esummers

razorpit said:

braytonak said:

Based on my own experience with the Hue Sync Box I can’t suggest anyone buy one, at least not with an Apple TV 4K and a basic 1080p TV. It fails to start syncing, forgets the hub it’s linked to, stutters and delays lighting changes, won’t connect to the app, and when it’s in a really bad mood it will turn the picture to digital snow or simply not pass a connection through. 

When it works, it’s nice. It does add depth to the experience. But it is NOT worth the price. 

Never had any of those issues. You try replacing your HDMI cables?

rob53 said:

"Then, too, there are Windows virtualization options, such as Parallels. These tend to be clunkier than the hardware Boot Camp, but then if you weren't prepared for clunkiness, you wouldn't be using Windows."

Why are you pushing Parallels when VMware is a much better product? I run Fusion and it's not clunky. Running Boot Camp is easier because you simply boot into it but running a virtual OS, or multiple virtual OSes, is the way many server farms are running today. Why worry about Boot Camp when there's a good product that replaces it?

I've been watching some youtube videos showing Hackintosh running on AMD Ryzen CPUs that are half the price of the Mac Pro and are faster. Yes, there are a few limitations but they use a motherboard that includes the following, very friendly to Mac, capabilities: DDR4, PCIe 4.0, SATA 6Gb/s, M.2, USB 3.2, AX Wi-Fi 6, 10G Super LAN. If these "PC" motherboards and the Ryzen CPU are both more or less Mac compatible then Apple surely can build their own AMD CPU, motherboard and everything else while adding full software capability. I see it as when, not if.

mbdrake76 said:

Soli said:

mbdrake76 said:

I'd still say they are going to be moving to custom-designed AMD chipsets instead.  Probably based around the Zen 2 architecture.  It'll retain x86 compatibility and provide better performance for the power.  The move to an all ARM platform seems a little too early.  Yes, they could if they wanted to, but I still think there needs to be considerable work done before Windows on ARM becomes a proper, mass-embraced thing.

Apple makes macOS. Microsoft makes Windows.

Well DUH. 

The point is that Macs are in a position to run both operating systems.  Virtually or via natively.  As a systems administrator who works for a system integrator (and before that, a VFX software firm), I work across multiple operating systems and the Mac is the only device that allows me to consolidate both OSes within the same hardware.  Shift to ARM, that goes away.

mbdrake76 said:

seanismorris said:

mbdrake76 said:

I'd still say they are going to be moving to custom-designed AMD chipsets instead.  Probably based around the Zen 2 architecture.  It'll retain x86 compatibility and provide better performance for the power.  The move to an all ARM platform seems a little too early.  Yes, they could if they wanted to, but I still think there needs to be considerable work done before Windows on ARM becomes a proper, mass-embraced thing.

A Mac running ARM Windows makes no sense (I think we agree on that).  I don’t think Apple will go AMD besides using their discrete graphics ...until they develop their own.  I remember reading Intel gives Apple amazing prices for their chips.  It’s possible AMD could match it, but Intel and Apple collaborate elsewhere.  Eventually Apple will do everything in-house, but until then switching to AMD seems like a needless complication.

Oh goodness - certainly not at the moment.  Microsoft was certainly brave to release the Surface Pro X, but realistically it's not much use to most people given how little support there is for ARM-based Windows applications at the moment.  That may grow, but I don't see it happening for a very long while - if that.  Apple does already have its own discrete graphics based off of the PowerVR graphics found in iPhones and iPad Pro.  But whether that's going to be good enough for the Mac and will continue to use AMD for that, I don't know.

It's all rumours and guesses at this stage.  If they go ARM on the Mac, I'd expect to see a development kit rolled out a good 6-12 months before any consumer kit is released.  And I'd hope that Apple will continue to support Intel Macs for another 4-5 years after the last Intel hardware is released to ensure plenty of time for people to take advantage of hardware they've just purchased.

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.