Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.advocacy > #119855 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2020-07-04 04:06 +0000 |
| Last post | 2020-07-13 09:00 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 221 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.advocacy
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-04 04:06 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-03 21:13 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-07-04 01:56 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-04 00:02 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-07-04 03:49 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-04 01:13 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-07-04 12:50 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-04 16:24 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-04 09:41 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-07-04 14:01 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-04 14:07 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-04 18:35 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Browne <bitbucket@blackhole.com> - 2020-07-04 15:16 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-04 07:23 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-04 11:03 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-04 16:08 +0000
Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-04 09:16 -0700
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-07-04 15:19 -0400
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-04 19:36 +0000
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-04 21:07 +0000
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-04 14:11 -0700
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-07-05 03:18 +0000
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-05 04:02 +0000
Arlen is utterly unmoved by facts Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-04 21:48 -0700
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-04 15:47 -0400
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-04 14:07 -0700
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-04 17:12 -0400
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-04 14:15 -0700
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-04 17:22 -0400
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> - 2020-07-04 16:25 -0500
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-04 14:41 -0700
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-04 21:45 +0000
Arlen makes yet another explicit claim... (wasRe: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs You know who! <no@body.net> - 2020-07-04 14:49 -0700
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-07-05 03:14 +0000
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-09 18:34 -0700
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-09 21:52 -0400
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-10 02:56 +0000
Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-09 20:38 -0700
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-11 15:24 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-10 23:35 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-11 04:24 +0000
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-11 04:36 +0000
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-11 10:40 -0700
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-12 12:55 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-12 01:10 +0000
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-11 22:36 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-12 04:17 +0000
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-13 16:16 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-13 05:43 +0000
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-13 21:55 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs delvon daily <delvondaily@example.com> - 2020-07-13 14:37 -0700
OT: Why must Arlen nymshift? (was Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-13 15:13 -0700
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-14 16:07 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-14 01:22 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-14 21:12 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-14 19:27 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-15 11:59 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-14 22:54 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-16 16:37 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-16 18:10 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-17 13:29 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-16 21:45 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-18 22:14 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-18 11:50 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-19 16:07 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-19 08:17 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2020-07-19 14:34 +0200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-19 09:05 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2020-07-19 18:59 +0200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-20 16:49 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-21 11:31 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-22 12:47 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-21 21:02 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-07-17 06:41 +0000
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-18 22:15 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-18 11:50 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-19 16:11 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-19 08:17 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-20 16:51 +1200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-21 11:31 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-18 07:18 -0700
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-18 11:50 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2020-07-18 21:47 +0200
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-20 03:35 -0700
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-11 04:51 +0000
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs John Michael <tonymayo43@gmail.com> - 2020-07-11 01:30 -0400
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-11 05:55 +0000
