cgWerks

Mike Wuerthele said:

Fidonet127 said:

I think we will look back at this article as a very sad misprint. I can't find where video cards will not be supported.

Finally, Mac Pro brings PCI expansion to Apple silicon. It features six open expansion slots that support gen 4, which is two times faster than before. So users can customize Mac Pro with essential cards, including audio and video I/O, networking, and storage.

Right there in the keynote, Apple says the new Mac Pro will support video card for input and output. 

They addressed no video cards several times, most recently in Gruber’s talk show.

I think maybe the confusion here is over the difference between GPUs and video I/O cards.

They must have more data than just username/password and IP address. It seems like they’d have some kind of device info, and likely a bunch of other data. Couldn’t the actual app even generate some kind of unique ID?

A simple solution would just be to have a base price, and then charge a bit more for each additional ‘viewer’ added to the plan. Then whatever that number is, is the max simultaneous streams associated with that account. Who cares where they are or who they are? They could all be at the same house, or each in a different city. A family of 5 could pick a 3x subscription, and maybe they’d be fine if all 5 couldn’t be on at once, while another family would buy 5x.

Are they just making this way too hard?

A lot of these high-profile ‘mistakes’ lately. First PayPal, now this.
I wonder - if like PayPal - they’ll just stuff it back in once the public excitement dies down?

muthuk_vanalingam said:
But the key player in this whole discussion is Microsoft - and their interest in making a windows version compatible with ARM. So long as Microsoft holds back on this, Intel/AMD can breath easy.

Yeah, IMO, this is key. It is all (or at least mostly) about the apps. There is a lot of talk about performance, power usage, etc. but at the end of the day, the question is whether a certain set of apps the user needs exists for the computing platform.

Obviously, given the state of the world, sales will slant towards laptops (work from home, mobile office, etc.) though this trend isn’t new. Also, people are going to be  more picky about how they spend their diminishing purchasing power. A computer is an important tool for most people, so it might not be an expense they can skip, but they’ll be looking more at foundational needs, quality, & longevity. Apple delivers a lot of that (if they don’t lose on software compatibility).

Marvin said:
Mac version doesn't support Nanite so it can only run those scenes with a patch. Unreal runs pretty well on M-series Macs though:

(Rosetta version)



The M1 Max GPUs run about 1/5th-1/6th the speed of a 4090 comparing the same resolution and settings. M3 Max will likely bring that down to 1/3rd and the M3 Ultra will sit between a 3090 and 4090 in a small form factor.

Thanks, I'm always looking for more in-app demos, rather than just rendering benchmarks and such. I can deal with 50% longer render times or such, as there are usually even render-farm solutions, and I'm not currently pushing deadlines or in a strict time=money situation. But, if the app isn't usable in the viewports when working on a large project, that is a problem.

This actually looks pretty usable (especially compared to older software I'm currently using). Hopefully the RT stuff will come with the M3. I've seen people demo'ing stuff on even the M1 Ultra Studio that isn't really all this usable, which is a problem for such a high-priced machine (when even a $1500 gaming PC is just fine). Hopefully some of that will end up being software optimization (and will actually get optimized!).

Ultimately, Apple needs to do something about this, unless they just intend to lose these markets. At least with Intel Macs, we did have an option to solve these situations.

mcdave said:
Whilst I’m with you that the accusers are often guilty of that which they accuse others, my behaviour is probably better characterised by another bizarre behaviour - vicarious defiance. Where we empathise with the ‘oppressed’ & rally to support the underdog. Oddly, in my case, the ‘oppressed’ are incognisant of the fact.

Whether it’s a customer being had by a salesman touting irrelevant specs, an old couple being relieved of their life-savings by a financial shark, a voter surrendering their freedom at the instant they believe they are expressing it or a young girl surrendering worse to an older predator. Each are deceived by empowerment to decide of their own volition and tolerate nothing which doesn’t empower them. Hooked on the heroin of false-Liberty and the woke generation exemplifies this issue.

This change, I do fear.

There's a Dutch saying Adam Curry often says (which I can't remember, and couldn't pronounce even if I did) for that 'accuse others of that which you're guilty'. We're seeing that SO much these days.

But, I totally identify with your proclivity and suffer the same myself. (I think it's often a positive attribute, but we do have to be careful not to get suckered in.) I'd never heard a term for it - vicarious defiance - I'll have to try and remember that.

What's even worse, IMO, is that we so often hear how the millennial (and younger), having grown up in this 'advertising' age, can see through the manipulation attempts. My read on it, is that maybe they are a bit more attuned to blatant manipulation (than maybe older boomers who grew up trusting the media, ads to a point, etc.) But, that protection doesn't go very deep. Anything cloaked in 'authentic' they fall for, hook, line, and sinker.

jungmark said:
3 out of 5 days in the office isn’t “all the time.”  If that doesn’t fit your schedule, feel free to look for other employment. 

True, but depending on the goals, it still has a big enough impact, it shouldn't be classified as remote work. For example, they would still have to live within a certain fairly limited radius to the office. They'd still have to have transportation. It doesn't help infrastructure/green-goals all that much. And, they still have the downsides on their side of the equation. They have to have a proper workspace at home, proper equipment and infrastructure.

Besides a few commuting hours gained, that's almost worse than just having to be in the office full-time. If you full-time work from home, then you make adjustments but they are balanced by the gains. For example, maybe you buy/rent a home with an extra room and get better Internet, but you can have no or one less vehicle and live in a more remote place, etc.