Last Active
  • Apple accused of trademark abuse in new 'Memoji' lawsuit

    Apple's listing on the Trademark List appears to be something of a fuck you to these folks. Memoji as listed there now is all-caps MEMOJI® (unlike every other mark listed) and if you look at the original lawsuit, you'll find the Android app was using MEMOJI while Apple was using Memoji. This is also in contrast to how Apple actually uses it, as Memoji.

    Basically Social Tech filed an intent to use MEMOJI [Pseudo mark: ME MOJI] in April 2016 and then, more than two years later, was still not ready to go when Apple launched Memoji. They then scrambled to put something out so they could capitalize on having filed the intent to use and maintained it over those two years.

    Also, the trademark application that Apple did buy was for MEmoji ... [Pseudo mark: ME EMOJI] -- filed April 2017.

    So they are different.

    Maybe when Apple's lawyer cites "common law" in its defense he is talking about the fact Social Technologies did not launch until after Apple did so. So they can't complain about getting swamped, and they have no right to recompense for that. Apple isn't required to sit around waiting to see if Social Tech will ever launch. They can argue about ME EMOJI versus ME MOJI, but that's all. And maybe that's a loser for Social Tech, because ME EMOJI is a stronger pseudo mark than ME MOJI -- WTF is a "MOJI" ? -- when Apple uses "Memoji."
  • Sen. Amy Klobuchar plans to hold antitrust subcommittee hearings on App Store

    Misogyny aside, this is her job, and there is no question the government needs to look at these issues and take positions. The App Store bullshit is minor in the overall picture. Whatever oversight or regulation that gets enacted in that respect will not pose any serious issues for Apple. 

    No, social platforms like Facebook will be front and center here. Things like the Instagram acquisition and other kinds of anti-competitive practices need to be looked at. Not to mention privacy and security aspects. The idea we should all sit around with our thumbs up our asses while we let people like Mark Zuckerberg do whatever they like is not going to fly.
  • Apple debuts new $5999 Mac Pro with up to 28-core Xeon processors

    KidGloves said:
    Looks amazing though I would like to see how the likely crippled $5999 version compares to similar PC workstations. I can't help thinking that the Apple Tax is back with a bang. The stuff looks like it's fantastically engineered (probably over the top for 90%). Anyone want to guess how much RAM the $5999 version will ship with?
    We're talking a base version that's DOUBLE the price of the current base. That's a big jump in anyone's book.
    An HP Z4 with the last-generation (=Skylake) 8 Core Xeon-W (i.e., W-2145) with 1000W chassis, 2x10Gb Ethernet, 32 GB (4x8) of RAM, 256 GB NVMe SSD, and AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 with 8 GB is $6965.

    So that thinking is wrong. 
  • Leaked Apple Silicon roadmap hints at new Mac Pro, MacBook Air

    rob53 said:
    blastdoor said:
    rob53 said:
    blastdoor said:
    rob53 said:
    Not going to join the off-topic comments, I'm getting back on topic.

    I hope these rumors are true because they do signal a fantastic direction for the M-series SoCs. Multiple dies networked together with their high-speed bus (PCIe or home-designed) all with unified memory possibly sharing all memory and storage among all CPUs and GPUs. This is what I was hoping for. If Apple makes these multi-die SoCs with sockets for the Mac Pro that could be absolutely outrageous, giving Mac Pro users upgradeability. 

    I presume this means at least 20 CPUs and 64 GPUs in a M1 Max-Duo. If Apple can work out a socketed motherboard with empty SoC sockets, the Mac Pro could start with this Max-Duo and quickly become a Max-Quartet, Max-Sextet simply by plugging in a matching Max-Duo. There comes a point where fast is fast enough (not really) but as I've said before, there are scientist who like Macs and having a supercomputer on their desktop just for themselves would be great. I could also see this Mac Pro Max-Sextet being used by movie studios, producing animated features in 8K in real time. 
    I doubt “sockets” or “SOC upgradability” are words that will be associated with the new Mac Pro.