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-11 05:59 +0000
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-14 10:11 +0000
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-15 17:14 +0000
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: xxxxx is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-18 08:37 -0700
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: xxxxx is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-07-18 18:31 +0000
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: xxxxx is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-18 21:01 +0000
Re: Apple profits vs Qualcomm profits (was Re: xxxxx is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-18 20:54 +0000
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-10 15:21 +1200
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-09 20:30 -0700
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-09 23:36 -0400
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-09 20:42 -0700
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-10 15:44 +1200
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-10 04:18 +0000
Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs For a friend <notyou@yes.yes> - 2020-07-09 21:35 -0700
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-07-10 01:04 -0400
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-09 22:06 -0700
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2020-07-10 01:27 -0400
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-09 23:13 -0700
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-10 14:20 +0000
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-10 10:09 -0700
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-11 15:18 +1200
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-11 05:00 +0000
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-10 22:34 -0700
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2020-07-12 12:54 +1200
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-07-12 04:22 +0000
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-12 06:07 +0000
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-10 18:47 +1200
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-10 14:27 +0000
Re: Arlen is a liar. Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-10 14:13 +0000
Re: Arlen is an idiot Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-09 23:36 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-04 21:36 +0000
How is it that Arlen can be this thick? Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs He really has no clue <none@all.com> - 2020-07-04 16:52 -0700
Re: How is it that Arlen can be this thick? Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-06 18:44 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-04 17:21 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-04 23:57 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2020-07-05 21:15 +0100
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-04 16:46 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-04 14:12 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> - 2020-07-05 00:14 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-04 16:40 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-04 17:12 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-07-05 03:22 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-12 10:51 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-12 14:47 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-12 12:21 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-12 15:32 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-07-12 12:53 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-12 17:20 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-12 15:14 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-12 18:26 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-12 14:12 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-12 17:20 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-13 09:11 +1200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-12 19:56 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-12 20:08 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-13 01:26 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-13 07:20 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-13 08:06 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-13 11:30 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-13 17:07 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2020-07-13 23:22 +0200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-13 21:45 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-13 17:55 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-13 18:36 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-13 18:58 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-07-13 23:08 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-13 20:26 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-13 16:41 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-13 20:26 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-07-14 02:17 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-07-13 19:29 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-14 09:27 +1200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2020-07-13 23:42 +0200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-07-13 21:47 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-14 11:56 +1200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-14 10:50 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-14 14:23 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-15 08:39 +1200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-14 21:48 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-14 21:54 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-14 21:18 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-14 21:25 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-14 22:06 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-14 22:21 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-15 02:30 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-15 07:56 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-07-15 09:02 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-15 09:50 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-15 13:13 