AppleSince1976

About

Username
AppleSince1976
Joined
Visits
20
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
292
Badges
1
Posts
110
  • Apple executives say creating Mac Studio was 'overwhelming'

    This computer would never have made it to daylight if Jony Ive was still at Apple.
    Ports- plenty of them- even in the front? Unbelievable.
    Looks like it can cool itself- and isn't a funky shape that no one knows what to do with- ie Cube or Trash Can Mac Pro.
    Still not upgradeable- no slots- while every PC in this price range can and does do both.
    I'm waiting on one. We'll see what it runs like when it shows up.
    It has Virtual PCIe Slots; Six of them on the Ultra. They just happen to be serialized.

    https://eshop.macsales.com/blog/63715-intel-introduces-thunderbolt-4-what-is-it-and-does-it-matter/

    And BTW, System Profiler reports Six Thunderbolt Busses on the Ultra version of the Studio (so I assume Four on the Max); so that’s a total of 240 Gb/s of raw potential expandability (of which 192 Gb/s can be PCIe data).

    Now all we need are the peripherals to take advantage of it!

    in a lot of ways, this is the Cylinder Mac that Apple couldn’t build in 2013. But now, Thunderbolt has matured, and is getting to be as LightPeak was first envisioned. Let’s just hope some peripheral manufacturers get on the ball!

    But until then, much I/O expansion can also be accomplished through the use of another function of those TB4 ports, namely USB.

    Is it possible to find other PCs that have TB4 ports? Yes. Will they have Six of them?

    Not bloody likely. Nor is it likely to have Six PCIe slots.

    Not expandable? No Slots?

    Pah!
    Xedrundhvidwatto_cobra
  • Mac Studio teardown demonstrates relatively easy disassembly

    xp17 said:
    zimmie said:
    So at least we know the SSD on the Mac Pro will still be replaceable, like it is today. There wouldn't be any reason to have a non-user-accessible flash cart if they didn't plan to make a replaceable one.

    I wonder if anyone has compared the pinout of the Mac Studio's flash carts to the flash carts in the iMac Pro and Mac Pro. The Mac Studio carts are shorter, so maybe the notch is moved to make them physically incompatible.

    I haven't yet been able to find a report of anybody who has changed the flash carts in an iMac Pro, but I bet it's the same process as the Mac Pro. Shut down, pull the SSDs, restore the T2 using Apple Configurator. The Mac Studio and new Mac Pro will probably be the same once Apple Configurator is updated for the new Mac Pro.
    You're wrong. This is not SDSD. it's just NAND memory modules. All electronics, drivers are on the motherboard. This cannot be changed
    But the modules can be changed, added-to, and upgraded, providing a few rules are followed:

    1. All modules remaining after the Update must be the same manufacturer and capacity as each other (but not necessarily the same capacity and mfg. as the original module(s)).

    2. You must make a Time Machine backup (if you value your data!) of the entire machine.

    3. You must use DFU mode and IPSW tools to prepare the “Secure Enclave” inside the M1 SoC to accept the new storage configuration.

    Sorry for cross-posting; but…

    https://www.macrumors.com/2022/03/21/mac-studio-ssd-not-user-upgradeable/


    zimmiewatto_cobra
  • Apple unveils plans to ditch Intel chips in Macs for 'Apple Silicon'

    melgross said:
    Unlike what the article says, Apple didn’t say what the machines they were using for their demos had in the way of RAM or storage. They did say how much would be in the developer machines. And I would also like to point out that the iPad Pro has 6GB RAM, not 16GB, so the developer machines are not outfitted the same. That’s not surprising, because the Mac needs more resources than iOS devices.
    Good point; but since they obviously had this transition in mind when they did the A12Z, I submit they designed an External memory bus into the SoC, allowing the internal RAM and Flash to be supplanted/replaced with external resources.

    Many Microcontrollers have supported such an expansion bus for decades; in fact, before EPROM and flash-based microcontrollers were the norm, it was the only way to do a “Development Version” of most microcontrollers.

    Afterall, when you’ve got a BGA package with a few hundred pads, what’s another 96 or so for an expansion bus?
    tmaywatto_cobra
  • Apple's shift to ARM Mac at WWDC will define a decade of computing

    swineone said:

    I'll go on a limb here and say that part of why Apple took so long is that they're perfecting an x86 emulation layer that's going to run, if not at close to native speed, fast enough to entice users of such software to stay on the Apple ecosystem. Additionally it's going to help with sales in the first few years, while certain important apps haven't yet migrated to ARM.

    Recall that Apple licensed the Rosetta layer for the PowerPC-to-Intel migration, but it was a much smaller company back then. They're huge now, and they even have their own compiler infrastructure in the form of LLVM; the expertise there might help to develop such an emulation layer.

    In closing, I wager a part of the announcement is going to be an x86 emulation layer with never-seen-before performance. I guess we'll see soon enough.
    Hmmm. Howsabout doing x86/x64 translation on the fly with an FPGA (or ASIC), similar to the Afterburner graphics accelerator in the Mac Pro?

