mjtomlin

This was already confirmed at WWDC and in their latest operating systems. The new predictive text feature is uses a LLM, based on the transformer machine learning model. So yeah, we know they’ve been working on it.

avon b7 said:

laytech said:

Surely the consumer should be allowed to decide not the EU. I don't want this opened up to anyone. I am happy locked behind Apple's gates. Shine on. EU Policing. Someone is doing deals in the backrooms to make this sort of rubbish a policy.

You can decide. Just decide not to use the future options that you don't already have.

The DMA/DSA (and more that is still in the pipe) is a way level the playing field for everyone and give consumers more rights and choice.

That’s not how this works. Enabling the OS to have those options could very well mean breaking specific security models, opening the platform to many issues whether you choose a future option or not.

 If by ”level” you mean creating a homogeneous market where one platform is pretty much the same as the other… where’s the choice? These laws suppress innovation and platform competition/differentiation. The ONLY real choice and innovation will have to come from smaller players that are still allowed to do whatever they want, because they don’t fall within these boundaries. This is NOT a level playing field.

You’re living in a pipe dream if you think this is heading towards some utopian market dynamic where the consumer has all the choices… This is actually headed down a dark dystopian rabbit hole, where more and more laws will be created/changed to push out foreign companies and create a single government run platform, because “the government knows what’s best for their citizens.” Which is exactly what they’ve started doing… “You don’t really want iOS… you NEED this instead.”

 This is how free markets thrive, it puts the innovation in the companies hands, and the choice in the consumers hands. The only time a government should step in, is when there’s a blatant abuse. iPhone is not a monopoly in the EU, far from it, with only a 25% share, yet they are being treated as if there is no competition or alternative. Even though 3 out 4 EU citizens choose Android. This is obviously just an attack to break a successful (lucrative) platform.

 The fact that the limit is a monetary amount and not a market share amount is very telling of what’s in play here.

tham said:

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.

Easy mistake.  The answer is no.  You are getting AIM mixed up with ARM.   AIM (Apple-IBM-Motorola) partnered to design the PowerPC chip.  

ARM is/was a British company.  In fact, it started as a contest on show on BBC (or was it iTV) in the late 70s on how to make a low powered computer chip.

Personally, I think Apple will eventually end up switching to RISC-V chip.  In fact, if they're not already developing a chip...they are...for sure.  10 years, they will come out with their own design.

Yes, AIM was a partnership to create a next generation CPU for Macs - It was a design based off of IBM's POWER architecture.

But ARM as it is known today is not Acorn Computers. It is Arm Holdings which is a company formed by Acorn, Apple and VLSI Technologies in the late 80's. It's designed was based off of Acorn's ARM and was originally designed for the Apple Newton.

In both cases, while the original IP was not Apple, they played a huge part in the direction the design for both went as they were going to be the major customer for both ARM and PowerPC.

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.

9secondkox2 said:

mjtomlin said:

apple4thewin said:

I think there is a chance that they decide to choose an A17 chip design for M3. Seems like using A16 is too small of a performance jump unless Apple decides to make an A16.5 which would be like A16 but in 3nm who knows besides Apple

The M1 debuted alongside the A14 and they both used the same cores and process node. The M2 used the "older" A15 cores (and same process node) because it was being fab'ed mid cycle.

So if the M3 is being held up by the 3nm node and will debut after the A17, then more than likely they will both use the same generation cores. If that's the case, then that's a generational skip for the M-series and we should see fairly huge gains in Mac performance and efficiency.

The m2 was held back for multiple reasons. It was held back as much as possible to try to fit new GPU features, but in the end, it didn’t work out. So apple made up for lost time with using already fully baked tech and clocking it up. Just another reason why m3 is more likely to be based on the latest design. The holdup this time around has to do with tsmc msnufacturing, not apple design and validation. 

I believe they licensed Imagination's Photon Architecture, but were having trouble integrating it, i.e., getting it to run efficiently. But I thought those GPUs were destined for the A16 generation...

prototypes had much higher power draw than the simulated estimates expected. This meant the GPU would have impacted battery life too much to be usable, and incurred thermal issues. As a result, it couldn’t be used for the iPhone 14 Pro line.

That was a quote from Dec. 2022, 6 months after the M2 debuted. Of course, Apple may have planned to have it done in time to stick in the M2, but gave up after they knew it wouldn't make it in time and just went with A15 gen. blocks to get it out by WWDC.