normm
About
- Username
- normm
- Joined
- Visits
- 64
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 599
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 653
Reactions
-
US trying for 'clean network' by banning 'untrusted Chinese apps' like WeChat, TikTok
tmay said:
National Security has never been beholden to "innocent until proven guilty".tjwolf said:
Of course that's what the Administrations *says*. Just as with Huawei, there's are accusations of wrong-doing - in order to support its actions - without any proof that such wrongdoing actually took place. To this day, there has been no evidence presented that Huawei snooped on its networks, much less send such information back to China. Sadly, with the POTUS lying publicly on a daily basis, *nothing* this Administration says can be trusted.razorpit said:
LOL, no. More like TikTok harvesting data from US citizens, but nice try.p-dog said:One word: “gaslighting”!
Well, ok, maybe a couple more: “childish vengeance” - especially against TikTok K-Poppers for spoiling the Toddler-in-Chief’s pro-COVID Tulsa rally.Before someone suggests that there *is* evidence because the UK & Australia have agreed with the US' assessment, I will point out that both countries are economically and ideologically tied to the US - countries that are not beholden to the US, like Germany, have found no evidence at all. Heck, even the UK said there was no evidence until the US had a few more words with them and they 'folded'.Not saying TikTok or WeChat or even Huawei are innocent, but what is supposed to separate the US from countries like China is that here, everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Until Trump came along, "well they're doing it..." wasn't a good enough reason for us to stoop to the same level.
It is all about risk assessment.
There is a lot of evidence that this administration doesn't listen to or believe its intelligence agencies. So who exactly is doing the risk assessment? I think it's Mr. "People are Saying".
Problems should be fixed. Blowing everything up only makes things worse. Some people would love to see us literally blow everything up.
-
Apple doesn't buy companies to stop competition, says CEO Tim Cook
We're in a different stage of the computer era. There's a lot of benefit from having just a few standard platforms. Once enough stuff has been built for them, the inertia to add to them rather than start over is enormous, and doesn't come from any artificial barriers to competition. And remember that one of the biggest platforms is Linux, which is free and open.M68000 said:Oh come on Tim. I’m a big Apple fan and have their phones since the beginning and several Macs. That being said, the days of “competition” may be gone. Let’s face it, Apple is now so huge it just scoops up anything that is really new and can put their own take on it in their products. They likely have an army of lawyers to protect their stuff which is fine but could also attack anybody trying to get into the tech world too. The chance of 2 guys starting up a new tech company in a garage and having it last are just about zero. Those days are over. Am I overreacting? As much as I like Apple, it is obvious how they and a few other tech companies are now just huge to the point you wonder if anything new will come from anywhere else.
-
Apple's macOS 11 Big Sur marks the end of OS X, not the Mac
Apple would need the Mac for their own development purposes, even if they didn't sell it to anyone else. Something with more storage, more processing, bigger screens, more interfaces, etc., than an ordinary user needs. They need it to build the future, and some of us need it to visit the future now.rbnetengr said:So, as iPad becomes a better platform for those users, and they abandon the Mac, will there be sufficient customer base left to continue Mac development?
-
Apple's shift to ARM Mac at WWDC will define a decade of computing
elijahg said:
There is: x86 is copyrighted by Intel and Apple would need a license to emulate it in hardware, and possibly software too. Good luck getting an x86 emulation license from Intel to assist Apple ditching Intel's lucrative CPUs.normm said:
There's no reason they couldn't include some hardware support for x86 emulation on their ARM chips. After all, they make the chips.swineone said: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.x86 is protected by patents, not copyright (unless you exactly copy something). Most of the instruction set is more than 20 years old, so that shouldn't be an issue. If there's a legal impediment to implementing newer instructions in software, that could be a show stopper. Assuming no impediment, it would be better to provide a little hardware assistance, rather than a complete x86 implementation. Perhaps hardware translation of common x86 instructions into sequences of equivalent ARM instructions? Some tables for hardware recognition of API calls? Whatever the slowest parts of the virtualization software are, add some hardware to speed them up. ARM already has virtualization extensions, just as Intel does, for handling high-level issues such as shared memory management. -
Apple's shift to ARM Mac at WWDC will define a decade of computing
There's no reason they couldn't include some hardware support for x86 emulation on their ARM chips. After all, they make the chips.swineone said: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.
