11 ms·

iMac Pro Appears to Include A10 Fusion Chip for Always-On ‘Hey Siri’

69 points by cybermancy 9y ago

cybermancy 9y ago
Will be interesting to see if native iOS apps will be able to run for development or regular use. This is a good sign for the convergence of the Mac and "i" products. For fun here's the "transitions" talk Steve Jobs gave announcing the switch from PowerPC to Intel processors. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghdTqnYnFyg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghdTqnYnFyg
- jaxondu 9y ago
  This is not a switch from Intel to ARM for Mac, but a ARM coprocessor in Mac similar to new MacBook Pro that handles the Touchbar and Secure Enclave for TouchID. Apple don't even like the idea of touch interface for Mac apps, so its unlikely they will open up running of iOS apps on the Mac. Curious to see if new Mac from now onwards will still support TouchID as Apple has said that they are abandoning Touch ID on the iPhone. Makes no sense to support TouchID on just one platform, the minor one.
  - cybermancy 9y ago
    I don't think we really know what it could be yet. Looks to be a inroad to phasing in ARM chips in Mac products.
    - tmzt 9y ago
      It could just be about doubling the battery life automatically for typical workloads. The A10 could even be running OSX like the Apple TV allowing Apple to port their own apps to it making the experience pretty seemless.
- 0x0 9y ago
  Converging the Mac and the i products sounds like a terrible idea, as long as iOS insists on running non-windowed apps. Serious workloads is very inefficient without a proper windowed desktop environment combined with a Finder and a Terminal that can access files across all apps. Also, having an x86-compatible CPU at the core enables high enough performance for virtualbox/vmware, which is a huge enabler in that it allows running windows or linux VMs side by side (or even integrated) with the native desktop. A converged ARM-based Macbook sounds very much like a toy computer; a facebook+youtube media consumption station with an option for perhaps doing limited creative work such as composing an iMovie or touching up some photos at the most.
  - cybermancy 9y ago
    Well I don't think Apple will be as senseless as they have been with the iPad Pro. I think they will converge them, but continue to support classic Mac interaction models (keyboard + mouse). With all the competition from Microsoft's Surface lineup we'll probably see the iPad shift even more towards the Mac side of interaction as well. To your second point about performance: have we really seen what a high wattage ARM CPU can do?
    - 0x0 9y ago
      I'm sure we'll see ARM CPUs with native performance on par with x86 soon, but not for running x86 binaries at full speed (i.e. windows/linux VMs).
  - coldtea 9y ago
    >A converged ARM-based Macbook sounds very much like a toy computer; a facebook+youtube media consumption station with an option for perhaps doing limited creative work such as composing an iMovie or touching up some photos at the most. What you describe as a "toy computer" is actually an indestructible and hella-great main business computer for a huge majority of people. Most people aren't designers or videographers or programmers -- including most Mac users. What you dismiss as "Facebook" is actually the browser, which is how most business users do their business day in, day out (plus some office suite and so on). So what you describe will be more like a Chromebook done right.
    - 0x0 9y ago
      Nothing wrong with a device like that - put a keyboard and mouse on the iPad and go at it. But please don't take away the option of having a real computer Macbook for the rest of us.
      - coldtea 9y ago
        Sure, I agree with that too. I'm all those things the main public is not (programmer as main trade, but make films and music on the side). I hope we'll always have that general flexibility. That said, I prefer something closed-but-works-98%-of-the-time like macOS's graphics engine (Quartz or whatever is called) than the infinitely flexible X-Windows (or whatever graphics engine/compositor rules Linux distros now) that seldom works properly and people write things in reviews like "it worked with my graphic card just fine on the first try" as if this is still allowed to be a good surprise in 2017.
- jmull 9y ago
  In terms of running iOS apps for regular use, it makes no sense to run apps designed for handheld touch screen devices on a non-touchscreen device where the display is fixed. For development, what’s the advantage over the current system where your app is compiled for x86? It would still run in something like the simulator app and have similar drawbacks. I’m more excited for possibilities like FaceID, not to mention other uses for the secure enclave. Purely speculating from a position of ignorance, but I wonder if this might be able to take over for a variety of coprocessors.)
- thought_alarm 9y ago
  Every iOS app already runs natively on Intel. Adding an ARM co-processor to the Mac doesn't change that situation.
  - umanwizard 9y ago
    It's possible to compile iOS apps for x86 if you have the source, but this x86 version is not included in what's shipped to the app store.
  - vardump 9y ago
    > Every iOS app already runs natively on Intel. For simple apps this is more or less true. More complicated cases might not behave same. For example, ARMv8 and x86 have different memory models. So execution won't be equivalent. You can have concurrency bugs in your code that only manifest on ARMv8. I'm sure there are a lot of other examples of differences as well.
