shamino

iOS developer turns vintage iMac G4 into an M1 Mac

shamino

October 2021

I love it!

I wonder what model iMac he started with. The early generation models only have a 1024x768 display, which is really uncomfortable for today's macOS. But the last model supports 1680x1050.

According to one article I found, it appears that the built-in display is actually DVI, using a custom connector. Which means it should be possible to replace the connector (or make an adapter) so it can connect to the M1's HDMI port. I assume this is what he actually did.

What would be really cool (no idea if he's done it yet) would be to get the optical drive working. If I remember correctly, it is a parallel ATA drive. Lots of companies make adapters that will connect it to a USB port. The only real potential problem seems like it will be making the adapter fit in the case.

Intel attempts to convert Apple fans in 'social experiment'

shamino

October 2021

Nothing they said is technically wrong, but it's incredibly misleading.

There are plenty of PCs, including very popular ones from mainstream brands, that are similarly not expandable. Especially if you are shopping for one that is thin and light. My work PC (an HP ZBook Fury 17 G7) is very expandable, but it also weighs a lot (base weight is 6 lb and can get heavier with some options) and is 1" thick - a lot of people would find that unacceptable.
Intel mentions a lot of features, but you can't get them all in a single computer, even though they would like to imply otherwise.
You can get all of these in PCs featuring AMD processors as well.
All the big PC makers are now dipping their toes into the ARM processor market as well. It may take a while to become popular, but when they do, you can expect the gaming market and cool hardware designed to follow right along. Because ultimately, nothing presented in that ad has anything to do with Intel.
Nobody but nobody buys a Mac because it's a good deal on the hardware. They buy it because they want to run macOS or want to run macOS applications. Once you've made that decision, it really doesn't matter what features you can buy on an incompatible computer.
Nothing here is new to anybody who cares. Just walk through your local Best Buy (or Micro Center or Target or WalMart) and you can see all of this. And if you're OK running Windows (or Linux, I suppose), I don't think any serious Mac user (not counting fanboys - who exist for all products) would tell you not to.
Yes, all those computers are sold today. How many people are flocking to buy them? Like that really cool dual-screen laptop (Asus Zenbook Pro Duo)? I saw it reviewed in 2019 (Linus Tech Tips), but kudos to you if you've ever seen one used in the real world. People see gee-whiz features and think they would like it, but when they see the cost (starting at $1500-3000 depending on model), size and weight, they quickly change their minds.
Could Apple design computers with these features? Only a fool would say they couldn't. But would they be able to sell enough units for them to be as profitable as the Macs they're selling today? That's a much much more difficult question that nobody here (or at Intel) knows enough to answer.

How the Apple TV+ adaptation of 'Foundation' differs from its source

shamino

September 2021

entropys said:

It is the Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire in space. The Foundation crew were the monks preserving knowledge. That is the core story.

Only superficially, and only for the stories in the first book.

It gets far far more interesting as the story evolves.

Microsoft says Windows on ARM will not support Apple M1 Macs

shamino

September 2021

MacPro said:

'Not supporting' isn't as bad as declaring it illegal I'd have thought.

But since Windows has its product activation system, they could just as easily refuse to activate an installation and justify it by saying that they won't activate an unsupported platform. We'll have to wait and see where this really goes. If Parallels can provide enough support for it to operate and Microsoft permits activation, then that will be good enough for most users (although corporate IT departments may balk at it).

22july2013 said:

Isn't Microsoft's main reason for existence the creation of operating systems for other people's hardware?

Yes, which is why this is a surprising statement. I suspect that the big reason is fear that the next generation chip (M2? M1X?) will be incompatible in various ways. Microsoft doesn't want to be stuck forever playing catch-up, since we know Apple won't be giving them engineering samples of new chips as they're developed.

We may see them change this stance in the future, if/when the platform stabilizes and Microsoft finds that they can start supporting new platforms in the future.

The other issue may simply be that Microsoft isn't in the business of reverse-engineering Apple's architectures. It's worth noting that they only supported Intel Macs via BootCamp - where Apple provided the device drivers necessary to make everything work. Microsoft may be unwilling to support the platform unless/until Apple provides something comparable for the platform. If so, we may be waiting a very very long time, since Apple doesn't seem to have any interest in supporting any other operating system on this hardware platform.