m1 Apple M1 = the rest of us are living in the stone age!?

[papajo]

1 minute ago, Obioban said:

Lol. 

Forum I run: https://nam3forum.com/forums/forum/main-forum/e46-2001-2006/46-welcome-read-this-first

 

I assume you don't need proof on video editing because... every mac user since ~2000 has been able to do that with built in software (though I've long since been using FCP) 

 

Guide I wrote to car programming/coding: https://nam3forum.com/forums/forum/e9x-2008-2013/e9x-coding-tuning/82342-comprehensive-programmable-option-coding-thread

 

Now showing pictures of my personal finance, but I suspect you don't care about that use case. 

 

Want pictures of my PC build? You'll love it-- I built it into a PowerMac G5 case (before Linus did ).

 

And software development is undoubtedly your favorite-- Swift in Xcode. 

(Which is why the compile test you choose to ignore every time amused me-- 9% battery used on M1 to compile the same project as the Intel needed 76% of the battery to compile, on an otherwise identical computer (13" 2 port MacBook Pro). 

 

21 minutes ago, papajo said:

So choose your poison, either you just were not completely honest about who you are or you are who you claim to be but you are not being completely honest about your experience with that chip. 

 

[papajo]

4 minutes ago, Obioban said:

Can we get a concrete example of the kind of program that can run on X86 that can't run on ARM?

https://isapplesiliconready.com/ (also it is worth mentioning that virtually* every piece of software runs on x86 since it is the architecture that runs most PCs,datacenters,supercomputers for decades now so the number is surely bigger than the 4k "not tested" programs included in the official link for m1 compatibility) 

 

*no pun intended since m1 cant run virtual environments 

[Obioban]

26 minutes ago, papajo said:

https://isapplesiliconready.com/ (also it is worth mentioning that virtually* every piece of software runs on x86 since it is the architecture that runs most PCs,datacenters,supercomputers for decades now so the number is surely bigger than the 4k "not tested" programs included in the official link for m1 compatibility) 

 

*no pun intended since m1 cant run virtual environments 

 

That's not what can/can't run-- that's a list of what has yet been recompiled and/or runs in Rosetta. 

 

Parallels is in beta to run VMs: 

https://www.parallels.com/blogs/parallels-desktop-apple-silicon-mac/

VMware is coming soon:

 

I believe you're just trolling at this point, so I'll bow out. We'll revisit this when the i5/i7/i9 competitor comes out, at which time much more software will be running natively.

[papajo]

Just now, Obioban said:

That's not what can/can't run-- that's a list of what has yet been recompiled and/or runs in Rosetta. 

well surely a person with your experience could check the website again and conclude that this is not the case since it has clear categories such programs that cant run natively or with rosetta at all and programs "not being tested" (which is a polite way to say that they probably will have issues and/or not run at all, this particular category has 4k entries) 

[Obioban]

19 minutes ago, papajo said:

well surely a person with your experience could check the website again and conclude that this is not the case since it has clear categories such programs that cant run natively or with rosetta at all and programs "not being tested" (which is a polite way to say that they probably will have issues and/or not run at all, this particular category has 4k entries) 

No, "not tested" means not tested. Of the tested software on that site, 92% of it is running, with more than half of it running natively (2.5 months after launch). There's nothing to suggest that that trend is falsely positive. 

[papajo]

16 minutes ago, Obioban said:

No, "not tested" means not tested. Of the tested software on that site, 92% of it is running, with more than half of it running natively (2.5 months after launch). There's nothing to suggest that that trend is falsely positive. 

Not tested means no active development for support which means what I just said, this is the reason linux for example has a steep learning/compromising curve to come because lots of things that "supposed" to work do not because there is no active development since they are not tested, support gets added once something is tested. 

 

And that's for things that run natively on such systems if you try to emulate them things can go wrong much more easily. 

 

Last but not least it is nice to slap percentages at random I can say that more than 99% of the software does not run natively and that from the programs that are tested to run in one form or an other about 40% of them runs with emulation and about 10% doesnt run at all. 

