dagmx

Why does the screen change anything more than a processor does?

I don’t think you’re making a compelling argument here. Arguably a processor is more relevant to a wider range of professionals than a screen is.

But those quadrants still had options for upgrades. I think people vastly misunderstand that chart. It was about reducing product lines down because the Apple of the 90s had too many models that all varied very subtly.

Or are you forgetting that you could choose display types on the old PowerBooks and MacBooks , or choose drive options for a premium etc?

There’s nobody confusing the Pro for the Air or the Neo.

Nobody is confusing the iPad base, air and pro. They’re all strongly segmented.

Your assertion hasn’t been true for a while.

You have the MacBook Pro with three tiers of SoCs, each with binning options.

There was already an option for screen coatings and now an option for a new screen type.

That’s not to mention storage and RAM choices.

Its still the MacBook with HDR display and active cooling and more inputs. I’m not sure why options are an issue

The EU AI act doesn’t force C2PA or any particular standard. Yes many people will use C2PA erroneously, but C2PA is not meant for indicating content was virtually generated, but that it was not modified from origination.

C2PA is fallible if your origin is fallible. SynthID is a better standard for designating something was created with GenAI, though is limited in what it covers. For example, 3D content is currently a poor fit for both SynthID and C2PA. Audio is also imho poorly served.

There are a few things in the works for 3D…audio is an area I’ve tracked less.

Wacom have a synthid like embedding for geometric data https://youtu.be/AEi083BtgvU?si=Lu9EO4b1SPcfXiQU

And Apple just recently merged a authorship setup into USD https://github.com/PixarAnimationStudios/OpenUSD/pull/4188 (I didn’t realize it was merged till looking it up for this response)

But crucially , none of the global regulations require C2PA specifically. And with all synthetic data , you’re really relying on honor system for transparency.

It’s not like the sensor to display pipeline that C2PA and Apple’s Reference Image can provide when enforced in hardware.

Your explanation isn’t true at all. It’s very easy to spoof NSEvents. Many tablet drivers and mouse drivers do this and have been for decades. The software side is easy to create.

The part that makes the Apple trackpad good isn’t even the software integration with the OS. It’s the actual trackpad hardware, its surface and haptics. On the software side it’s largely just good acceleration curves.

I’d argue the reason very few competitors exist is just cost and lack of understanding what feels good and why , much like your own comment does.

Meta’s chief AI officer is a 29-30 year old who was acquihired as part of his data labelling company. He’s not a model developer.

Meta hires in strange ways. I’m convinced it’s more about your sales pitch going in.

In my experience everyone is just rebuilding the same wheel over and over.

A lot of people may be more empowered to create things now with less up front effort but it doesn’t lead to having better ideas or more actual system architects.

That sounds a lot like AI fantasy slop.

Apple just shifted to N2. They’re not going to be doing another major shift right away.

And TSMCs own roadmap would put your hallucination years away at best for a a product that follows a roughly annual cadence https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/semiconductors/ts...

For reference , Fex is a translation framework for x86 to ARM much like Apple’s Rosetta2 and Microsoft’s Prism.

Valve sponsor development as it’s also the way the new Steam Frame supports x86 games. It’s also being used (as a fork) in Crossover Beta to replace the use of Rosetta2.

Tech communities like this skew more libertarian I find, which tends to be anti everything that isn’t immediately self serving.

Geekbench when run on Asahi Linux is practically the same as when run on macOS, just like Linux and Windows in the same x86 chip don’t give significant differences.

Because it ruffles x86 feathers, despite geekbench corresponding very closely to SPEC as well and there being no indication that the results aren’t comparable.

What people willfully conflate this with often is that you shouldn’t compare FLOP numbers between GPU arches and instead rely on benchmarks.

You have that exactly backwards. The MacBook Neo released with the previous years A series Pro chip.

It’s currently got an A18 Pro.

Your intuition here is wrong.

Processors, not just Apple’s, change constantly between generations. The core instruction set doesn’t change, but they get new capabilities, not just with new instruction sets.

Remember the SoC isn’t just the CPU. It’s display engines, GPUs, storage controllers, video decoders and more.

Even outside of Apple, you’ll see hardware vendors provide Linux patches for their latest CPUs to keep working well. There’s some baseline functionality that works out of the box but it’s never a free ride.

Sure, you can also have iOS binaries forward relevant iOS SDK symbols to macOS. That doesn’t mean they’re not different SDKs with different limitations, and not everything that is on the store can be patched to run in the simulator because there are legitimately symbols missing or with stubbed functionality.

It’s literally a different toolchain and SDK.

The simulator is a different SDK target than iOS itself.

You have to compile completely independently for it, and depending on your dependencies they may not compile for the simulator.

Additionally the simulator runs a really ancient and feature restricted version of Metal. That means you can’t test a lot of graphical things that the hardware actually supports. I’m not sure if this supports GPU passthrough but the macOS VMs do, so that alone would be a huge improvement if possible.

HBM itself is very expensive but it’s not really fair to compare to LPDDR or GDDR

They’re very different things.