    To maintain very high bandwidth and low latency connections among all logic and memory, there needs to be very tight integration. For example, look at the picture here: https://www.anandtech.com/show/16921/intel-sapphire-rapids-nextgen-xeon-scalable-gets-a-tiling-upgrade. I’ll bet apple’s four die system looks more like that than, say, this: http://neconocone.cocolog-nifty.com/blog/files/genesis_brochure.pdf 

    robaba said:
    Sockets would expose the design to huge latency costs, I don’t think they will go that route.  I’m just not conversant enough with leading-edge ultra-high performance cpu design theory to guess what they might do instead.  Once they place their markers down, that will establish their patterns going forward—it’s in the next few iterations of Apple Silicon that we will begin to see what they are really capable of!  

    And of course, their competitors will not be standing still.  Intel is starting to put out innovative (though brutally hot) chips, and AMD is still on an up-cycle.  NVidia have purchased an Apple splinter group and may soon join the fracas on the RISC side, even if they are eventually blocked from purchase of ARM Holdings.

    It’s an exciting time in CPU design again!  Almost like the way the market looked prior to the Itanium debacle.
    Sockets don't need to be the traditional thousand pin sockets, they can be something new. I don't know what but Apple probably has something in the design stage that will allow multiple SoCs to be attached to the same unified memory architecture with low latency. Saw a video with two Apple designers talking about how many years ago Apple silicon started to be developed. The fact Apple is talking about multiple dies means they already have some well into development. The 400GB/s bus is something that renders external RAM and storage worthless so they have to have ideas on how to integrate multiple SoCs along with multiple dies. I would think there comes a point where multiple dies get too big but I have no doubt Apple will figure this out.

    As for anything Intel or AMD, they're way far behind Apple unless you want to use their CPUs to heat rooms. Apple's upside down design philosophy is something a CPU manufacturer can not replicate. Apple designs the device package first, figures out what software should run then designs the computer to make it work. Chip manufacturers can only design a chip and hope someone can make it work with their software in their computer package (laptop, desktop, phone). Nobody else does what Apple does. Find that video and you'll see what I mean.
    With respect to packaging and using multiple dies apple is not ahead. AMD has the most real products with multiple dies. They started with Epyc multi-chip modules. 

    AMD and apple both use TSMC and TSMC has a wide range of packaging options available. Apple has used some interesting options with Apple Watch (system in package). 

    I think it’s super unlikely that we will see anything that could be called a socket or user upgradable. It will be highly integrated to provide ultra high bandwidth and low latency.
    Like I said, AMD only makes CPU/GPU, they don't make the whole package allowing them to design like Apple is designing. You really need to find and watch that video to see what I am referring to. A huge motor doesn't mean anything in a car if the car isn't designed to use it from the ground up. Look for the RR videos. Don't want AI to ban me for referring to other sites.
    I don’t think AI bans you for pointing to other sources of information, unless your account only exists to do that. I assume you’re referring to the interview that the VPs Tom Boger and Tim Millet gave. So you could just link to AI’s own story about it, here:


    The Six Colors “Upgrade” (via Relay FM) podcast interview is titled “They Feed on Memory Bandwidth” — about an hour and quite thorough. They are well-rehearsed, and the interviewers aren’t getting anything out of them that Apple hasn't prepared them to say, but it’s still an illuminating picture that is very useful.
  • Linksys AX4200 Wi-Fi 6 mesh routers gain support for Apple HomeKit

    These are us. Setup took a few minutes, as I had to use their serial numbers to manually identify which of our three nodes was in which room, but it was easy and basically nothing to it. The Linksys app just asked if I wanted to integrate with HomeKit, then sent me to the Home app.

    One thing I’m not sure about is parental controls over internet access for kids’ devices. I used to manage that from the Linksys app, and it looks like I still can, but I’m not sure if I’ve got additional options now, with regard to Screen Time and the like. If I learn anything interesting, I’ll post it here.
  • Apple had a M1 Mac Pro, but decided to wait for M2 Extreme

    crowley said:
    Due to the timeline of how long Apple said they will replace Macs with ASi versions, I don’t think M1 Pro version was really designed. The mini will stay as the consumer computer, the Studio will stay as the prosumer low to medium pro computer, and the Pro will be the high end. The Studio will not cut it for someone who needs 1.5tb of memory and lots of processing power. Yes the Sudio beats some configurations of the Mac Pro. The Studio wasn’t designed in a short time. The Studio took awhile to design and announced when they were ready.  
    I’m skeptical of this. 