[Obioban]

11 minutes ago, papajo said:

Not tested means no active development for support which means what I just said, this is the reason linux for example has a steep learning/compromising curve to come because lots of things that "supposed" to work do not because there is no active development since they are not tested, support gets added once something is tested. 

 

And that's for things that run natively on such systems if you try to emulate them things can go wrong much more easily. 

 

Last but not least it is nice to slap percentages at random I can say that more than 99% of the software does not run natively and that from the programs that are tested to run in one form or an other about 40% of them runs with emulation and about 10% doesnt run at all. 

That's just not correct. That web site has no affiliation with Apple-- it's just some guy compiling a list, using user submitted data. "Not tested" just means that nobody has submitted a go/no go for the particular app in question. 

 

Of the apps people have submitted data for, 8% don't run, 92% run, 56% run natively. 

[papajo]

13 minutes ago, Obioban said:

That's just not correct. That web site has no affiliation with Apple-- it's just some guy compiling a list, using user submitted data. "Not tested" just means that nobody has submitted a go/no go for the particular app in question. 

 

Of the apps people have submitted data for, 8% don't run, 92% run, 56% run natively. 

Which is about what I said by ballparking the figures,

 

26 minutes ago, papajo said:

Last but not least it is nice to slap percentages at random I can say that more than 99% of the software does not run natively and that from the programs that are tested to run in one form or an other about 40% of them runs with emulation and about 10% doesnt run at all. 

as for the 99% it is evident that almost all the software out there does not run natively on ARM ISA....  

 

So what's your point? 

 

let me rephrase my self do you have any indication/proof that software is going to get developed to run natively other than Adobe? 

[Obioban]

22 minutes ago, papajo said:

Which is about what I said by ballparking the figures,

 

as for the 99% it is evident that almost all the software out there does not run natively on ARM ISA....  

 

So what's your point? 

 

let me rephrase my self do you have any indication/proof that software is going to get developed to run natively other than Adobe? 

thinking about programs people normally run...

-Microsoft Office, other than teams, is already running natively (teams soon).

-Adobe has announced their entire suite is coming over

-as above, VMware and parallels are announced as coming soon/in beta

-everything Apple is already running natively

-chrome/Firefox already are native already 

-handbrake already has a native version 

-VLC is running natively 

-electron has been updated for M1, so everything built using electron (slack, discord, etc) will be M1 native for no effort soon, If they’re not already

 

... what else do people normally run? 
 

My general indication is that every app I run other than Teams is already native.

[LAwLz]

On 1/30/2021 at 5:47 PM, papajo said:

There is no apples to apples comparison (no pun intended) 

 

Apple ARM chip is an ARM chip totally different than a x86 chip.

 

It does less, provides less functionality and has a limited instruction set, yes that allows it to be faster sometimes under specific scenarios by using "simpler" programs or simplified ports for arm(also take here generic benchmarks with a pinch of salt especially Geekbench which was a "nobody" and suddenly came to light because it gives high (and arbitrary in the sense that it doesnt measure any performance unit per second but just gives a number as a score) scores to ARM chips... ) 

 

The only reason for the industry to be taken over by ARM would be a financial one and not a technical one (e.g more people starting buying apple and hence companies start to make "me too" arm laptops etc etc) 

 

there is no way in the foreseeable future to have an ARM chip having all the capabilities (and compatibilities) with a x86 cpu. 

 

Its usecase is nice for power critical applications though because it is simpler (also cheaper to produce) it doesnt consume much power and if it can run basic stuff snappy enough (<-- the entire bet of apple here for making that chip) then its a win win. 

Pretty much everything you wrote here is wrong...

 

 

On 1/30/2021 at 5:47 PM, papajo said:

It does less

No it doesn't. I don't understand where you got this idea from. In what way does the M1 "do less" than for example a Skylake processor?

 

On 1/30/2021 at 5:47 PM, papajo said:

provides less functionality

Are you just repeating yourself to pad out your post?

Does less and provides less functionality seems to mean the same things to me.