The more logical argument to me is that Apple uses its upgrade price points as more than just direct BOM and rather as a proxy for things that are amortized across all their sales like support/warranty/etc so higher SKUs subsidize the costs of the lower ones.

I’m not trying to say you shouldn’t be excited by it. But there’s a significant number of caveats to every single number you posted but you glossed over the points I made.

And in being defensive, you jumped straight from the topic you were discussing (GPU perf) to CPU perf numbers to try and make a point.

There’s a difference between being cynical and pragmatic, just as there’s a difference between being hyped and realistic.

You haven’t seen this in a product. You’re seeing development board numbers. Be excited all you want but it’s a public forum, if you want to just post without any responses make a blog.

I’m not sure I follow why the performance is “Insane”

This is a M5 level chip that runs slightly within a ballpark of M5 wattage (afaik M5 is between 15W max on an iPad and 30W max CPU+GPU on a cooled Mac)

This is running in a thermally unconstrained bench setup and has potentially worse power consumption with what will be lower than previous gen performance when this and the alleged M6 are truly out.

Oh yes, Claude seems to be loving the word vacuous recently. My test bed side project is full of vacuous this and that now.

I even try and get it to define what it classifies as vacuous and it can’t do so without getting stuck in some kind of trap. It’s like a word with some kind of huge gravity for it.

Ah fair, I forgot Panasonic owned Lumix.

Though the lawsuits are more complex with multiple parties suing RED, of which Nikon also fought RED and ended up buying them out to win that side of the battle. On the panasonic side it was more of their cinema line of cameras rather than Lumix that was the driver (though they have trickle down)

And prores isn’t necessarily RAW, it’s just one of the variants.

Unless I’ve missed it; Lumix has nothing to do with this long standing patent battle. Could you elaborate on the supposed relationship?

I disagree with your assessment. My twitter feed pre and post Elon’s takeover changes dramatically.

Pre his takeover , it would more reliably show me my niches of design, technology, gamedev etc

After his take over I’d start seeing more and more boosted content from frankly abhorrent individuals. The whole blue check mark thing being paid instead of truly verified also messed with the algorithm.

I’m sure it’s doable to curate it into what you want again, but it was a night and day shift for me and why I eventually left.

Even filtering out content wasn’t enough because it would get boosted through other means.

Yes because SwiftUI is way more self contained and minimally verbose, it’s a better fit for LLM use than AppKit/UIKit

Thank you very much for the corrections here. As someone else who has professionally worked in the film space, it always irks me when people talk about film in digital resolutions for the reason you mention.

I also agree with many of your other corrections but that is the one I wanted to ageee with the most as it’s my biggest pet peeve when I see people claim “film” is equivalent to a given resolution.

Anything analogue can be (almost) infinitely resolved but that doesn’t mean it’s going to be effectively good at all those resolutions. Almost nobody thinks of the quality of medium and lenses when making those claims.

A post mortem is a very common term in many industries on how something went after you shipped it.

You’re taking it very literally here, it does not involve anything being dead or killed.

We’ve used this in the software, games, film and construction industries for decades at this point.

Substitute Mortem for Ship and that’s how people use it.

Corresponding Apple press release that isn’t paywalled https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/07/apple-maps-to-power-n...

The commercial Autodesk apps still dominate, as do Maxon apps like C4D for motion graphics and zbrush for sculpting.

The big problems are that license cost doesn’t outweigh the pain points. In production I can get support from Autodesk for specific bugs without rediverting my production resources to fixing it.

Blender has no C++ API and even the Python api is not stable version to version. Studios live by maximizing their competitive advantage and that takes the form of extending the DCCs with custom pipelines and high performance plugins. With blender I’d have to maintain a full fork.

Also blender’s ghost UI system is significantly worse than Qt. It also means I can’t share the Qt tools I built for the rest of the apps with blender.

And while Ton was still CEO he heavily told studios he didn’t want their business. He believed blender shouldn’t be part of a pipeline but be the whole pipeline. These were his explicit words in a presentation blender gave at SIGGRAPH.

For background, I was a lead engineer in the film industry and still am quite involved with industry development while also contributing to blenders code base. My partner also works for one of the big animation studios.

I think blender is great and it’s seeing adoption professionally but there’s a lot of fundamental things that need solving before it displaces the current status quo DCCs.

Do you have comparisons for Apple’s GPU to NVIDIA’s at the same power and thermals?

Right now the M5 Max is one of the best laptop compute GPUs for blender rendering and doesn’t do too badly on raster tests either. But it operates at a fraction of the equivalent NVIDIA parts.

It’s more that Apple doesn’t provide a competing tier of device as the high end NVIDIA GPUs. But within the tiers they do provide they’re fairly competitive.

A lot of unreal engine games also fork the engine. If your bar is being forked then unreal doesn’t meet the bar for a lot of people either.

3D Engines of that fidelity are rarely genre specific. Editors might be but the engines are often fairly flexible because most genres share a lot in 3D space.