morky

About

Username
morky
Joined
Visits
35
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
184
Badges
1
Posts
198
  • Apple unveils plans to ditch Intel chips in Macs for 'Apple Silicon'

    johnbear said:
    Sad! grab an Intel Mac Pro while you can. ARM Macs will be inferior in performance. 

    They just demoed Maya running in emulation on a year-old chip designed for a thermally-constrained, fanless enclosure. MacBook Pros and Mac Pros will have chips designed for MacOS and Apple's compiler. Also imagine how powerful a chip they could create with active cooling. I expect they will destroy Intel in performance.
    JWSCraoulduke42rundhvidthtfastasleepAppleSince1976roundaboutnowchiauraharamwhite
  • Apple unveils plans to ditch Intel chips in Macs for 'Apple Silicon'

    I thought it was interesting that the transition strategy was an exact mirror of 2005, with virtualization added. This will be far easier, though, with Carbon long dead and all apps 64 bit. No 2-year wait for native Photoshop.
    tmayasdasdfastasleepnarwhalroundaboutnowDeelronchiawatto_cobra
  • Apple Silicon will force industry to reconsider use of Intel chips, says ex-Apple exec

    razorpit said:
    Agree with this. Don't think Intel is going anywhere soon, but if you have stock I think now is a good time to sell. Intel is vulnerable right now.

    There's a lot of laziness and content out there right now. Apple Silicon is going to wake a few business units up at MS and Intel, at least it better for their sake.
    This isn't true at all. It doesn't solve the main reason why PC users don't buy Macs.

    1. Macs cost twice as much as Windows PCs with comparable specs. This means that ChromeOS - whose devices are cheaper than Windows ones - is a bigger threat, and ChromeOS already runs on both ARM and x86-64, even the Linux and Android apps.

    2. Macs can't run a ton of software that Windows can, including a lot of specialty and enterprise software, with gaming being a particular example. When Macs switch to ARM, this is going to get worse, not better.

    A lot of people seem to think that Apple's clout in mobile translates to PC. It doesn't. No one is going to run out and buy a MacBook that costs twice as much as a Dell and can't run the software that he needs for work or the video games that he wants to play just because it has the same processor in it that is in the iPhone and iPad (which most likely he may not own anyway because Android has an 65% market share in tablets and 80% market share overall). The people who believe this are Apple fans who own and use Apple products anyway and only deal with Windows and Android devices for review purposes. (Yes, this includes most "tech" writers, who regularly get basic stuff about non-Apple products wrong.)

    And it isn't laziness. Real tech problems that Apple doesn't have to deal with because Apple only has to support one platform isn't laziness. Apple doesn't have to worry about backwards compatibility because Apple doesn't have an enterprise software unit. Microsoft does have an enterprise software unit, it is a massive part of its business, and Microsoft can't tell those customers that they aren't going to support business applications that their customers wrote in 1997 that will never be meaningfully updated because it will cost them tons of money without generating them a bit of revenue.

    As for Intel, they make a wide range of processors - i3, i5, i7, i9, Xeon - that allows their OEMs to make devices at all price points that they need to update at the same time. It is a completely different challenge from Apple's only needing to work on a single Ax processor a year. That is the same with Qualcomm: they have multiple 2x, 4x, 6x and 7x processors a year as well as their flagship 8x. 

    The hardware and software companies that support a range of devices, platforms and price points all have a harder job than Apple. They can't do what Apple does, but based on the issues that Apple has at times, Apple can't do what they do either.
    I agree that Microsoft is stuck with Intel because they need to provide enterprise support for legacy applications. However, Apple will not be making a single processor going forward. They are going to make chips with a much wider thermal footprint, specific to the needs of a particular Mac model. They would not be making this move if they thought they could not outperform even Xeon Macs at the high end. Also, your current cost comparison is hyperbole, and future cost is conjecture. Additionally, I never see Android tablets in actual use. 
    StrangeDaysjony0fastasleeproundaboutnowlolliverargonautwatto_cobra
  • Apple's Federighi and Joswiak discuss Apple silicon, iOS 14, Big Sur and more

    j2fusion said:
    I am worried that the transition will curtail or eliminate access to low level system functions. For example, iOS does not allow access to MAC addresses on the local network limiting the usability of network scanners. This is just one example that could limit the effectiveness of many utilities. We all don’t just want to run Word and Photoshop. I also hope companies like VMware see the worth in developing an emulator for Intel processors. 
    I wouldn't worry, from everything they are saying this will simply be a Mac on a different processor architecture. Just a way better Mac.
    Beatscat52lolliverfastasleepjony0watto_cobra
  • Facebook smartwatch could feature removable display with cameras, heart rate monitor

    Mark my words: they will sell dozens of these things.
    FileMakerFelleranantksundaramJapheywilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Apple unveils plans to ditch Intel chips in Macs for 'Apple Silicon'

    karmadave said:
    I remain skeptical. Not because I don't think Apple can pull this off. They've done it 2x before so clearly they can. Consumers probably won't notice any difference other than better battery life, etc. Will large corporations buy any laptop that doesn't have an x86 compatible processor? Clearly they buy lots of iPhones and iPads so perhaps. Fortunately for Apple the Mac is a small portion of their overall revenue so the risk is relatively small. Especially compared to their last major transition when Mac was the majority of their revenue. This is a multi-year adventure so it will be interesting to follow Apple's progress.
    I see no reason a large corporation would care about x86 compatibility for a Mac.
    fastasleepnarwhalDeelronwatto_cobra
  • Apple's Phil Schiller and Anand Shimpi tease details of A13 Bionic chip

    I miss Anand. There is nothing like his A-series articles since he went to Apple. 
    mjtomlinmacguiwatto_cobra
  • Why the Mac's migration to Apple Silicon is bigger than ARM

    Holy crap. I just realized Apple could now trivially implement booting MacOS from an iPhone. You could just dock your phone in a laptop enclosure, or use a desktop setup. Also, with VDI, corporations issuing iPhones would not need to buy PCs Or Terminals to run Windows.
    spock1234watto_cobra
  • Tesla, BMW don't appear to be gearing up to join Apple's new CarPlay vision

    macxpress said:
    morky said:
    macxpress said:
    chadbag said:
    Now I know why BMW drivers are  attracted to BMWs.   "Takes one to know one".  Arrogant a-hole drivers attracted to arrogant company.

    (Note the above is said in jest, but only partially.  Whether deserved or Not, BMW drivers do have a certain stereotyped reputation). 
    It's funny, the other day I was thinking that Tesla drivers had surpassed BMW drives for that reputation. So not terribly surprised to see the two companies linked in this article. 
    Yeah, Tesla people are very attached to the brand...even though the car as a whole is a POS. 
    No, it isn't. 
    Yes it is...its horribly built and has some of the worst reliability of any car on the road. 
    macxpress said:
    morky said:
    macxpress said:
    chadbag said:
    Now I know why BMW drivers are  attracted to BMWs.   "Takes one to know one".  Arrogant a-hole drivers attracted to arrogant company.

    (Note the above is said in jest, but only partially.  Whether deserved or Not, BMW drivers do have a certain stereotyped reputation). 
    It's funny, the other day I was thinking that Tesla drivers had surpassed BMW drives for that reputation. So not terribly surprised to see the two companies linked in this article. 
    Yeah, Tesla people are very attached to the brand...even though the car as a whole is a POS. 
    No, it isn't. 
    Yes it is...its horribly built and has some of the worst reliability of any car on the road. 
    I'll take Sandy Munro's assessments over yours, sorry.
    MplsP