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-15 15:42 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-15 15:44 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-16 08:43 +1200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-14 11:45 +1200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-14 10:35 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-14 14:23 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-15 08:38 +1200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-14 21:10 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-07-15 08:59 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-14 11:47 +1200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2020-07-14 17:42 +0200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-15 08:33 +1200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-14 16:37 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-07-15 08:55 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2020-07-15 22:19 +0200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-16 08:47 +1200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2020-07-15 23:10 +0200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-16 14:41 +1200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2020-07-16 18:44 +0200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-16 10:16 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-16 14:29 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-07-17 08:34 +1200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-16 10:14 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2020-07-16 23:42 +0200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-16 18:09 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2020-07-17 10:01 +0200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-17 21:41 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2020-07-18 21:45 +0200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-18 13:31 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-15 09:46 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-13 17:55 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-07-13 23:19 +0000
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-13 20:26 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-14 21:30 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-15 10:05 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-15 13:13 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-23 00:06 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-23 00:10 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-23 15:34 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-23 19:06 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-07-23 19:42 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-12 16:58 -0700
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-07-12 20:08 -0400
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2020-07-13 12:55 +0200
Re: Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> - 2020-07-13 09:00 -0700
Page 8 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 12 Next page →
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-12 19:56 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <_qNOG.74558$NB.13477@fx20.iad> |
| In reply to | #120100 |
On 2020-07-12 17:11, Your Name wrote: > An Apple Silicon Mac Pro is coming. All Macs will transistion within > the next two or three years. I am not 100% sure of that. Promising that all Macs will be Arm based within 2 years does not garantee all current Macs will be transitioned. For instance, laptops may not inlude the MacBook Air and be limited to MacBook and MacBook Pro each in various sizes. And there may be a new plastic imac for students like in the past. Consider that Apple is moving to a chip with an integrated GPU. Works amazingly well for an laptop or iMac or MacMini. But the Mac Pro expects support for PCI Express, graphics cards, and cars such as Afterburner and likely SATA or M.2 inter5faces built in. The current MacPro uses a Intel server chip produced for many many customers and servers, and that chip supports all the various interfaces of the MacPro which won't be needed in the MacBook or iMac except perhaps thunderbold and USB. Does it make sense for Apple to create an Axx chip solely for the low volume MacPro with features that will be unused in the iMacPro ? And cosnider that the Mac pro comes with 8 to 28 cores. Will Apple create an Axx chip with up to 28 cores only for that low volume model? Having multiple separate CPUs to reach the 28 core count causes performance problems in terms of a coherent cache between ores within a chip, but not across chips and causes symchronisation challenges when one chip changes a part of memory that is cached by another chip (need to signal to that other chip to invalidate its cache). But if Aple decides to re-enter the pro-sumer maret with an afforable MacPro, then its volumes may justify this. Heck, Apple could do like HP Enterprise and you get a physical chip with 28 cores in it, but only pay to enable X cores and if you wish to upgrade, yu pay a fee for a key to enable y more cores.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-12 20:08 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <120720202008272367%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #120107 |
In article <_qNOG.74558$NB.13477@fx20.iad>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > > An Apple Silicon Mac Pro is coming. All Macs will transistion within > > the next two or three years. > > I am not 100% sure of that. that's because you're clueless. apple clearly stated that the transition would be *complete* in 2 years. > Promising that all Macs will be Arm based within 2 years does not > garantee all current Macs will be transitioned. of course it does. > For instance, laptops may not inlude the MacBook Air and be limited to > MacBook and MacBook Pro each in various sizes. And there may be a new > plastic imac for students like in the past. what part of 'complete' is not clear?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 01:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <3gSOG.85932$Av7.38596@fx34.iad> |
| In reply to | #120110 |