gallerdude 9y ago
Mac development has lost some momentum, so maybe unique hardware help push things forward. On the other hand, the ever-controversial touchbar was unique hardware.
internet2000 9y ago
Having an embedded iOS computer take over most "firmware" features would definitely simplify things for Apple. The strings found that hint at the A10 being in charge make it sound like this could possibly even solve the Intel ME issues, if the iOS part absorbs roles traditionally given to the Intel chipset.
danjoc 9y ago
>the chip will enable support for "Hey Siri" functionality, potentially even when the iMac Pro is turned off. Intel ME wasn't bad enough... so Apple builds a second backdoor you can't remove, with the explicit purpose of bugging your room? No thanks.
- holydude 9y ago
  This is such a ridiculous statement...literally anything could be a backdoor why would it be one of the most expensive components ?
013a 9y ago
This is huge. While it starts with just powering things like boot security and Hey Siri, I guarantee you this is the first step toward Apple getting rid of Intel on the Mac. How much longer before they release MB/MBPs with the same chip, doing the same thing? How much longer after that before we see SDKs released for writings apps that run on Mac, but are completely executed within the ARM processor? I think this is coming far sooner than many people think.
- userbinator 9y ago
  I guarantee you this is the first step toward Apple getting rid of Intel on the Mac. ...and making Macs even more closed and proprietary, moving away from the (semi-open, but also quickly closing[1]) PC again. This is huge, and scary. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15730113 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15730113
  - cududa 9y ago
    Or you could just buy a Non Apple product if you don't like it.
  - pjmlp 9y ago
    It is the return to the roots, just like Apple used to be before OS X happened. They only became more open out of necessity.
    - Someone 9y ago
      Apple’s roots were extremely open. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_I#History https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_I#History: ”After building it for himself and showing it at the Club, he and Steve Jobs gave out schematics (technical designs) for the computer to interested club members and even helped some of them build and test out copies” Also: the Apple 2 shipped with full schematics and an assembly listing of its ROMs. The ‘phone book’ edition of Inside Macintosh didn’t document all hardware, but I wouldn’t call it ‘closed’. It explains how OS calls are implemented, details on the floppy disk interface, etc.
alphabettsy 9y ago
Could handle Face ID, etc. Possibly offload video encoding/transcoding? The A10 can handle 4K HEVC. Not sure what the point would be with dedicated graphics doing the same.
- dzhiurgis 9y ago
  Article mentions secure enclave so FaceID is very likely. It doesn’t make much ergonomic sense to put fingerprint reader like you do on macbook.
  - JustSomeNobody 9y ago
    Right. With Face ID, you sit down in front of your computer and your desktop is already up and available.
  - jpalomaki 9y ago
    External keyboard with touchbar and touchid might be interesting (but hard to make wireless, unless with some cool new wireless charging mechanism).
pornel 9y ago
I wonder if macOS will be able to run userspace code on this. Apple's ARM chips are pretty fast, so this could be extra 50% of computing power for the iMac. From software side they've already done similar things in the past (fat binaries, Rosetta).
- Someone 9y ago
  This new iMac pro, in its ‘low end’ configuration, has 8 cores (https://www.apple.com/lae/imac-pro/specs/ https://www.apple.com/lae/imac-pro/specs/), possibly of the new “Purley” kind (http://bgr.com/2017/07/12/imac-pro-2017-specs-intel-xeon-purley-chip/ http://bgr.com/2017/07/12/imac-pro-2017-specs-intel-xeon-pur...) A single A10 will not add 50% of computing power, even ignoring its GPU.
  - runeks 9y ago
    True, but the A10 is much cheaper than any Intel CPU, so Apple could develop a multi-socket ARM motherboard to increase the number of ARM cores, to make performance compatible with Intel's (perhaps at lower cost, since Apple can get cheap A11s using the high volume of iPhone 8/X). Also, according to Geekbench, the single-thread performance of the 2.4 GHz A11 is 70%[1] of the 3.7 GHz i7-8700K. I'm guessing Apple could bring the A11 even closer to the i7 by increasing the clock frequency, which may not make sense for mobile devices (because of disproportionally higher power consumption). So, again according to the Geekbench figures, four A11s (at mobile clock frequency) is 50% faster than a 6-core i7-8700K[1]. [1] https://browser.geekbench.com/ios_devices/52 https://browser.geekbench.com/ios_devices/52 https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/2062 https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/2062
- runeks 9y ago
  If the A10 really is half as fast as an Intel CPU, wouldn't it make more sense for Apple to put four of these chips in an iMac -- delivering double the performance -- and use the savings to fight Intel's x86 emulation patent in court? One could hope that, due to the negative PR, Intel would give up trying to prevent Apple from delivering 2x the performance at a lower cost. In any case, I think this patent needs to be challenged thoroughly, as it seems to favor only Intel while punishing consumers.
nerdponx 9y ago
Crazy how HN flips out over the Intel ME then turns around and applauds this.
- cybermancy 9y ago
