mjtomlin

IreneW said:

Do that's why they removed Tiles' possibility to track positions....

Incorrect!

They removed the “Always Allow” option in the permission dialog box, but the option still exists in location settings.

Two things...

1. Rosetta is not emulation (as others have pointed out). It translates x64 code so that it can run natively on the M1's CPU and GPU cores.  That translation happens when the application is installed or run for the first time after an update. It can also happen JIT (just in time) when arbitrary x64 code is executed.

2. The point of the comparison wasn't about the performance of the hardware (M1 vs. SQ1), it was about the real world performance of the system, including the operating systems. This is the performance a user can expect to get out of the system.

kkqd1337 said:

I'm dubious of their claims. But i'm all for it if its true. I'll probably wait for M2 tho as I dont need anything right now.

One thought I had....

if these chips are so amazing.... why are they not making servers? using them in data centres, thats where power per watt really matters isnt it?

Efficiency matters everywhere, not just in data centers. It allows you to push up performance without using more power and generating more heat. This is how and why the new MacBook Air does not need fan, but has 3x the performance as the Intel model.

The BIGGEST difference (and arguably the most important), between the blue and green bubbles… is that it shows which messages are end to end encrypted and which are not. All blue bubbles are encrypted. Green are not.

9secondkox2 said:

Netflix not jumping in both feet first on a hyped new platform means they’ve taken a gander and weren’t impressed. 

Kind of like everyone else not selling apps for it. 

The effort and engineering power going into the VP is astounding. Unfortunately, it’s just fundamentally flawed as a concept. 

Yeah, that’s not what that means. Netflix has a history of being hostile towards Apple’s platforms.

lorca2770 said:

Please, correct me.
I have been following Apple since 1984 (Mac 128 ߘꩦlt;/p>

Was it not S Jobs who at some point, during the tough times, sold ARM (since it was Apple’s company)? I think I understood it was Apple Reduced Memory. It was one of those developments that were undermined by Microsoft with the permanent: “stop the presses we are coming with something better”. So many Apple developments were drowned by, at the time, all powerful MS.
Please advise.

Originally ARM stood for the Acorn RISC Machine. In the late 80's when Apple started the development of the Newton, they needed an extremely low power, but powerful CPU design. They partnered with Acorn Computers and VLSI Logic to form ARM Holdings, Ltd. The CPU produced from this partnership became known as Advanced RISC Machine. And it was this design that went on to become the basis of the modern design used today.

Steve Jobs sold off Apple's share in ARM Holdings after he axed the Newton project, along with many other products and projects to get Apple back on track and focus on their core competencies. (Although it was rumored that, out of spite, Steve Jobs basically tore down everything John Scully built.)

I believe what you're talking about with Microsoft, is their infamous use of spreading F.U.D. throughout the industry to keep clients from buying a competitors product. They would promise that they were working on something similar to a competitors product and it would be released "soon". Hell, even Windows 95 was advertised as "More Mac Like". Most of MS's competition basically floundered or went out of business from these business "practices". They were also infamous for their "Embrace, Extend, and Extinguish" practices to co-op competing standards and technologies.

keithw said:

The 2023(?) ASi "Mac Pro" must either be able to reach the 166,946 GB5 GPU results either with on-chip GPU cores or by a discrete graphics card like the existing Intel Mac Pro, otherwise, why bother to even release it?

I think this is why we haven't seen the new Mac Pro yet. The new GPU design for the A16 was supposed to see a huge performance increase (>50%, mainly due to implementing hardware based ray tracing), but it had to be pulled because apparently it wasn't meeting efficiency standards*. So If I had to guess, the M3 is going to skip the A16 and be based on the A17 generation of cores, so we should see a fairly substantial performance increase in the M3 and finally get the ASi based Mac Pro, which will be the first system with M3 generation SoCs with M3 Ultra and M3 Extreme.  (Both the A17 and M3 will also use TSMC's N3 process bringing further performance and efficiency enhancements.)

*This is the issue that's going to have be addressed at some point in the future... trying to develop a single core for both mobile and desktop applications. More than likely, that new GPU would've been fine in a desktop system where thermal ceilings can be lifted with active cooling systems. I think Apple will eventually start "optimizing" actual CPU and GPU (more so) cores for their intended systems.

Yes, because Apple hasn’t considered any of this. You know, like create and adopt a new file system or buying Anobit (a company that specialized in designing controllers that increase NAND endurance). And let’s not forget, iPhones have been using NAND memory since their inception and we haven’t seen issues en masse from those devices.

CrossPlatformFrogger said:

While Apple kept pushing for unnecessary unused horsepower in their chips Google chose to focus on AI with the Tensor chip, and Apple was caught flat footed. I remember when Google first announced Tensor and everybody talked about how it wasn't as fast as Apple's chip and Google came out and said they weren't going for speed. This article makes me want to check out the new Pixel, I know the "AI" on it will be the real deal.

This article has nothing to do with the Tensor SoC’s in the Pixel. Those SoC’s aren’t even close to Apple’s M-Series in any respect - maybe the NPU is close.

This is about Google’s server Tensor Processing Unit, which is an entirely different beast….

designr said:

There's an assumption built in here that so-called "spatial computing" is a real thing that anyone really wants.

That's still to be determined.

Being a long time Mac user, from way back in the day, many, many people considered the Mac a toy because of its GUI and they didn’t see the benefit of it because they couldn’t think beyond a command line. So doubting Apple and their vision is a fool’s errand, especially considering the several times they’ve released something that was doomed to fail only to end up to redefining (or owning) their respective markets. Apple doesn’t just throw a device out onto the market without thinking about the entire ecosystem or platform that does or will go along with it.

The unfortunately aspect of the product is that it sat in R&D for so long, it got stuck with an M2 instead of an M3 (Although as far as SoC’s go, I think the rejiggered M3 Pro was designed to end up in this device.).