 

On 1/30/2021 at 5:47 PM, papajo said:

and has a limited instruction set

I feel like this is just you repeating yourself again, but my guess is that you don't even know what this means.

Can you please explain to me what you mean, in your own words, and why it matters. Is there some specific instruction you are thinking about? 

 

On 1/30/2021 at 5:47 PM, papajo said:

yes that allows it to be faster sometimes under specific scenarios by using "simpler" programs or simplified ports for arm

This is wrong. Programs compiled for ARM do not have to be simpler. 

 

On 1/30/2021 at 5:47 PM, papajo said:

(also take here generic benchmarks with a pinch of salt especially Geekbench which was a "nobody" and suddenly came to light because it gives high

Geekbench wasn't a "nobody" before. I've been using it since 2011. Just because you hadn't heard of it before doesn't mean it didn't exist.

 

On 1/30/2021 at 5:47 PM, papajo said:

(and arbitrary in the sense that it doesnt measure any performance unit per second but just gives a number as a score) scores to ARM chips... ) 

This is a strong indication that you have 0 understanding of what geekbench is or what it does, but you want to dislike it because it shows results you don't like.

1) A benchmark score doesn't have to be "frames per second" or something along those lines.

2) The score, which you call an arbitrary number, is calibrated against a baseline of 1000 (which is an i3-8100). If you get 2000 points then it is twice as fast as an i3-8100. If the i3-8100 completes the text compression test in 10 seconds and the M1 does it in 5 seconds, then the M1 gets a score of 2000. The reason why it doesn't say "5 seconds" as the score for the compression test is because then you wouldn't be able to compile all results to a single overall score since some tests would want high scores, some would want low scores, some would measure seconds, some would measure megapixel throughput etc.

3) Geekbench isn't biased towards ARM.

4) You don't seem to have any problem with Cinebench despite it using the exact same way of measuring. It took some unknown processor as a reference point and then scales everything according to that. It doesn't measure seconds, or megapixel throughput or anything of that sort.

 

 

On 1/30/2021 at 5:47 PM, papajo said:

The only reason for the industry to be taken over by ARM would be a financial one and not a technical one (e.g more people starting buying apple and hence companies start to make "me too" arm laptops etc etc) 

Or you know, better efficiency, possibly higher performance, breaking away from the duopoly of AMD and Intel. But you're right, it's totally just for financial reasons, not any technical ones...

 

 

On 1/30/2021 at 5:47 PM, papajo said:

there is no way in the foreseeable future to have an ARM chip having all the capabilities (and compatibilities) with a x86 cpu. 

What capabilities are you referring to? You already mentioned compatibility so I assume it's something else you want.

Compatibility seems to be advancing very fast on the MacOS and GNU/Linux sides of things. 

 

 

On 1/30/2021 at 5:47 PM, papajo said:

Its usecase is nice for power critical applications though because it is simpler (also cheaper to produce) it doesnt consume much power and if it can run basic stuff snappy enough (<-- the entire bet of apple here for making that chip) then its a win win. 

1) What makes you think something like the M1 is cheaper to produce than a x86 processor?

2) Why do you keep saying things like "it can run basic stuff"? It performs better than competing x86 processors. You seem to be in heavy denial about the performance of these chips.

 

 

 

On 1/30/2021 at 10:31 PM, papajo said:

Well that would serve its purpose well if you like do the r23 as well I will download it but the r20 will be inticative on how the performance of an armchip will fair for actual programs since an other drawback with arm is that it can't natevily run normal programs and that it runs only compatible to arm programs natevily 

What kind of backwards logic is that? You might as well say a drawback of x86 is that it can't run normal ARM programs natively.

[LAwLz]

5 hours ago, papajo said:

Yes it is, it not only is but it is a prime example of one in other words when you think about closed OSs MacOS is the first thing that comes into mind lol. 

Please describe to me the various ways MacOS is more locked down than let's say Windows.

In my mind, MacOS is far more open than Windows.

[papajo]

53 minutes ago, Obioban said:

thinking about programs people normally run...

