Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2016 nMP

Status
Not open for further replies.
AidenShaw said:
[Cough] Carbon64 [Cough]
Click to expand...

Carbon64 never existed in a public release. They never had to continuously support it because it never existed.

Carbon32 continued to get support for years afterwards. Some parts of it are still getting patches today. Apple didn't just yank Carbon out of OS X.
 
Last edited:
t0mat0 said:
http://daringfireball.net/2008/04/64000_question
Surprised Adobe by the sounds of it.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter. It was never publicly released, of course Apple can just yank it. There was never any application released that used Carbon64.

Apple won't just yank OpenCL because there are applications that were released that use it. Trying to compare it to Carbon64 is useless. Carbon64 never existed in any public version of OS X.
 
goMac said:
...Apple can't just randomly drop APIs.
Click to expand...
FWIW: Well they can, although for public APIs they typically provide ample deprecation notification before something is completely removed. This is particularly true for APIs they own and control ( such as Carbon, Foundation, AppKit etc. ) and less so for technology they don't ( their licensing deal with Rosetta is an example ). Even today the Carbon framework ships with OS X and Xcode 7 builds Carbon apps( and the lack of QuickDraw headers starting in OS X 10.7 can be overcome by simply copying them from a 10.6 SDK ) even though Apple has been warning to move to Cocoa for years. Apple decided long ago to focus all their new development on Cocoa ( some of Carbon did make it to 64-bit but that effort ceased ) and relegate Carbon to maintenance mode. When Apple eventually removes an API is partially dependent on how quickly and easily developers adopt the replacement. To this day there are hundreds of Carbon apps running happily on OS X machines but the effort to move them to Cocoa APIs is substantial. Maybe Carbon isn't the typical example but it should be interesting to see when ( if ) Apple drops its support.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JamesPDX
Water under the bridge now, and i'm not comparing Carbon 64 to anything :)

Gruber: Like, when you guys offer a hint as to what developers should be doing, people should take the hint?
Schiller: I think our batting average is pretty good on that.
Gruber: Wow, that's weird. My next question was about 64-bit Carbon.
<Laughter, whoops>
Schiller: [laughs]
Gruber: That's an old note from a, this card is very old. This is from a... [laughs] This is our audience, Phil. A 64-bit Carbon joke got a laugh!
Schiller: [laugh] A pained laugh!
Gruber: Yeah, there's probably some angry people out there. [laughs] It's all good now.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: pat500000
lowendlinux said:
So you guys will be building hackintosh's as render slaves.
Click to expand...

I'll be building a hackintosh as my main rig. Have had nothing but problems with the nMPs I've had at work (two of them have been in and out of repair - for what I presume to be faults relating to overheating). Also, the current nMPs have proven that there is no upgrade path for those who rely on GPU processing power. So I'll just wait for the Broadwell-E refresh and build myself the Hackintosh equivalent.

If it wasn't for my industry/workplace (advertising and video editing) being so Mac centric, I'd be switching to PC. Apple have shown nothing but contempt for their high-end professional users.
 
  • Like
Reactions: trifid, JamesPDX and pat500000
zephonic said:
Wow! Anybody else totally blown away by the new Skylake Macs not introduced today? :confused:
Click to expand...
I can't believe how much faster they aren't. It blows the mind that in only three years they're 0% faster.

They should be prettier. Jobs' Apple was a design innovator.
imac_gallery_04.jpg


And don't forget the innovation of a line of laptops that earned the common name of "toilet seat Ibooks". https://images.search.yahoo.com/sea...2cw--?p=toilet+seat+ibooks&fr=ie8&fr2=piv-web


[doublepost=1458606138][/doublepost]
goMac said:
Carbon64 never existed in a public release. They never had to continuously support it because it never existed.

Carbon32 continued to get support for years afterwards. Some parts of it are still getting patches today. Apple didn't just yank Carbon out of OS X.
Click to expand...
Carbon64 shipped in developer releases outside of Apple, and then was simply dropped without notice in spite of the third parties who had spent many man-years porting to Carbon64 (and who had done the Carbon64 porting sessions multiple years at MacWorldSF).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tuxon86, pat500000, briloronmacrumo and 2 others
When I was selling Macs and Macworld was a week or two away
I would ask my customers 'Do you need your Mac right now?'
When they asked me why I wanted to know I would tell them that
Macworld was coming up and there would a lot of great new stuff
that might be better for them.
My manager hated it when I did that.