  This has interesting implications in many aspects of computing while Intel ME largely serves to attack and spy on the user.
- tpush 9y ago
  Lots of Apple fanboys on this forum.
- mrbuttons454 9y ago
  I have more trust in Apple than I do Intel.
- misnome 9y ago
  Strange, I didn't see in the article any suggestions that this chip had full access to all data flowing throughout the computer. Almost as though it's not at all similar in any way to the Intel ME discussions.
erikj 9y ago
Always-on Siri is a very creepy feature, and who even needs it in a "Pro" workstation?
bitL 9y ago
The last thing I want is to talk to my turned off computer... Comedy sketches of the past are becoming reality, and will be propelled by "Apple can't do no wrong" crowd.
minimaxir 9y ago
Please stop saying that Apple is secretly recording your conversations for nefarious purposes with Hey Siri. It’s been around for 2 years and there has been nothing world-ending found about the feature. A reminder about how Hey Siri privacy works: https://techcrunch.com/2015/09/11/apple-addresses-privacy-questions-about-hey-siri-and-live-photo-features/ https://techcrunch.com/2015/09/11/apple-addresses-privacy-qu... > In no case is the device recording what the user says or sending that information to Apple before the feature is triggered,” says Apple. > Instead, audio from the microphone is continuously compared against the model, or pattern, of your personal way of saying ‘Hey Siri’ that you recorded during setup of the feature. Hey Siri requires a match to both the ‘general’ Hey Siri model (how your iPhone thinks the words sound) and the ‘personalized’ model of how you say it. This is to prevent other people’s voices from triggering your phone’s Hey Siri feature by accident. > Until that match happens, no audio is ever sent off of your iPhone. All of that listening and processing happens locally.
- rallycarre 9y ago
  It won't be listening to you if they don't care to. The idea of having a device that listens to everything around in your home is unnerving, for me atleast. The problem with saying "they would never do something like this" or "I have nothing to hide so why do I care" is that your trusting people thousands of miles away from you who are heavily influenced by the government... If your not comfortable having a policeman sit on your desk while you work on your computer then I might not be a good idea supporting products like these. Personally, Siri can screw off. I am more than happy to check the weather myself. :)
  - zoul 9y ago
    If Apple wants to eavesdrop on you I don’t see how Siri changes the situation. You already have a networked device with a microphone, turning or not turning on an additional service hardly makes a difference.
    - tritium 9y ago
      And that's just it, isn't it. Siri is just a name. A cartoon. The reality is that at a minimum, it's an organization of profit motivated people trying to listen to you. Maybe Apple is controlled by nice people today, but how many other companies will justify their own actions by pointing to Apple's practices. And when those companies are bought and sold, or go out of business after a period of desperation, what happens in those moments? Justify this with Apple, and ten more organizations follow in those footsteps.
JustSomeNobody 9y ago
Makes perfect sense for them to do this for Siri and Security. Otherwise they'd end up with two separate implementations.
izacus 9y ago
I'm worried this is going to be some kind of TouchBar-and-Siri type useless gimmick instead of something that genuinely makes this a good useful machine.
GeekyBear 9y ago
Steven Sinofsky had an interesting tweetstorm throwing a bit of cold water on the notion that this was a sign that Macs were moving to ARM. https://twitter.com/stevesi/status/932116692620079104 https://twitter.com/stevesi/status/932116692620079104
- runeks 9y ago
  > 12/ Or do you allow cross-compilation? Then the access to underlying system undermines "iOS" walled approach. Only "certified apps" isn't so interesting to most people. I don't get this point. How does ARM translate to "walled garden"? I see no reason to tie ARM and the walled garden-approach together, just because that's the way it is on mobile. Non-certified apps would work just fine on OSX if the developers build for ARM. Assumption 1: Most interesting OSX apps are active ones, where the authors have the source code, and are thus able to cross-compile and publish ARM binaries. Assumption 2: Due to volume (and using an indenpendent foundry) the A11 chip is at least 10x cheaper than an Intel CPU. I'd love to see a Macbook with 10xA11s, for a total of 20 high-performance cores, even if it can only run non-legacy apps ("legacy" meaning apps that depend on x86 code somehow). Does anyone know how much space the four inefficient cores on the A11 take up? Perhaps the A11 volume is just so large that Apple can spit them out at a cost so low that it doesn't matter if four of the cores remain unused? I don't think they'd be of much use in a Macbook -- at least not the 40 of them that would be available in a 10xA11 setup.
  - photojosh 9y ago
    > Does anyone know how much space the four inefficient cores on the A11 take up? Have a look at the die photo at [0]. Not much. [0]: http://techinsights.com/about-techinsights/overview/blog/apple-iphone-8-teardown/ http://techinsights.com/about-techinsights/overview/blog/app...
egypturnash 9y ago
I wonder if it'll shut off if, like me, you turn off Siri. I'm glad they're trying this first in Macs that're expected to always be plugged in, rather than laptops.
jbverschoor 9y ago
Apple did it before and they will succeed again. Fat binaries.

