Mac Os Big Sur eww eww
Those icons, My Eyes !!!!! 🙈

Looks kinda the same to me aka. really fucking good compared to every other OS on the market

@12bitfloat I don’t like mono shape icons
It makes the UI look like that of a toy

@hardfault
I suppose, though I definitely prefer it to the half-finished look of the windows UI.

Either way, #TerminalMasterRace

@SortOfTested windows is not even near to perfection of Mac Os design.
But the translucent profiles and square icon with weird shades , nope !

Although i am more curious to see performance of apple silicon 😬
I mean many players tried and failed

@hardfault
I was having this talk with the husband yesterday.

My estimate is that you're not likely to see an arm chip replace anything in the MacBook pro line, bc marketing. Things i think will happen in order of likelihood:

- baby MacBook goes arm
- Mac mini gets an arm option
- ibook revived
- 13" MacBook gets an arm coprocessor option
- iMac gets a low power budget entry that runs iOS

@SortOfTested i thought of the similar timeline but i got confused when they showed it running inside a mac pro

@hardfault
The reason arm has never taken off is the makers never distributed a compelling software development story. To this day, almost all arm software is written on x86 hardware. Intel shipped a massive pile of docs and tools to enable creation on their silicon.

That's what apple has to do to make arm viable. That, and, make a solid effort at the migration story, because the software people use doesn't exist on it

@SortOfTested yes but as a developer i am just thinking about the open source software that will not run on mac
1. will they recompile python interpreter and provide same performance as intel based mac
2. what about mac ports or home brew tools
3. open MP and open CL
4. matlab and labView just started catching up, now they have to update for arm again

i just see 2 years of hell infront of me

@hardfault
That's all part of the story. There's every possibility it will end up being something akin to MS paying/begging people to develop for the platform.

It's also possible apple will eventually effectively disown devs who don't dev exclusively for apple as a means of competitive advantage

@SortOfTested Well you seem to forget that the reason ARM never took over is because any ARM chip is way less powerful than x86_64 chips by design due to a reduced instruction set, reason why it takes so few energy.
I doubt you can run performance demanding processes with this

@CodeTalker Apple will make it so you can (because if not, they'll be doing to the dogs much faster than they already are), and within a few years, other manufacturers will follow suit.

@CodeTalker Modern ARM isn't really less powerful than x86 anymore and way more power efficient. Partly because the instruction set is way less complex which means less die space wasted for instruction interpretation and higher IPC

@CodeTalker
That's a bit of a red herring.

Risc platforms were always perfectly fine (sparc, powerpc, etc), the difference was entirely in what was made available in terms of tooling and software to enable to development story. ARM was unapproachable and poorly documented, whereas intel distributed piles and piles of tools and information that solved the hard problems and made forward progress cost-feasible. This led to greater investment in the x86 space, so the parallel process load problems were solved sooner.

The core of an x86 cpu is a risc processor. The additional silicon as @12bitfloat rightly points out is convenience method packaging for the functionality surrounding the reduced instruction set.

The ARM strategy will be the battle of microcode vs hardware implementation. The way we're seeing FPGAs absolutely destroying traditional hardware appliances, I can't say there isn't an argument to be made. I don't know if it's 4 years to parity or a decade, but it is both possible and desirable bc competition.