This is awful. I love playing games on my MBP and the latest crossover releases have been amazing in the ability to play almost all windows PC games at full speed. Losing rosetta means crossover is dead.
You would hope that apple would open source it, but they are one of the worst companies in the world for open sourcing things. Shame on all their engineers.
From the OP: "Beyond [the two-year] timeframe, we will keep a subset of Rosetta functionality aimed at supporting older unmaintained gaming titles, that rely on Intel-based frameworks."
This is the real issue. Mac is not a target for a large number of triple A games, and rosetta made that possible. Apple has a vested interest because if they support rosetta you don't need to by Windows laptops to game... you can just use your Mac. Otherwise they are routing money to their competition.
What are you talking about? There's Do I have enough RAM to run Slack,
all my Chrome tabs, and a terminal program; there's what terminal program shall I run today: Ghost edition; there's Can I get Colima to run, now with docker DLC. There's Kubernetes on Mac: Kind edition; there's Let's with Tart!; Nix is for Ops: New and more obtuse config edition. With so many fun games to play, who's got time for anything else?
I can see why that sounds sensible, but my personal obsevations are that heavy duty power users almost universally prefer the bigger screens, and those people also want the highest level settings. Most people I know who want smaller screens are not serious power users.
I can see an overlap with people who want smaller computers who also want max power, but I just would not believe that is a significant group. (again, all personal observations)
You don't pay your doctors, insurance does, so I mostly expect insurance will replace doctors with chatbots as soon as its feasible. Sadly in a large percentage of scenarios that would actually be an improved outcome. (yes, not all and those are the ones that will probably kill you... but come on, medicine is such a disaster its should be completley rebooted)
>Sadly in a large percentage of scenarios that would actually be an improved outcome.
I predict triage will be converted to AI who will be able to offer minor prescriptions, stuff unavailable to over the counter, without doctor oversight. Like allergies, rashes, insect stuff, fungal or worms. Will likely be able to reduce medical load by treating people who just need to be sent to get over the counter stuff.
> but come on, medicine is such a disaster its should be completley rebooted)
Agreed, but is AI the right move? Do you really want to be the first one to try it?
Asthma inhalers (at least, some types) are available over the counter here.
As far as I know, only "narcotics" (opiates, psychostimulants...) require regular check-ins (due to byzantine legislation) - but even that's been worked around with one-click refill requests and telehealth.
The types available over the counter are unsafe for long term use and frankly worse in every way compared to the one you need a doctors permission to purchase.
You need a established relationship to access one click refill and telehealth, they will tell you to come in after a time.
He is a horrible apple shill, but he does have great insight and articulate reasoning on why things are the way they are. We should figure out where the block is and remove it.
It's the kind of articulation you'd see in a McKinsey pitch deck. It's corporate apologia, heavily skewed towards Apple. His takes on Apple's 30% cut and the EU telling Apple to allow third party app stores, tell me he's speaking from the investor's POV than a developer's or consumer's.
It's important to be able to read and understand both sides of an argument. Sadly most people prefer to read media that's slanted in the way they agree with.
As for the EU, the land is devoid of innovation. Whether it's a cure for cancer, AI, a rocket to Mars, or you name it, chances are the next big thing will not be developed there. You can admire them for their socialist healthcare or whatever while still realizing that if the entire world operated like Europe progress would cease and another dark age would start. You don't have to see things in black and white.
The US is polarized with the republicans not wanting any socialized health care because they don't want to care for people not like them. You can't organize and correctly run a health care systems when half you politicians actively sabotage and burn it down.
> not wanting any socialized health care because they don't want to care for people not like them because they don't want to care for people not like them.
Categorically, older individuals tend to vote more conservative and more republican. This doesn't make sense to me at all.
What makes more sense is that they argue against the socialization of any industry that funds their campaigns.
Democrats seem to take a more middle ground. ie Obamacare socialized low cost solutions and pushed costs uphill toward people who need more expensive care.
>>M4 Pro has less memory bandwidth than the P40, so it would be slower
Why do you say this? I thought the p40 only had a memory bandwidth of 346 Gbytes/sec. The m4 is 546 GB/s. So the macbook should kick the crap out of the p40.
The M4 Max has up to 546 GB/s. The M4 Pro, what GP was talking about, has only 273 GB/s. An M4 Max with that much RAM would most likely exceed OP's budget.
I built a serverless startup (GalaticFog) about 8 years ago, had to shut it down. Market never developed. There were some obvious lessons learned.
First most companies thought they needed to do containers before serverless, and frankly it took them a while to get good at that.
Second the programming model was crap. It's really hard to debug across a bunch of function calls that are completely seperate apps. It's just a lot of work, and it made you want to go monolith and containers.
Third, the spin up time was a deal killer in that most people would not let that go, and wanted something always running so there was no latency. Sure workload exist that do not require that, but they are niche, and serverless stayed niche.
I think they say that because it used to be only supercomputers that could do a petaflop of compute. So taking what used to be a datacenter(15 years ago) and cramming it into a small device is a pretty impressive feat.
The Raspberry Pi Pico I carry on my keychain is significantly more powerful than the Apollo lander computer, but thankfully they don't advertise it as a "Lunar Computer".
I work in a large enterprise company, have both windows and mac machines, and excel works equally great in both, but more and more excel runs in a browser.
We mostly email links to spreadsheets running in cloud. So it really doesn't matter what your OS is any more from an excel perspective, as long as your computer can run a modern browser you are good.
From what I've seen your company is an exception. Yes, for 95% of users, browser/Mac Excel is more than enough. But the non-tech companies I've seen still don't want to get Macs because of that 5%, they just don't want to bother with having to support two platforms. And leadership obviously doesn't care/have no idea.
This is only partly true. AI works really well on very legacy codebases like cobol and mainframe, and it's very good at converting that to modern languages and architectures. It's all the stuff from like 2001-2015 that it gets weird on.
You would hope that apple would open source it, but they are one of the worst companies in the world for open sourcing things. Shame on all their engineers.