dewme

I'm fortunately down to only a small handful of apps that require an x86 machine. I have one that requires x86 hardware (which works fine with BootCamp). Instead of going the VM route I've simply purchased a sub-$300 Mini PC that runs Windows 11 Pro very nicely. Being on a wired LAN I can run RDP in a full screen or a window on my dual screen Mac and there is no discernible lag.

RDP remotes the entire Windows session to the client side so it is faster than any VNC based solution. VNC basically copies the screen from the server to the client and polls the screen constantly for changes that need to be updated on the client, even mouse pointer and clock seconds changes. If the server and client have different screen resolutions it also has to rescale to the client's resolution. They've obviously optimized the heck out of all the client-server interaction with intelligent screen change detection and message optimization so some VNC based solutions are better than others.

RDP dispenses with all of that client-server screen updating stuff because it all runs on the client session on the remote client machine. The RDP client remotes the APIs between the client session and underlying operating system, just like a local session does on the (RDP) server machine with local APIs.  The default behavior of Remote Desktop closes the active windows session on the remote machine if one is running. This is a must-have behavior if you're remoting into a work computer from home and don't want anyone at the location where the computer resides to see what you're doing.

As an Apple customer, all I can say is that Apple Silicon was a masterfully engineered and superbly executed innovation that will forever be seen as yet another major inflection point in computer evolution, and it was driven by Apple. It tamed the Power Monster that looked like it would be an insurmountable brick wall to further performance improvements, unless of course we considered using liquid nitrogen cooling systems for personal computers. Apple Silicon may end up being "Peak Silicon" because the silicon fabrication technology looks like it will hit an atomic limit in the near future. 

No amount of revisionism will dull the shine on what Apple has accomplished.

If you want simple, no-fuss, plug & play monitors for a Mac, going with an Apple display will make you happy. However, Apple's displays also carry some limitations that reduce their usefulness for certain users, like me. for one, Apple monitors do not allow you to easily share the same monitor with more than one computer and/or an Apple TV.  Yeah, you can go with a KVM or some other workaround like an HDMI switch, but using just the features built into the monitor to achieve sharing is pretty damn nice, especially when using BetterDisplay so you don't have to reach around the back of your monitor to change the input source or other settings. For example, my 32" Dell 4K monitor supports 144Hz on DP and HDMI 2.1. My MacBook Air and Mini PC only support 60 Hz but I run my Mac mini at 120 Hz (I think it can go to 144 Hz). 

I have a second dual 27" monitor setup with a Studio Display and a Dell 4K with USB-C/DP 1.4 and HDMI x 2 inputs. The Mac uses USB-C, my AV receiver with an Apple TV 4K (and other HDMI sources) uses one HDMI. I can run the second monitor as a dedicated display for my Mac, a full-screen Windows 11 ARM in VMWare, full screen Apple TV, or use the Dell's built-in dual screen or PIP mode to view two video sources on the same screen. If you go with a very large Dell 43" 4K monitor you can view 4 video sources on the same screen at the same time. Each quarter is a 1080p rendering, which may be perfect for some applications. My "standard" configuration is to use the Dell as an extended display for my Mac and put my Apple TV 4K in a small PIP window to play music or watch a movie, TV, or a video in the background. My Apple TV is my primary music player since it's pumping sound through a 5.1 KEF speaker system rather than the Studio Display speakers. 

As far as resolution, both the 5K Studio Display and 4K Dell display are scaled to 2560 x 1440 and look virtually identical and ideal for arms-length viewing. Note that display scaling DOES NOT change your monitor's resolution. The monitor's screen hardware determines the resolution in pixels. Display scaling determines how you video drivers fit the desired display scale into those pixels. The display scaling you pick is directly related to your viewing distance and the physical size of the screen.

I have high hopes that Apple takes a leading role on home automation. There are still way too many fiefdoms and silos tied to individual product manufacturers or technology specific consortiums. The promise of Matter is to reduce the number of silos or at least formalize the interoperability between the existing ones while expanding the notion of a common system standard. My decades of trying to do the exact same thing in the industrial networking and device management domain reminds me that what Matter is trying to do is not easy at all. It is difficult at many levels due to inertia and the loss of total control that occurs when moving from proprietary standards to open standards. The path to a common standard must include ways to aggregate existing proprietary, closed, and semi-closed standards into the new common standard. It's not a step function, it's a slowly rising change that will take several years to reach critical adoption levels.

I'm not speaking in derogatory terms at all when I say that Apple is part of the problem. So is the Z-Wave consortium and several other not-really-open standards tied to Amazon, Google, Hue, and a whole lot of products using raw Ethernet based methodologies. If Matter is to matter,  the majority of these players must sign-up to creating a path from where they are to where Matter wants them to be. Quite a few of them have already started, like Zigbee, Amazon, Apple, and other device makers that have already added Matter support to their existing product lines. The Matter consortium has put the watering hole in place and paved the path that others can get to it. It's now up the device vendors to make their move.

More importantly, in my opinion, is that some key and highly influential players like Apple must assume a role as Matter system builders and integrators. The only way I see this happening is for Apple to be in a position to deliver some level of turnkey systems that buyers can immediately put in place to give them a functioning home automation system. Even a limited turnkey system or "starter kit" that has all the essential pieces would be good enough, even if there are non-Apple components in the kit. But Apple needs to put itself in a position to be one of the central hubs at the center of a integrated system. This includes providing a visual rendering or virtual model of the user's home, not a simple grid of boxes or a network topological view. The current Home app just doesn't cut it. Hosting the visualization piece on a Mac, iPad, or iPhone is not bad, but hosting it on the Apple Vision Pro as a premium option would be the most immersive, realistic, and engaging way to navigate, manage, and specialize the system for individual installations.

Apple can do this. With HomeKit Apple assumed "If you spec it out, they will come," assuming all of the third party pieces would fall into place to allow users to put together a system like stacking Legos. Didn't work. Where it is moving at all it's doing so at a glacial pace for all but the most dedicated users. Apple needs to deliver a complete solution, even one that's a minimally viable one but still a functioning and working system that delivers value. Users need to experience home automation as a system so they can fully appreciate it and later adapt it to to their specific needs with additional hardware and software elements supplied by various vendors who've signed up to support Matter.

I don’t see any similarities at all between the WW1-WW2 interwar period and the current US-China relationship. If anything I see China and Russia rehydrating another Cold War.