-Microsoft Office, other than teams, is already running natively (teams soon).

-Adobe has announced their entire suite is coming over

-as above, VMware and parallels are announced as coming soon/in beta

-everything Apple is already running natively

-chrome/Firefox already are native already 

-handbrake already has a native version 

-VLC is running natively 

-electron has been updated for M1, so everything built using electron (slack, discord, etc) will be M1 native for no effort soon, If they’re not already

 

... what else do people normally run? 
 

My general indication is that every app I run other than Teams is already native.

well office needs like 20 seconds to boot each app(and god knows how much extra ram) but ok we will see (at least a year from now best case scenario) 

Adobe has said that and we will see (at least a year from now if not more) 

VMware. I would hold my expectations low since nothing concrete has been announced and there are some serious obsticles (how to virtualize if the hardware for that is not present in the chip? how to passthrough lanes and GPUs when no such thing exist in the soc etc) "support" could mean a lots of things maybe they make a limited translatable version of it. 

As for "Every apple app" I am not so sure + there are some comon apps such as netflix,disney+ that wont work https://www.theverge.com/2021/1/15/22233754/apple-blocking-m1-iphone-app-sideloading (this article mentions netflix but other such apps facebook messenger,snapchat etc wont work either

 

having said that 1) these are a couple of mentions in a sea of thousands of programs already running in x86

2) We are returning to the initial point I already mentioned that for general usage M1 is a nice power efficient snapy solution if you are into apple products and people will enjoy that. 

 

This is still not an argument proving that people that do not use M1s are living in the stone age (quite the contrary because they dont have neither to wait or to hope for support) doesnt prove that m1 have superior processing power in real life applications nor that RISC is better than CISC 

 

So we are making circles here 

[papajo]

Just now, LAwLz said:

Please describe to me the various ways MacOS is more locked down than let's say Windows.

In my mind, MacOS is far more open than Windows.

In your mind I can not get in. 

 

Out in the real world not being able to install e.g a nvidia graphics card on your computer because your OS doesnt allow for that is considered to be  closed

[LAwLz]

4 minutes ago, papajo said:

In your mind I can not get in. 

 

Out in the real world not being able to install e.g a nvidia graphics card on your computer because your OS doesnt allow for that is considered to be  closed

But you can install an Nvidia graphics card in a Mac, if the hardware allows it.

It's not a software limitation in MacOS.

 

 

Also, if "I can't use hardware X" means it is locked down then does that mean Windows is locked down because I can't use the Afterburner card on my Windows PC?

[WhitetailAni]

4 minutes ago, papajo said:

In your mind I can not get in. 

 

Out in the real world not being able to install e.g a nvidia graphics card on your computer because your OS doesnt allow for that is considered to be  closed

Windows and macOS each have their pros and cons (note that I mean post-cat macOS, not cat Mac OS X or Classic Mac OS).

macOS has almost seamless compatibility with things within its ecosystem, while Windows is a lot easier to do your own thing do (and subsequently screw up).

And you can put an NVIDIA card in a Mac Pro - Linus put a Titan RTX in one when he did the Mac Pro 2019 upgrade video.

[papajo]

1 minute ago, LAwLz said:

But you can install an Nvidia graphics card in a Mac, if the hardware allows it.

It's not a software limitation in MacOS.

 

 

Also, if "I can't use hardware X" means it is locked down then does that mean Windows is locked down because I can't use the Afterburner card on my Windows PC?

no you can not there is no driver for it and there is no driver for it because Apple doesnt support it because it is closed. 

 

The afterburner card is an Apple product and it is not supported in windows because Apple doesnt want it because Apple products are a closed ecosystem

 

 

[leadeater]

18 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

What makes you think something like the M1 is cheaper to produce than a x86 processor?

This has to not be the case. it's on TSMC 5nm which is pretty damn expensive right now and the M1 isn't actually all that small physically considering that it is 5nm. It's probably rather expensive save for the fact Apple is the one making it so all the costs are their own so have better control over R&D costs for it and are not consequently paying another company for the same with margin on top etc. Relatively speaking it's probably the most expensive CPU on the market right now, maybe 

[WhitetailAni]

1 minute ago, papajo said:

no you can not there is no driver for it and there is no driver for it because Apple doesnt support it because it is closed. 