    Plus, Apple’s pretty chummy with AMD (who has a cross license with Intel for x86 compatibility). Perhaps they could contract them to design such a lobotomized x86/x64 “coprocessor” for use in an Arm system. Apple could easily provide whatever low-level interconnection bus the two agree upon.

    Since Apple has an Architecture-Class Arm license, they could even extend the Arm instruction set to add instructions to enter/leave x86/64 mode, etc. Those instructions would be used by the OS for low-latency “environment switching”.

    Such a system might actually have full x86/x64 compatibility, at “hardware” speeds...


    docno42watto_cobra
  • Apple releases 'major' update to Logic Pro X

    dysamoria said:
    Oh finally a new GUI for EXS24? Cool. But...

    As predicted: Apple dropped Sierra and High Sierra support for Logic. I’m sort of surprised they didn’t also drop Mojave support.

    None of my Macs support Mojave. They are already hacked to run unsupported High Sierra and can’t go further to Mojave.

    Sigh.

    Then there’s the remote app, with no support for iOS 12, which I’m still on because iOS 13 is reportedly sluggish on iPhone 6s and iPad Pro first generation.

    Sigh.

    The push to buy new hardware continues... and I’m poor as dirt.

    Even if I weren’t poor, Apple don’t give a damn about me being a customer unless I’m also wealthy. Buy a new phone every three years to be safe. Buy a new Mac every six years or less.

    No!

    I’ve been saving tax rebates to buy a new Mac Pro to replace both my old Macs and my old PC, and then Apple went and changed the introductory price of the Mac Pro to frelling $6000, twice what it used to start at, and all non-plutocrats who can’t afford an overkill machine are expected to keep using storage & RAM-unupgradable & thermally deficient all-in-one laptops, iMacs, or similarly stupidly compact & unupgradable Mac Mini (while also suffering whatever display incompatibilities there are with third party displays because Apple only makes a $5000 display now).

    Apple won me over in 2008. In 2013, that Apple ceased to be. I still hate Windows and PCs more, but WTF am I supposed to do? Just keep buying thermally-insufficient, high-cost second-hand machines that last a shorter time due to the constant upgrade cycle push via an expiring ecosystem?

    Having a fully-operational Apple device ecosystem is impossible for longer than a couple years. For example: if I upgrade to iOS 13, iCloud Safari sync will break for me because I can’t uograde to Mojave on my Macs.

    This is shit. I don’t know where else I can go because I DESPISE Windows and PCs. Dog damn you, Apple.
    I am in the same boat, hardware-wise. I can't just download LPX 10.5 to participate in this particular round of "New Hotness". But there really is a way... with few exceptions, you should be able to upgrade pretty much any reasonably modern Mac (back to about 2008) to at least Mojave with the most-excellent DOSDude's tools. Here's the one for Mojave:

    http://dosdude1.com/mojave/

    I have no affiliation with him; but I have used his tools on multiple Macs, and can attest for their ease-of-installation and perfect performance. I would even go so far as to strongly suggest you click his "Donate" button...

    Now, to address the underlying issue: Which is the "correct" thing to do? Continually hobble macOS and Applications with ever-increasing layers of "compatibility" wedges, alternate Frameworks, and other workarounds? This is what got Windows to the point where it was an completely unstable, insecure, teetering stack of swiss-cheese. Or, move the OS, its Frameworks, and Applications forward, taking advantage of more efficient, stable and faster operation, and even features simply not possible with existing macOS versions and/or Frameworks?

    Fortunately, IMHO, Apple chose the correct path.

    And keep in mind: It isn't like your LPX 10.4.x or iOS 12-compatible Logic Remote is going to suddenly stop working today. They are still the same awesome tools you enjoyed 10 seconds before you were aware of this Update, and still have many hours of enjoyable and reliable service to give!

    The new Mac Pro is so expensive because it is so advanced. It is far and away more computer than its immediate ancestor. In fact, a 2019 16" MacBook Pro with an 8-core 2.4 GHz/5.0 GHz i9 is likely faster than a previous-generation Mac Pro, and is a damn sight easier to haul to a live recording session! And it is essentially comparable in price to the previous Mac Pro, too.

    As for displays, the reason why Apple got out of the sturm and drang display business, is that there was no longer enough distinction between what they could do vs. other display companies at a given price point, and so their display business slowly became non-profitable. But considering that a MacBook Pro can:

    Simultaneous support full native resolution on the built-in display at millions of colors and:

    • Up to two displays with 6016‑by‑3384 resolution at 60Hz at over a billion colors
    • Up to four displays with 4096‑by‑2304 resolution at 60Hz at over a billion colors
    I wouldn't sweat the display capabilities...

    But no reason to be mad; advancement and eventual obsolescence is simply the way of "tech". It isn't usually an evil conspiracy (other than people like Sonos; who intentionally bricked their older devices!).

    https://www.whathifi.com/us/news/sonos-kills-off-its-controversial-and-device-bricking-recycle-mode


    Having said all this; I'd tough it out until the USB-4 equipped Macs come out (next year, likely). They will support the new DisplayPort 2.0. That will give you up to 16k displays (!!!)
    jdb8167fastasleepfahlmanwatto_cobra