jdb8167

winston2010 said:

If I were Apple, I would make a x86 instructions compatible processor with ARM core.  Modern Intel processors used the same technique with RISC-like core and x86 microcode.  This way, no transition issues, if not 100% compatible with existing software.

This is very unlikely because of licensing issues. It is probably impossible for Apple to get a x86 license.

The alternative is running a version of the x86 application under either emulation or translation to ARM. Both are likely to be used; first you start an application by emulation x86 opcodes and after a short amount of time for statistical analysis at runtime, you translate the x86 instructions to ARM instructions. The instructions translated usually are localized in what is known as “hot-spots”. This makes the relatively time consuming operation of translation shorter since you are only translating short snippets of binary code that run frequently.

This has been done before with the Intel transition. The Rosetta emulator for going from PowerPC to Intel x86 was quite effective. The problem with the ARM transition is that the ARM CPU isn’t likely to be as much faster from the Intel CPU as was the Intel CPU from the PowerPC CPU. So any slowdowns will seem like very poor performance.

But unlike with the Intel transition, Apple has a lot more control with their own ARM CPU designs. One solution is to add a few instructions to the ARM CPU to aid in the emulation/translation from the Intel instruction set. Apple has complete discretion to add anything they want to their A series processors. They may be able to do statistical analysis on a wide variety of Intel binaries and find where any slowdowns because of CPU architecture differences occur. These instructions don’t have to resemble their x86 counterparts because they would only run under emulation or translation thus avoiding any copyright or patent problems from Intel or AMD.

Will Apple deem this work to worthwhile? I have no idea, but these ideas aren’t new or radical. They’ve been employed since the 1990’s so Apple is well aware of the possiblities.

Edit: One thing I was going to note is that Apple has added instructions to their A-series CPUs in the past for speeding up an interpreter. This was done for Javascript in, if I remember correctly, the A7 chip. This instruction improved performance of Javascript in Safari by a significant margin.

Mike Wuerthele said:

lkrupp said:

I guess one question to discuss is what makes Lightening better than USB-C. Does Lightening do something or provide something USB-C cannot?

Lightning's connector itself is a bit more durable than the jacketed USB data and power connector, and easier to extract from a device if it shears off.

USB-C can carry more data and power faster than Lightning can. How relevant this is to mobile varies, user to user.

According to Apple's submission, the lightning jack in the phone is also smaller leaving more room for battery and other components. This might explain why they are willing to use USB-C on iPad Pros but not on iPhones.

From their Copenhagen Economics submission:
https://www.copenhageneconomics.com/dyn/resources/Publication/publicationPDF/3/523/1579701038/united-in-diversity_copenhagen-economics.pdf

"For example, not only is the USB Type-C connector larger than the Lightning connector on the outside, thus restricting how slim devices can be, it also takes up more space inside the device which impacts the space left for other components, such as the size of the battery. Overall, the USB Type-C solution takes up 69 per cent more space of a device than the Lightning solution. This has a significant impact on the design, slimness and internal hardware capacity of the devices."

Had a problem with a MacOS update for the first time in a long time. Apparently this update wasn't compatible with my SoftRAID enabled OWC 4 Thunderbolt disk array.

After the Mac continued the install after the first reboot, it just kept on rebooting. Sometimes updates will reboot a couple of times in a row so I didn't think much of it until I noticed that it was still rebooting a few minutes later. I pulled the Thunderbolt connection and then the update continued normally. After the install was completed, I had to reinstall the SoftRAID drivers and then I could plug in my RAID again and reboot normally.

Update problems are so rare for me that I forgot what kind of heartbeat elevation can occur with an install problem.

Gilliam_Bates said:

mjtomlin said:

Apple already encrypts your data just as every other online storage service does. 

They just happen to have the key to decrypt it. 

If you’re that paranoid, you can encrypt your own data before you put on iCloud. Apple cannot decrypt that and hand it over. 

What about the Keychain data — is that also accessible to Apple and therefore US gov? If yes, then you are basically saying we should keep strong passwords for our encrypted data in our memory or on a post-it note.

According to Apple, your keychain and some other vital information is end-to-end encrypted. 

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303

Figueroa said:

This is so frustrating and would appreciate input from someone more knowledgeable than me. I'm a long-time Mac user who's productivity and enjoyment of work has depended so much on this system for over 15 years. Now it's time for me to upgrade my workstation and I hate the iMac or iMac Pro form factor and lack of upgradeability. I work on a wide variety of projects for my employer; everything from video editing and 3D animation to programming, and since money is not too much of a concern for me right now I'm seriously considering a Mac Pro with the following configuration:

3.2GHz 16‑core Intel Xeon W processor
32GB (4x8GB) of DDR4 ECC memory
Radeon Pro Vega II with 32GB of HBM2 memory
1TB SSD storage

I would then upgrade the RAM and storage myself.

I'm willing to pay for this for two reasons: future upgradeability as my needs grow and staying on macOS.

Everyone here has made excellent points on both side of the argument and I've put serious consideration into a custom build with AMD Threadripper 3970X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti. I found this great website that allows me to configure what I want myself: https://www.extreme-pc.ca/customize.asp?productid=381793

I can't decide on what to do and the more research I do the deeper I go into this rabbit hole with no end in sight. My biggest concern with the Mac Pro is the Xeon W. From what I've read, the Threadripper blows it out of the water.

Any guidance from any of you smarter folks on my dilemma would be appreciated.

It depends on what you do with your workstation. If you are busy and making significant money for most of your work-week, the last thing you want is to spend time and potentially money maintaining your computer. A 16-core XEON is going to destroy most workflows. The Threadripper might be cheaper for the amount of compute power but it isn’t likely to be enough faster to get you through your work much faster. If you value MacOS then a Threadripper is not enough of an incentive to make a switch to Windows or Linux. If your time is valuable, a hackintosh shouldn’t even be a consideration.