69 points by cybermancy 9y ago

Will be interesting to see if native iOS apps will be able to run for development or regular use. This is a good sign for the convergence of the Mac and "i" products. For fun here's the "transitions" talk Steve Jobs gave announcing the switch from PowerPC to Intel processors. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghdTqnYnFyg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghdTqnYnFyg

jaxondu 9y ago
This is not a switch from Intel to ARM for Mac, but a ARM coprocessor in Mac similar to new MacBook Pro that handles the Touchbar and Secure Enclave for TouchID. Apple don't even like the idea of touch interface for Mac apps, so its unlikely they will open up running of iOS apps on the Mac. Curious to see if new Mac from now onwards will still support TouchID as Apple has said that they are abandoning Touch ID on the iPhone. Makes no sense to support TouchID on just one platform, the minor one.
- cybermancy 9y ago
  I don't think we really know what it could be yet. Looks to be a inroad to phasing in ARM chips in Mac products.
  - tmzt 9y ago
    It could just be about doubling the battery life automatically for typical workloads. The A10 could even be running OSX like the Apple TV allowing Apple to port their own apps to it making the experience pretty seemless.
0x0 9y ago
Converging the Mac and the i products sounds like a terrible idea, as long as iOS insists on running non-windowed apps. Serious workloads is very inefficient without a proper windowed desktop environment combined with a Finder and a Terminal that can access files across all apps. Also, having an x86-compatible CPU at the core enables high enough performance for virtualbox/vmware, which is a huge enabler in that it allows running windows or linux VMs side by side (or even integrated) with the native desktop. A converged ARM-based Macbook sounds very much like a toy computer; a facebook+youtube media consumption station with an option for perhaps doing limited creative work such as composing an iMovie or touching up some photos at the most.
- cybermancy 9y ago
  Well I don't think Apple will be as senseless as they have been with the iPad Pro. I think they will converge them, but continue to support classic Mac interaction models (keyboard + mouse). With all the competition from Microsoft's Surface lineup we'll probably see the iPad shift even more towards the Mac side of interaction as well. To your second point about performance: have we really seen what a high wattage ARM CPU can do?
  - 0x0 9y ago
    I'm sure we'll see ARM CPUs with native performance on par with x86 soon, but not for running x86 binaries at full speed (i.e. windows/linux VMs).
- coldtea 9y ago
  >A converged ARM-based Macbook sounds very much like a toy computer; a facebook+youtube media consumption station with an option for perhaps doing limited creative work such as composing an iMovie or touching up some photos at the most. What you describe as a "toy computer" is actually an indestructible and hella-great main business computer for a huge majority of people. Most people aren't designers or videographers or programmers -- including most Mac users. What you dismiss as "Facebook" is actually the browser, which is how most business users do their business day in, day out (plus some office suite and so on). So what you describe will be more like a Chromebook done right.
  - 0x0 9y ago
    Nothing wrong with a device like that - put a keyboard and mouse on the iPad and go at it. But please don't take away the option of having a real computer Macbook for the rest of us.
    - coldtea 9y ago
      Sure, I agree with that too. I'm all those things the main public is not (programmer as main trade, but make films and music on the side). I hope we'll always have that general flexibility. That said, I prefer something closed-but-works-98%-of-the-time like macOS's graphics engine (Quartz or whatever is called) than the infinitely flexible X-Windows (or whatever graphics engine/compositor rules Linux distros now) that seldom works properly and people write things in reviews like "it worked with my graphic card just fine on the first try" as if this is still allowed to be a good surprise in 2017.
jmull 9y ago
In terms of running iOS apps for regular use, it makes no sense to run apps designed for handheld touch screen devices on a non-touchscreen device where the display is fixed. For development, what’s the advantage over the current system where your app is compiled for x86? It would still run in something like the simulator app and have similar drawbacks. I’m more excited for possibilities like FaceID, not to mention other uses for the secure enclave. Purely speculating from a position of ignorance, but I wonder if this might be able to take over for a variety of coprocessors.)
thought_alarm 9y ago
Every iOS app already runs natively on Intel. Adding an ARM co-processor to the Mac doesn't change that situation.
- umanwizard 9y ago
  It's possible to compile iOS apps for x86 if you have the source, but this x86 version is not included in what's shipped to the app store.
- vardump 9y ago
  > Every iOS app already runs natively on Intel. For simple apps this is more or less true. More complicated cases might not behave same. For example, ARMv8 and x86 have different memory models. So execution won't be equivalent. You can have concurrency bugs in your code that only manifest on ARMv8. I'm sure there are a lot of other examples of differences as well.