You can put NVIDIA cards in Mac Pros.

Linus put an Titan RTX in the 2019 Mac Pro, and you can flash macOS-compatible BIOS onto older cards for the older Mac Pro.

[papajo]

1 minute ago, ragnarok0273 said:

macOS has almost seamless compatibility with things within its ecosystem

I didnt say that macOS has only cons or that it is bad I said that it is a closed OS and this almost or not almost seamless compatibility you are mentioning is exactly a byproduct of its closed ecosystem (they only have to care for particular software and hardware they designed/allowed their computer to run and not mess with 3rd party stuff such as windows does) 

[papajo]

Just now, ragnarok0273 said:

Linus put an Titan RTX in the 2019 Mac Pro, and you can flash macOS-compatible BIOS onto older cards for the older Mac Pro.

That's called hacking, doesnt disprove that the OS is closed you can jailbrake an iphone for example. 

 

You can make a PS4 run homebrew software doesnt mean that PS4 is not closed... 

[WhitetailAni]

Just now, papajo said:

That's called hacking

No it's not.

It's called "modding".

[papajo]

3 minutes ago, ragnarok0273 said:

No it's not.

It's called "modding".

when you mod something in a way that contradicts the manufacturers intended use and use software not aproved by said manufacturer then it is called hacking

 

But the word you use doesnt matter for this particular argument what does matter is that Apple makes specific hardware configurations designed to run particular pretested hardware and that it doestn allow for 3rd parties to run their hardware/software unless they get a license from apple to do so that is the definition of a closed ecosystem. 

[WhitetailAni]

Just now, papajo said:

when you mod something in a way that contradicts the manufacturers intended use and use software not aproved for said manufacturer then it is called hacking

No it is not.

Just now, papajo said:

But the word you use doesnt matter for this particular argument what does matter is that Apple makes specific hardware configurations designed to run particular pretested hardware and that it doestn allow for 3rd parties to run their hardware software unless they get a license from apple to do so that is the definition of a closed ecosystem. 

That's Apple's MO.

Also, you're wrong about the part that they can't run their software - you just have to disable SIP via Recovery Mode.

[LAwLz]

2 minutes ago, papajo said:

no you can not there is no driver for it and there is no driver for it because Apple doesnt support it because it is closed. 

1) There are drivers for it.

2) Nvidia are the ones developing the drivers, not Apple. If there are no drivers then it's because Nvidia doesn't develop them anymore. In fact, it was Nvidia that announced with the release of CUDA 10.2 that it would be the last version to support MacOS and future versions would not be supported. Apple are not entirely blameless for the Apple vs Nvidia conflict, but the idea that Apple are blocking Nvidia is just false.

3) Not having drivers does not make an OS closed. By that logic GNU/Linux is probably more closed than Windows as well. Wide hardware support != open. When you talk about open software you usually refer to things such as open source code and the FSF definition of freedoms. By those standards, MacOS is most likely more open than Windows (mostly thanks to being based on FreeBSD).

 

 

9 minutes ago, papajo said:

The afterburner card is an Apple product and it is not supported in windows because Apple doesnt want it because Apple products are a closed ecosystem

So let me get this straight.

When some hardware doesn't support MacOS then it's Apple's fault.

When some hardware doesn't support Windows then it's also Apple's fault?

 

Great logic you got there.

[papajo]

Just now, ragnarok0273 said:

No it is not.

That's Apple's MO.

Also, you're wrong about the part that they can't run their software - you just have to disable SIP via Recovery Mode.

m8 I am not expressing my opinion nor trying to reinvent the wheel. 

 

This is common knowledge Apple OS = closed OS 

 

https://leasepilot.co/blog/open-vs-closed-software-ecosystems-a-primer/#:~:text=closed ecosystems.,hardware (the phone itself).