    The Studio is basically a stretch Mini. They just had to take the Mini CAD files, edit the vertical dimensions, add perforations and port cutouts, and attach a simple tapered and perforated cylinder to the bottom. 

    The whole thing could have been designed, tested, and machined in a very short period of time, including the big honking fan assembly - which probably explains the numerous fan issues in the first run. 
    It's a completely different logic board, completely different cooling, completely different port construction.  There's no reason to think it went through any less of a design process than any other new Apple product, which would not be "a very short period of time".  No way.
    Of course those items needed to be laid out and built but it’s a known quantity. Apple was developing the Mac pro and testing likely indicated the m1 ultra or adoubled up version of that wasn’t what they wanted to share a awe as the best they could do. Somewhere in the testing process, the decision was made to not launch at wwdc. And since wwdc I planned far in advance, this gave more than enough time - in a relatively short period of time - to build a stretch Mac mini and have it ready shortly thereafter. It’s not some new avant-garde industrial design and the motherboard isn’t some feat of engineering. 

    As Gurkan noted, apple planned to launch the Mac Pro at wwdc but then decided against it. 
    There is no way they would have launched the studio and the pro at the same time. They just needed to buy time with a product that doesn’t have a legacy to live up to and can perform for those who need/want the power. 

    It’s not bad that it’s a bit of a bridge. It’s just that apple needed to get some serious performance clout but it’s lauded machine is not ready. 
    In addition to the various points others have made, your theory ignores another aspect of the Mac Studio decision, arguably the most important element—abandoning the larger iMac and/or iMac Pro. That was not something done lightly or in response to hypothetical engineering issues with the M1 Mac Pro.

    Most likely, the situation was precisely the opposite of what you describe—the existence of the Mac Studio allowed Apple to put the Mac Pro on hold (for whatever reason).

    When did the supply-chain rumors of a “Mini Pro” begin? The Mac Studio was already in development for production when those rumors surfaced. Also the 27" iMac rumor. My understanding is the authors of both these rumors have said everything they were seeing is accounted for by the Mac Studio and the Studio Display.
  • Employee COVID outbreak forces Apple to close Texas store

    chadbag said:
    sflocal said:
    This is human stupidity at its finest.  The selfish, moronic, conspiracy-loving anti-vaxxers are putting people's live at risk.  They are just too stupid and ignorant to accept it.  I'm all for personal choice and keeping the government out of my body, but what's it going to take to get these people to understand that COVID is here to stay until they get vaccinated?! 

    One can only hope that Darwin will take care of things, but even then... that's years down the road.
    The vaccine does not stop you from spreading or getting covid.  It does lessen the effects if you get it.  So I fail to see how someone  who has concerns about the covid vaccines and is not vaccinated is any more at fault for the spread.  

    Repeat:  The vaccine does not prevent the spread of covid.  It does lessen symptoms once you get it.  

     (Yes I am vaccinated). 
    Your reasoning is based on the assumption that vaccinated and unvaccinated people get COVID at the same rate. That is just false. As others have already said, it’s not slightly different, it’s massively different. 

    I’ve heard this same thing recently in person, I guess it is the latest vector of disinformation. It involves a bit of sleight of hand, taking one proven fact (a vaccinated person with COVID can spread the virus), removing its context (vaccinated people are far less likely to get COVID), and using that as an excuse.
  • Apple's iPhone SE and Mac mini spring event is on March 8

    AppleZulu said:
    dewme said:
    I'm definitely in the camp of speculation that Apple will be giving us a peek at what's on their roadmap for Pro-level Macs, including the iMac Pro, Mac Pro, and yeah, maybe some kind of Mac mini Pro - along with a few more pedestrian updates like an iPhone SE re-pop and an spec updated Mac mini.

    Seems like too much of this would be self-defeating for Apple. Advance previews of hardware upgrades undermines sales of current hardware. They might tell you a few months out about a new product, but not about plans for existing lines. 
    Uh, what current hardware? Do you mean the Intel iMac and Intel Mac Pro? Like they aren’t already undermined? Releasing a Mac Mini Pro and announcing a coming iMac Pro and iMac Max, not to mention an M1 Mac Pro with the current form factor, might actually increase sales of the Intel hardware as its discontinuation approaches…
  • Satechi Thunderbolt 4 Dock review: A compact port extender for Mac

    JP234 said:
    JP234 said:
    ITGUYINSD said:
    JP234 said:
    So give up a Thunderbolt port on your Mac to get more thunderbolt ports? You had two, now you have three. And some USB ports, Ethernet, and an SD port.