gallerdude 9y ago

Mac development has lost some momentum, so maybe unique hardware help push things forward. On the other hand, the ever-controversial touchbar was unique hardware.

internet2000 9y ago

Having an embedded iOS computer take over most "firmware" features would definitely simplify things for Apple. The strings found that hint at the A10 being in charge make it sound like this could possibly even solve the Intel ME issues, if the iOS part absorbs roles traditionally given to the Intel chipset.

danjoc 9y ago

>the chip will enable support for "Hey Siri" functionality, potentially even when the iMac Pro is turned off. Intel ME wasn't bad enough... so Apple builds a second backdoor you can't remove, with the explicit purpose of bugging your room? No thanks.

holydude 9y ago
This is such a ridiculous statement...literally anything could be a backdoor why would it be one of the most expensive components ?

013a 9y ago

This is huge. While it starts with just powering things like boot security and Hey Siri, I guarantee you this is the first step toward Apple getting rid of Intel on the Mac. How much longer before they release MB/MBPs with the same chip, doing the same thing? How much longer after that before we see SDKs released for writings apps that run on Mac, but are completely executed within the ARM processor? I think this is coming far sooner than many people think.

userbinator 9y ago
I guarantee you this is the first step toward Apple getting rid of Intel on the Mac. ...and making Macs even more closed and proprietary, moving away from the (semi-open, but also quickly closing[1]) PC again. This is huge, and scary. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15730113 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15730113
- cududa 9y ago
  Or you could just buy a Non Apple product if you don't like it.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  It is the return to the roots, just like Apple used to be before OS X happened. They only became more open out of necessity.
  - Someone 9y ago
    Apple’s roots were extremely open. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_I#History https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_I#History: ”After building it for himself and showing it at the Club, he and Steve Jobs gave out schematics (technical designs) for the computer to interested club members and even helped some of them build and test out copies” Also: the Apple 2 shipped with full schematics and an assembly listing of its ROMs. The ‘phone book’ edition of Inside Macintosh didn’t document all hardware, but I wouldn’t call it ‘closed’. It explains how OS calls are implemented, details on the floppy disk interface, etc.

alphabettsy 9y ago

Could handle Face ID, etc. Possibly offload video encoding/transcoding? The A10 can handle 4K HEVC. Not sure what the point would be with dedicated graphics doing the same.

dzhiurgis 9y ago
Article mentions secure enclave so FaceID is very likely. It doesn’t make much ergonomic sense to put fingerprint reader like you do on macbook.
- JustSomeNobody 9y ago
  Right. With Face ID, you sit down in front of your computer and your desktop is already up and available.
- jpalomaki 9y ago
  External keyboard with touchbar and touchid might be interesting (but hard to make wireless, unless with some cool new wireless charging mechanism).

pornel 9y ago

I wonder if macOS will be able to run userspace code on this. Apple's ARM chips are pretty fast, so this could be extra 50% of computing power for the iMac. From software side they've already done similar things in the past (fat binaries, Rosetta).