On 2020-07-12 20:08, nospam wrote: > apple clearly stated that the transition would be *complete* in 2 years. Transition being complate means Apple will be done with the transmition project. It does not mean that all current models will have been transitioned. Consider the Macbook Air and MacBook. Is there really a need to continue both now that the MacBook is as thin as the Air ? > what part of 'complete' is not clear? It only means that the project will be complete. It doesn't state that the current product portfolion will be completely transitioend in 2 years.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 07:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <130720200720372176%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #120112 |
In article <3gSOG.85932$Av7.38596@fx34.iad>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > > > apple clearly stated that the transition would be *complete* in 2 years. > > Transition being complate means Apple will be done with the transmition > project. It does not mean that all current models will have been > transitioned. of all the stupid things you've said, that one ranks at the top. using that bizarre logic, the 'transition project' is already complete since apple has already announced and demoed apple silicon macs. > Consider the Macbook Air and MacBook. Is there really a need to continue > both now that the MacBook is as thin as the Air ? it isn't, plus there's more differences than just thinness. > > what part of 'complete' is not clear? > > It only means that the project will be complete. It doesn't state that > the current product portfolion will be completely transitioend in 2 years. you can't be that stupid. nobody can be that stupid.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 08:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <rehtae$uru$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120107 |
On 7/12/2020 4:56 PM, JF Mezei wrote: <snip> > Does it make sense for Apple to create an Axx chip solely for the low > volume MacPro with features that will be unused in the iMacPro ? Obviously they're not going to make an ARM chip with the performance of Xeon that could support multiple graphics cards and other peripherals needed in the Mac Pro. It would make more sense to just write off the small volume of users that require a high-power x86 workstation like the MacPro, or continue to manufacture the current model with CPU, memory, and graphics card upgrades as they are made available. Doing just a new motherboard, while keeping the existing chassis would be fine. Designing a motherboard takes only a couple of engineers and it can be contracted out if necessary. Or they could allow a workstation maker, that doesn't compete in the consumer space, like SuperMicro to design and build MacPros for them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 11:30 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <130720201130040149%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #120121 |
In article <rehtae$uru$1@dont-email.me>, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote: > > Obviously they're not going to make an ARM chip with the performance of > Xeon that could support multiple graphics cards and other peripherals > needed in the Mac Pro. of course they are going to do that. there's absolutely no reason not to. > It would make more sense to just write off the small volume of users > that require a high-power x86 workstation like the MacPro, or continue > to manufacture the current model with CPU, memory, and graphics card > upgrades as they are made available. that would not make any sense at all. > Doing just a new motherboard, while keeping the existing chassis would > be fine. Designing a motherboard takes only a couple of engineers and it > can be contracted out if necessary. Or they could allow a workstation > maker, that doesn't compete in the consumer space, like SuperMicro to > design and build MacPros for them. nonsense. it takes far more than a couple of engineers to design a logic board and apple would never contract it out under any circumstances, nor would they have another company design and build it. you're clearly trolling.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 17:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <Y14PG.133966$eN2.11698@fx47.iad> |
| In reply to | #120122 |
On 2020-07-13 11:30, nospam wrote: > of course they are going to do that. there's absolutely no reason not > to. Financial reason. Creating an ARM chip only for low volume MacPro with new interfaces to support external graphics, PCI express and likely others such as SATA, M.2 etc is a lot of work. If they need double the cores compared to a iMacPRO, that also requires a lot of work. There are ways to justify this work in terms of maintaining the development ecosystem. (at which point the MacPro becomes a cost centre). You dismiss the argument that designing a motherboard isn't a simple task, yet think that designing a chip for the MacPro is an easy task that Apple will do. Then again, you also argue that every single current model will see an upgrade to ARM model. Amazing that those who constantly insult me do not insult your arguments.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 23:22 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <reijbe$c65$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120125 |
JF Mezei wrote: > On 2020-07-13 11:30, nospam wrote: > >> of course they are going to do that. there's absolutely no reason not >> to. > > Financial reason. Creating an ARM chip only for low volume MacPro with > new interfaces to support external graphics, PCI express and likely > others such as SATA, M.2 etc is a lot of work. > > If they need double the cores compared to a iMacPRO, that also requires > a lot of work. > > There are ways to justify this work in terms of maintaining the > development ecosystem. (at which point the MacPro becomes a cost centre). > > You dismiss the argument that designing a motherboard isn't a simple > task, yet think that designing a chip for the MacPro is an easy task > that Apple will do. > > Then again, you also argue that every single current model will see an > upgrade to ARM model. > > Amazing that those who constantly insult me do not insult your arguments. nospam is absolutely immune to reason. He (and Snit Michael Glasser) are the two "apple users" who will provide the very reason to send back any future mac user back to windows. Apple users had (in the past) been touted as "arrogant, stupid and condescending bastards immune to reason". There was some truth to it, but it has lessened a lot in the last years. But those two will serve happily to fuel that vision. nospam ist incredibly stupid, an idiot who will tell everyone and his cat the "true gospel" of apple market speech. He is completely devoid of any technical knowledge, and will answer to ANY criticism to apple with "nonsense". He will fail EVERY time to tell us why it should be "nonsense", because he is lacking the knowledge to do so. And Snit? Well, he is Snit. He is the very person who is seen as the "lying apple bastards" by the (not yet) apple users. And when those "not yet apple users" see posts from these bullshit idiots, they will never be any "apple user". Just to make certain that their environment will not blame them