What a difference six years makes.
Today's farce makes me really sad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: apolloa, JamesPDX, filmak and 2 others
briloronmacrumo said:
FWIW: Well they can, although for public APIs they typically provide ample deprecation notification before something is completely removed. This is particularly true for APIs they own and control ( such as Carbon, Foundation, AppKit etc. ) and less so for technology they don't ( their licensing deal with Rosetta is an example ). Even today the Carbon framework ships with OS X and Xcode 7 builds Carbon apps( and the lack of QuickDraw headers starting in OS X 10.7 can be overcome by simply copying them from a 10.6 SDK ) even though Apple has been warning to move to Cocoa for years. Apple decided long ago to focus all their new development on Cocoa ( some of Carbon did make it to 64-bit but that effort ceased ) and relegate Carbon to maintenance mode. When Apple eventually removes an API is partially dependent on how quickly and easily developers adopt the replacement. To this day there are hundreds of Carbon apps running happily on OS X machines but the effort to move them to Cocoa APIs is substantial. Maybe Carbon isn't the typical example but it should be interesting to see when ( if ) Apple drops its support.
Click to expand...

Deprecation cycles typically last a long, long, long time though. OpenTransport was deprecated in 10.4, but wasn't removed until 10.9. Tons more deprecated API is still around. Heck, OpenTransport, even though it was deprecated, was still ported to Intel OS X.

A lot of Carbon still hasn't reached deprecation status, or just recently reached deprecation. Apple doesn't just randomly yank things out, otherwise old apps would be breaking much more often. Rosetta maybe comes closest to something like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JamesPDX
__dontpanic__ said:
I'll be building a hackintosh as my main rig. Have had nothing but problems with the nMPs I've had at work (two of them have been in and out of repair - for what I presume to be faults relating to overheating). Also, the current nMPs have proven that there is no upgrade path for those who rely on GPU processing power. So I'll just wait for the Broadwell-E refresh and build myself the Hackintosh equivalent.

If it wasn't for my industry/workplace (advertising and video editing) being so Mac centric, I'd be switching to PC. Apple have shown nothing but contempt for their high-end professional users.
Click to expand...

Depends on your software. The advertising industry / press / video editing / animation .. is from my point of view, and in my network not Apple minded anymore for a long time now. With a good configured PC you benefit from OpenCL and Cuda as well. What keeps you away from a PC?
 
__dontpanic__ said:
I'll be building a hackintosh as my main rig. Have had nothing but problems with the nMPs I've had at work (two of them have been in and out of repair - for what I presume to be faults relating to overheating). Also, the current nMPs have proven that there is no upgrade path for those who rely on GPU processing power. So I'll just wait for the Broadwell-E refresh and build myself the Hackintosh equivalent.

If it wasn't for my industry/workplace (advertising and video editing) being so Mac centric, I'd be switching to PC. Apple have shown nothing but contempt for their high-end professional users.
Click to expand...

Unless your workflow includes OSX only software like FCX you aren't really tied to OSX. Adobe products run better in some case (with the help of Cuda) on windows than it does on OSX.
 
In my case a large investment in Mac software. Also some of the Photoshop plug-ins I use on a regular basis are either Mac only or in a few cases by companies that have since gone bust, so no chance of upgrades there. To be honest if there was a PC equivalent of Boot Camp (i.e. running Mac OSX on a PC) I'd be very tempted. I have a Early 2008 MacPro that, so far, is doing well but I'm starting to look at 3rd party refurb 5,1 models as a replacement rather than a nMPro.
 
It has already been denied in fact. but who knows?
I could see it happening. But that could be the end of MIPS, since Apple is into ARM.
But it could be good on the GPU side of things, and for those into VR there's already work done.
Still, for Macs AMD should be the top dog.
 
nothing to see here. That's just a move from apple to ensure R&D and product stability for iphones.
 
goMac said:
...you do realize that Apple controls whether or not CUDA can exist? They're the ones with the signing power on the kernel extension.

Anyway, OpenCL is being replaced by Metal. But the OpenCL API probably has another 5-10 years of life before it goes away. Apple can't just randomly drop APIs.
Click to expand...


