point I see an Apple Silicon based Mac is just a consumer device Not everyone runs Docker or similar to do their work. If it turns out that Apple’s performance claims are true, I don’t see people easily letting it go, a snappy machine is a serious advantage. After all, we are in this deep trouble because of the endless layers of abstraction, so I don’t see it getting any speedier anytime soon for the status…
If Docker performance on Mac was a disincentive for using it, then people would have abandoned it because of the hypervisor instead of container architecture.
That's where tool user, AKA "The Developer" experiences the performance. If the autocomplete comes up fast, you are a happy developer, if your scripts finish running instantly on every save, you are a happy developer. If you click and it runs, you are a happy developer. If you think about it, Docker itself is about that comfort of not having to deal with the tool setup every time. On Apple dev technology that's the default without Docker. Search for Xcode on AppStore, click download, click open once it's downloaded, write your Swift code that can do UI and backend , click run and it runs. Sometimes autocomplete stops working but you just close Xcode and open it again and it works :)
There's nothing you can't do on 2015 Macbook Air that can be done on a fresh high end Macbook Pro. The difference comes from the comfort of being snappy and people pay multiple times more for that snappiness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rosetta 2 purely AOT? Where did you get that idea from?
It certainly still does some JIT/interpretation at runtime but it does indeed translate the executable upon first launch.^1 I can’t imagine how it would be able to fully translate a browser JavaScript engine that’s doing its own JIT, for example. 1: https://www.macrumors.com/2020/11/12/rosetta-2-translation-c...