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 21:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <hn430bFerc6U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #120126 |
Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: > JF Mezei wrote: > >> On 2020-07-13 11:30, nospam wrote: >> >>> of course they are going to do that. there's absolutely no reason not >>> to. >> >> Financial reason. Creating an ARM chip only for low volume MacPro with >> new interfaces to support external graphics, PCI express and likely >> others such as SATA, M.2 etc is a lot of work. >> >> If they need double the cores compared to a iMacPRO, that also requires >> a lot of work. >> >> There are ways to justify this work in terms of maintaining the >> development ecosystem. (at which point the MacPro becomes a cost centre). >> >> You dismiss the argument that designing a motherboard isn't a simple >> task, yet think that designing a chip for the MacPro is an easy task >> that Apple will do. >> >> Then again, you also argue that every single current model will see an >> upgrade to ARM model. >> >> Amazing that those who constantly insult me do not insult your arguments. > > nospam is absolutely immune to reason. He (and Snit Michael Glasser) are the > two "apple users" who will provide the very reason to send back any future > mac user back to windows. Apple users had (in the past) been touted as > "arrogant, stupid and condescending bastards immune to reason". There was > some truth to it, but it has lessened a lot in the last years. But those two > will serve happily to fuel that vision. nospam ist incredibly stupid, an > idiot who will tell everyone and his cat the "true gospel" of apple market > speech. He is completely devoid of any technical knowledge, and will answer > to ANY criticism to apple with "nonsense". He will fail EVERY time to tell > us why it should be "nonsense", because he is lacking the knowledge to do > so. And Snit? Well, he is Snit. He is the very person who is seen as the > "lying apple bastards" by the (not yet) apple users. And when those "not yet > apple users" see posts from these bullshit idiots, they will never be any > "apple user". Just to make certain that their environment will not blame > them > Have you figured out what “Quit” and “Exit” do on Linux yet? LOL! How about HTML 5? Figured out it is not just for Apple devices? Can’t believe you are still crying over how I noted your blunders. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 17:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <130720201755459456%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #120125 |
In article <Y14PG.133966$eN2.11698@fx47.iad>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > > > of course they are going to do that. there's absolutely no reason not > > to. > > Financial reason. Creating an ARM chip only for low volume MacPro with > new interfaces to support external graphics, PCI express and likely > others such as SATA, M.2 etc is a lot of work. financial reasons are exactly why they *will* do that. apple silicon will be faster, more power efficient and cost less than intel. > If they need double the cores compared to a iMacPRO, that also requires > a lot of work. > > There are ways to justify this work in terms of maintaining the > development ecosystem. (at which point the MacPro becomes a cost centre). yet another bogus assumption of yours. > You dismiss the argument that designing a motherboard isn't a simple > task, nope. one of the resident trolls ignorantly claimed designing a logic board is simple, which it very definitely is not, especially something suited for a mac pro. > yet think that designing a chip for the MacPro is an easy task > that Apple will do. i didn't say how easy or hard it was, only that it is going to happen. > Then again, you also argue that every single current model will see an > upgrade to ARM model. it's not an argument. you are *wrong*. full stop. apple has stated that they will transition every mac to apple silicon. why do you dismiss official statements from a public company? > Amazing that those who constantly insult me do not insult your arguments. they insult you because you say incredibly stupid shit and when it's pointed out to you how incredibly stupid it is, you dig yourself an even deeper hole and say even more stupid shit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 18:36 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ul5PG.25112$rc1.4609@fx09.iad> |
| In reply to | #120136 |
On 2020-07-13 17:55, nospam wrote: > apple has stated that they will transition every mac to apple silicon. > > why do you dismiss official statements from a public company? WWDC 2020. https://youtu.be/GEZhD3J89ZE 1:32 Family of SoC just for the Mac product line Common architecture across all of our product line. The second line can be loosely interpreted as "ARM" on all our devices, or interpreted as "we'll have common architecture of an SoC that includes GPU and shared memory acorss all our products". Apple did not specify which, likely because it wants the flexibility to decide later on. At 1:46, Tim cook speaks of tramsition in the last 2 minutes of presentation: ## For the customersm, we expect to ship our first Mac with Apple Silicon before the end of thsi year and expect the transition to take about 2 years. ## So there is no statement to promise every current Mac will be transitioned, only that the transition project will be complete in about 2 years. If all Macs will use an SoC. For fixed config Macbook, Mini and iMac, the SoC makes sense and none have expansion slots and just rely on a thunderbolt/USB bus. Will adding support for external variable configs on PCI-express, adding SATA support for internal drives make sense because that would require an SoC with those pins that go to the PCIexpress bus. Also, remember that Apple is moving to ots own proprietary boot console, so it woudl need to support such variable configs with PCI express cards and what not just for one model. Certaintly doable, but worth the cost?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 18:58 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <130720201858134255%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #120143 |