    I got a dock with HDMI,  Ethernet, SD, micro-SD, (2) USB 3.0 for $16.19 on Amazon.

    Is this one really worth $300? Not to me. Maybe you.
    Depends on what Mac you connect it to.  Worst case, the MBP 13 M1 has 2 TB ports.  One used for this dock, leaves me with 1 on the MBP and 3 on the dock.  4 Total by my count.  And it's not just "some USB" ports, they are 10Gbps each.  So yes -- if you just need some generic ports to plug in a mouse or a thumb drive, a $20 dock is fine

    For those who need more TB4 ports and high-speed USB 3.2 ports plus Ethernet, this is good.  Expensive, but good.  There isn't much else out there like this.

    Like M68000 said -- no HDMI is a big bummer.
    Your math is just one port off: you have to connect one of those 3 on the dock to one of the TB ports on your Mac. That's a total of 3.
    Thunderbolt is expensive tech, no matter who's producing it, and it's really only useful to a handful of professionals in the I/O intensive applications. 10Gb/s USB-C will do just fine for the other 99.99%. So will two USB-C ports, for that matter.
    FTA: On the front of the dock is a Thunderbolt 4 host port, which connects to your Mac and can provide 96 watts of power delivery. 

    So there are four TB ports — one in front, three in back. 

    Also, an HDMI port would be nice, but a TB to HDMI cable about the same price as an HDMI-HDMI cable. 
    So you have one port that connects to the Mac. That leaves three that can be used for I/O. But without the hub, you have (minimum) 2 that you can use for I/O. Net gain: 1 port.
    You’re forgetting that one of the (minimum) two on the MacBook is still free. So that’s four total I/O. So net gain is two, not one. And if it’s a 13" Pro or an M1 Air, the net gain for I/O is three if you need to charge the battery, because the hub does that as well.
  • Apple isn't done with 2022 -- here's what's still coming

    netrox said:
    netrox said:
    I am pretty sure that the new M2 MacBook Pros will be based on 4nm process, not 5nm process. Apple said that A16 is created on 4nm process and it's likely that it will use the same process. 
    Yes, that’s correct. And it’s thought to be the N4P process. It’s useful to know that it is still 5nm, “4nm” is just a name, indicating further refinements. TSMC has four generations of 5nm: N5, N5P, N4, and N4P.

    So the M2 being N5P (A15) and M2 Pro/Max being N4P (A16), nicely mirrors the iPhone 14 and 14 Pro divide.
    No, Apple literally said, "4 nanometer" - here's a screenshot of the video:

    No, maybe you should take like three seconds to look it up before responding. This is text directly from the TSMC site:

    “TSMC’s 5nm (N5) Fin Field-Effect Transistor (FinFET) technology successfully entered volume production in the second quarter of 2020 and experienced a strong ramp in the second half of 2020. […]

    In addition, TSMC plans to launch 4nm (N4) technology, an enhanced version of N5 technology. N4 provides further enhancement in performance, power and density for the next wave of N5 products. The development of N4 technology is on schedule with good progress, and volume production is expected to start in 2022.”

    Source: https://www.tsmc.com/english/dedicatedFoundry/technology/logic/l_5nm

    It’s been broadly discussed as such — it’s not a secret or anything. 

    Um… it’s been 2022 for a while now… plenty of time to have produced the A16 at 4nm and Apple is stating that explicitly and emphatically. It’s 4nm - actually matching the statement and timeline you quoted. There is no disagreement or contradiction. 
    The point is that the so-called “4nm” is still the 5nm tech. It’s inaccurate to suggest that it’s not, which is what netrox did. 4nm (N4 and N4P) is just a marketing name.

    Yes, it is a refinement. But no, it’s completely wrong to suggest it is like the transition from 5nm to 3nm technology, or from 7nm to 5nm before that, or from 10nm to 7nm before that.