No, OpenGL is being replaced by Metal/Vulkan. OpenCL "can" be replaced with Metal, but won't be on software that uses Vulkan+OpenCL. Since Metal is not portable back to Windows/Linux, you won't see OpenGL and OpenCL removed from OS X until wrapping layers are created so backwards compatibility isn't destroyed in the process. Cross-platform software vendors like Adobe, and Autodesk are not going to create software that targets an Apple-only API if it increases their development costs. It's just simple economics "If all platforms support OpenCL and Vulkan, that is what we will use"

As it is, people need to think beyond games. OpenCL is popular to do things with audio and video compression, and that has nothing to do games. OpenCL can also run on the CPU or GPU, regardless of the underlying architecture.

So I don't see OpenCL disappearing. I could see OpenGL development being depreciated in favor of Vulkan, but you're not going to see it depreciated in favor of Metal because that will just prevent developers from porting non-OSX software to it.
 
Misaki said:
No, OpenGL is being replaced by Metal/Vulkan. OpenCL "can" be replaced with Metal, but won't be on software that uses Vulkan+OpenCL. Since Metal is not portable back to Windows/Linux, you won't see OpenGL and OpenCL removed from OS X until wrapping layers are created so backwards compatibility isn't destroyed in the process. Cross-platform software vendors like Adobe, and Autodesk are not going to create software that targets an Apple-only API if it increases their development costs. It's just simple economics "If all platforms support OpenCL and Vulkan, that is what we will use"

As it is, people need to think beyond games. OpenCL is popular to do things with audio and video compression, and that has nothing to do games. OpenCL can also run on the CPU or GPU, regardless of the underlying architecture.

So I don't see OpenCL disappearing. I could see OpenGL development being depreciated in favor of Vulkan, but you're not going to see it depreciated in favor of Metal because that will just prevent developers from porting non-OSX software to it.
Click to expand...
Check again, Vulkan actually provides API for compute SPIR-V... https://www.khronos.org/spir
While vulkan is GPU only SPIR-V runs both on cpu and DSP too.

Of course you'll use vulkan only as environment for SPIR-V as opencl does, it's like to said opencl already is included in Vulkan.

But in long term I'm not vulkan and SPIR-V are at the end of the compute road, I see more future on MIC architecture (either on x86, ARM or ia64) for high performance compute servers which would make opencl irrelevant and restricted to pc accelerators.


Vulkan and Metal actually are the same thing just one will remain Apple only.
 
Metal is the default on both OSX and iOS. That's a billion devices. I seriously doubt CUDA is on a billion devices. I suspect the only contender in terms of market penetration is DirectX. Unless OpenCL/OpenGL or some other API is on Android? I don't really know about that.

I think we're missing the point if we keep confining the discussion to desktop OS.
 
Roykor said:
Depends on your software. The advertising industry / press / video editing / animation .. is from my point of view, and in my network not Apple minded anymore for a long time now. With a good configured PC you benefit from OpenCL and Cuda as well. What keeps you away from a PC?
Click to expand...

True, but I don't want to have to build a machine room for my project studio. The noise floor is the acoustic hum from the mixer's internal power supply. But one day I may have to just run everything to the basement and cable-up through the floor. I need Xeons or multi i7s and SSDs to run VEP5 slaves from Pro Tools 12 via Gigabit Ethernet.

If Apple did a BTO-only, could we get better machines that way? They wouldn't have to "market" them. Seems a waste that I can't have even my my G5 DP case repurposed.
[doublepost=1458724748][/doublepost]
Roykor said:
Nah, you just trying to talk it all-right that Apple is selling you a old computer and charge max. Its fine that you would like to pay and smile. Because a Mac is magic, suprieur and the support is awesome. Rainbows everywhere! Look, don't get me wrong. I understand some basics behind a "workstation" and the choices behind it. Like support. But this is the flagship op Apple. The best of the best Apple can throw at you. Its there beast, the PRO machine. The only headless machine wit real horsepower. They put this all in a very very small round box because that looks awesome (it does). Clearly there users where asking for a very small case with limited configuration options. So Apple delivered.

When they released it, the hardware inside was basically 2012. Its 2016. They charge you 2012 hardware for 2016 prices + apple brand. And a 2 grand PC kicks the sh*t out of this machine. I do understand that people would like to defend their product. I do that sometimes too. But please, please Apple. Launch a real Pro machine so that it can match up a 2016 computer horsepower. Why is Apple pushing their old users away to the PC world?? (HP and Dell have awesome workstations you know.. with a lot of hardware options.)
Click to expand...

This is why Apple should just "outsource" their Pro line to Boxx http://www.boxxtech.com/ -so that we can still run OSX and not on a disposable Dell or HP that may or may not have the capacitor plague and tin whiskers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back