In article <ul5PG.25112$rc1.4609@fx09.iad>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > At 1:46, Tim cook speaks of tramsition in the last 2 minutes of > presentation: > > ## > For the customersm, we expect to ship our first Mac with Apple Silicon > before the end of thsi year and expect the transition to take about 2 years. > ## what part of that is not clear? > So there is no statement to promise every current Mac will be > transitioned, only that the transition project will be complete in about > 2 years. read it again, this time with a dictionary to help with the big words, or better yet, an english teacher.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 23:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnrgpqbt.2liu.g.kreme@ProMini.lan> |
| In reply to | #120125 |
In message <Y14PG.133966$eN2.11698@fx47.iad> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > You dismiss the argument that designing a motherboard isn't a simple > task, yet think that designing a chip for the MacPro is an easy task > that Apple will do. No one, not even nospam, said it was a simple task. My prediction,<1> made up entirely by me, is they will release an add-on board to the MacPro that gives it an integrated new CPU/GPU that can be used as Apple Silicon and that a future Mac Pro will be all Apple Silicon (or whatever they call it, since I doubt Apple Silicon is the marketing name they will use in products). > Then again, you also argue that every single current model will see an > upgrade to ARM model. That would be the smart money position, yes. > Amazing that those who constantly insult me do not insult your arguments. Your "arguments" are made-up bullshit based on no knowledge at all. <1> This isn't even at the level of rumor, it's barely wishful thinking. -- 99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 20:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <130720202026171273%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #120145 |
In article <slrnrgpqbt.2liu.g.kreme@ProMini.lan>, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > My prediction,<1> made up entirely by me, is they will release an add-on > board to the MacPro that gives it an integrated new CPU/GPU that can be > used as Apple Silicon and that a future Mac Pro will be all Apple > Silicon (or whatever they call it, since I doubt Apple Silicon is the > marketing name they will use in products). > ... > > <1> This isn't even at the level of rumor, it's barely wishful thinking. actually, that has been rumoured. i forget where i read it, but you're not the first person to think of something along those lines.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 16:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <reiren$ooq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120125 |
On 7/13/2020 2:07 PM, JF Mezei wrote: > On 2020-07-13 11:30, nospam wrote: > >> of course they are going to do that. there's absolutely no reason not >> to. > > Financial reason. Creating an ARM chip only for low volume MacPro with > new interfaces to support external graphics, PCI express and likely > others such as SATA, M.2 etc is a lot of work. > > If they need double the cores compared to a iMacPRO, that also requires > a lot of work. > > There are ways to justify this work in terms of maintaining the > development ecosystem. (at which point the MacPro becomes a cost centre). > > You dismiss the argument that designing a motherboard isn't a simple > task, yet think that designing a chip for the MacPro is an easy task > that Apple will do. <snip> Actually, having worked for a motherboard company, as well as two CPU companies, for many years, it's not as complex a task as some people believe to design a desktop motherboard. The CPU manufacturer guides you every step of the way, gives you reference design boards, and does design reviews of your board. Much of a board stays the same even when there is new CPU and chipset. Rarely does the board design involve more than one or two engineers to do the design and layout. I recall having an engineer come into my lab for help debugging their motherboard and me asking him how long he was with the company. He said "I started the company, and I design the boards." This was Charles Liang, Chairman/Pres/CEO/Founder of SuperMicro. They wisely got out of the commodity desktop PC motherboard business and now do servers and high-end workstations. Designing laptop motherboards is another issue entirely. It's much more complex of a task due to space constraints and thermal considerations.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 20:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <130720202026181356%nospam@nospam.invalid> |
| In reply to | #120147 |
In article <reiren$ooq$1@dont-email.me>, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote: > Actually, having worked for a motherboard company, as well as two CPU > companies, for many years, it's not as complex a task as some people > believe to design a desktop motherboard. yes it very much is. > The CPU manufacturer guides you > every step of the way, gives you reference design boards, and does > design reviews of your board. Much of a board stays the same even when > there is new CPU and chipset. Rarely does the board design involve more > than one or two engineers to do the design and layout. apple doesn't use reference designs and there isn't anyone to 'guide you through every step of the way' with a brand new cpu never before used in any shipping product. > I recall having an engineer come into my lab for help debugging their > motherboard and me asking him how long he was with the company. He said > "I started the company, and I design the boards." This was Charles > Liang, Chairman/Pres/CEO/Founder of SuperMicro. They wisely got out of > the commodity desktop PC motherboard business and now do servers and > high-end workstations. another made up story. > Designing laptop motherboards is another issue entirely. It's much more > complex of a task due to space constraints and thermal considerations. not really. if anything, that's easier since the space and thermal constraints are closer to existing iphone and ipad designs. a desktop logic board has entirely different constraints and would be the first of its kind.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-14 02:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnrgq5d0.nb5.g.kreme@ProMini.lan> |
