knowitall

loopless said:

Anyone who works in or develops HPC software cringes at this.  Sure it's likely you can make an ARM chip with the performance of high-end Xeons, but the world of HPC software is a million years away from XCode app development where you can flip a switch to build for a new architecture. There are so many bespoke libraries (e.g. Intel MKL) and years of optimization that have gone into getting HPC code to run fast on AVX Xeons.

Apple is a bit-player in HPC with the Mac Pro because of their 'war' with nVIDIA ( cutting off access to the compute power of their massively parallel GPUs)  - it would just sideline them even more if they went ARM.

GC (Grand Central) is Apples answer, as parallelism is the answer to supercomputer power.
Works fine with XCode.

polymnia said:

lkrupp said:

Anilu_777 said:

I seriously wish bloggers and mainstream media would tell us facts instead of click bait. “Apple is doomed” is what sells eyeballs. YouTube is just a a bad 90% of the time. “I left Apple for Android” sells. It’s Google so I don’t expect better. But mainstream journalists should report fact. And Apple fact is usually missing. 

And when Dilger's editorials point that out many here object to it as fanboyism. It's funny how many AppleInsider members neither own nor use Apple products but are always at the ready to amplify and enhance the negative narrative. Dilger paints positive pictures and explains the misinformation and downright lies about Apple and he's vilified for it, with requests to AI to stop publishing his writings. 

let’s be objective. DED’s articles are many things. Positive isn’t one I’d of those. There are an arrogant, sneering tone used to describe all non-Apple or Apple-allied actors in the stories. What I find unfortunate about his style is that the articles seem well researched and comprehensive. He doesn’t need to respond with disses and negativity against the hacks he is railing against. I understand why he’s upset and frustrated that much of the tech press paints Apple the way it does.

I still don’t care for the tone of his writing. I read it because there is insight in it. And I do my best to look past the adolescent barbs he peppers throughout. 

His tone is that of the non-Apple corner. Your sanity is put into question when you argue in a positive way about Apple, your also immediately put down as a fanboy, even if your arguments are completely sane and objective. Academic and intellectual circles almost immediately condemn you with the first positive utterance about such a filthy multinational company (how dare you think that way, whatever the facts, left minds think).

So, the .mp4 file triggered a player exploit (buffer overrun) which allowed code to be executed that used another exploit to gain root access to the device running a daemon on it gathering and dumping information to ‘bin evil’.
This gives a bleak picture of Apples coding practices. The ‘player’ is almost certain an Apple framework allowing this exploit, which means it isn’t coded in Swift (which doesn't allow for buffer overruns and similar problems) which is bad, but it also means that legacy code isn’t checked for the most obvious and known security problems.
The root exploit, needed to get out of the sandbox and have sufficient rights to operate cross platform and share information without the user knowing it is also unforgivable. It means that the operating system isn’t screened for such things (or screened in a very bad way).

StrangeDays said:

knowitall said:

It seems fair to report the number of people getting a heart attack because of false ‘positives’. 

Sure. What numbers are you sharing with us? How many fatal heart attacks have their been due to false positive a-fib results on Apple Watch?

What? You don't have any numbers? Because there very likely isn't any data to suggest it's happened at all? Sacre bleu!

My comment was a bit sarcastic of course but false positives is a real concern ... by doctors.

Journalist and bloggers were right, 64 bit per se isn’t an advantage.
They just had the transition to 64 bit of desktops which was promoted by computer companies as ‘huge’ while it turned out to be used largely as marketing to sell more computers with no subsequent speed gain to speak of and lots of incompatible software that had to be bought again.

This time journalist thought they knew there stuff and spotted another marketing campaign promoting 64bit for embedded.

The point is that ARM 32 bit and 64 bit are completely different processors using a different instruction set. So thats the difference.

Apple did this before with Intel processors, when used in 64 bit mode (intel keeps its 32 bit stuf lingering around) the processors can be seen as completely different from 32 bit, exhibiting different register sets and instructions with much more efficient context switching.