| In reply to | #120147 |
In message <reiren$ooq$1@dont-email.me> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote: > Actually, having worked for a motherboard company, as well as two CPU > companies, for many years, it's not as complex a task as some people > believe to design a desktop motherboard. Yes it is. > The CPU manufacturer guides you every step of the way, gives you > reference design boards, and does design reviews of your board. You are confusing making a Intel chip based-motherboard with designing a new motherboard for a chip that has no reference design and no reference motherboard. ARM doesn't design motherboards. ARM doesn't check your motherboard. You worked in a tiny segment that is entirely irrelevant to what Apple is doing. If you've ever seen the inside of a modern Mac you would know that Apple's motherboard are not like some mini ATX board. -- And the three men I admire most, the father son and the holly ghost they caught the last train for the coast...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 19:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnrgpdg2.2cih.g.kreme@ProMini.lan> |
| In reply to | #120121 |
In message <rehtae$uru$1@dont-email.me> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote: > Obviously they're not going to make an ARM chip with the performance of > Xeon that could support multiple graphics cards and other peripherals > needed in the Mac Pro. "Obviously" == "I have no idea what I am talking about about" > Designing a motherboard takes only a couple of engineers and it You are real dumb. -- Rid yourself of doubt -- or should you? -George Carlin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-14 09:27 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <reijjt$nm$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #120121 |
On 2020-07-13 15:06:50 +0000, sms said: > On 7/12/2020 4:56 PM, JF Mezei wrote: > > <snip> > >> Does it make sense for Apple to create an Axx chip solely for the low >> volume MacPro with features that will be unused in the iMacPro ? > > Obviously they're not going to make an ARM chip with the performance of > Xeon that could support multiple graphics cards and other peripherals > needed in the Mac Pro. > > It would make more sense to just write off the small volume of users > that require a high-power x86 workstation like the MacPro, or continue > to manufacture the current model with CPU, memory, and graphics card > upgrades as they are made available. > > Doing just a new motherboard, while keeping the existing chassis would > be fine. Designing a motherboard takes only a couple of engineers and > it can be contracted out if necessary. Or they could allow a > workstation maker, that doesn't compete in the consumer space, like > SuperMicro to design and build MacPros for them. Apple has stated they are transitioning *all* their Macs to Apple Silicon, so that includes the iMac Pro and Mac Pro, but they will almost certainly be the very last Mac models to make the switch and likely 2-3 years away. In the long run keeping some Macs on Intel chips would be a bad option and waste of time for the programming teams.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-07-13 23:42 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <reikgm$ij2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120127 |
Your Name wrote: > On 2020-07-13 15:06:50 +0000, sms said: >> On 7/12/2020 4:56 PM, JF Mezei wrote: >> >> <snip> >> >>> Does it make sense for Apple to create an Axx chip solely for the low >>> volume MacPro with features that will be unused in the iMacPro ? >> >> Obviously they're not going to make an ARM chip with the performance of >> Xeon that could support multiple graphics cards and other peripherals >> needed in the Mac Pro. >> >> It would make more sense to just write off the small volume of users >> that require a high-power x86 workstation like the MacPro, or continue >> to manufacture the current model with CPU, memory, and graphics card >> upgrades as they are made available. >> >> Doing just a new motherboard, while keeping the existing chassis would >> be fine. Designing a motherboard takes only a couple of engineers and >> it can be contracted out if necessary. Or they could allow a >> workstation maker, that doesn't compete in the consumer space, like >> SuperMicro to design and build MacPros for them. > > Apple has stated they are transitioning *all* their Macs to Apple > Silicon, so that includes the iMac Pro and Mac Pro, but they will > almost certainly be the very last Mac models to make the switch and > likely 2-3 years away. In the long run keeping some Macs on Intel chips > would be a bad option and waste of time for the programming teams. In the long run not having some intel Macs will send independend programmers to windows and linux. Apple is now already a relativly bad programming platform for anyone not doing apple programming exclusivly. Forcing programmers doing multi-platform work to absolutely must have non-apple computers just to do their work will send several to reconsider their options. I have 2 iMacs, one Macbook, iPad and iPhone here. And I will certainly not switch to Apple-ARM on computers. I will simply replace apple- devices with non-apple brands when they are too old. Apple using customers are still vastly in the minority. I will ignore that customer base instead. For every apple using customer there are 6-7 windows using ones
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 12 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.advocacy
csiph-web