Someone 9y ago
This new iMac pro, in its ‘low end’ configuration, has 8 cores (https://www.apple.com/lae/imac-pro/specs/ https://www.apple.com/lae/imac-pro/specs/), possibly of the new “Purley” kind (http://bgr.com/2017/07/12/imac-pro-2017-specs-intel-xeon-purley-chip/ http://bgr.com/2017/07/12/imac-pro-2017-specs-intel-xeon-pur...) A single A10 will not add 50% of computing power, even ignoring its GPU.
- runeks 9y ago
  True, but the A10 is much cheaper than any Intel CPU, so Apple could develop a multi-socket ARM motherboard to increase the number of ARM cores, to make performance compatible with Intel's (perhaps at lower cost, since Apple can get cheap A11s using the high volume of iPhone 8/X). Also, according to Geekbench, the single-thread performance of the 2.4 GHz A11 is 70%[1] of the 3.7 GHz i7-8700K. I'm guessing Apple could bring the A11 even closer to the i7 by increasing the clock frequency, which may not make sense for mobile devices (because of disproportionally higher power consumption). So, again according to the Geekbench figures, four A11s (at mobile clock frequency) is 50% faster than a 6-core i7-8700K[1]. [1] https://browser.geekbench.com/ios_devices/52 https://browser.geekbench.com/ios_devices/52 https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/2062 https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/2062
runeks 9y ago
If the A10 really is half as fast as an Intel CPU, wouldn't it make more sense for Apple to put four of these chips in an iMac -- delivering double the performance -- and use the savings to fight Intel's x86 emulation patent in court? One could hope that, due to the negative PR, Intel would give up trying to prevent Apple from delivering 2x the performance at a lower cost. In any case, I think this patent needs to be challenged thoroughly, as it seems to favor only Intel while punishing consumers.

nerdponx 9y ago

Crazy how HN flips out over the Intel ME then turns around and applauds this.

cybermancy 9y ago
This has interesting implications in many aspects of computing while Intel ME largely serves to attack and spy on the user.
tpush 9y ago
Lots of Apple fanboys on this forum.
mrbuttons454 9y ago
I have more trust in Apple than I do Intel.
misnome 9y ago
Strange, I didn't see in the article any suggestions that this chip had full access to all data flowing throughout the computer. Almost as though it's not at all similar in any way to the Intel ME discussions.

erikj 9y ago

Always-on Siri is a very creepy feature, and who even needs it in a "Pro" workstation?

bitL 9y ago

The last thing I want is to talk to my turned off computer... Comedy sketches of the past are becoming reality, and will be propelled by "Apple can't do no wrong" crowd.

minimaxir 9y ago

Please stop saying that Apple is secretly recording your conversations for nefarious purposes with Hey Siri. It’s been around for 2 years and there has been nothing world-ending found about the feature. A reminder about how Hey Siri privacy works: https://techcrunch.com/2015/09/11/apple-addresses-privacy-questions-about-hey-siri-and-live-photo-features/ https://techcrunch.com/2015/09/11/apple-addresses-privacy-qu... > In no case is the device recording what the user says or sending that information to Apple before the feature is triggered,” says Apple. > Instead, audio from the microphone is continuously compared against the model, or pattern, of your personal way of saying ‘Hey Siri’ that you recorded during setup of the feature. Hey Siri requires a match to both the ‘general’ Hey Siri model (how your iPhone thinks the words sound) and the ‘personalized’ model of how you say it. This is to prevent other people’s voices from triggering your phone’s Hey Siri feature by accident. > Until that match happens, no audio is ever sent off of your iPhone. All of that listening and processing happens locally.

rallycarre 9y ago
It won't be listening to you if they don't care to. The idea of having a device that listens to everything around in your home is unnerving, for me atleast. The problem with saying "they would never do something like this" or "I have nothing to hide so why do I care" is that your trusting people thousands of miles away from you who are heavily influenced by the government... If your not comfortable having a policeman sit on your desk while you work on your computer then I might not be a good idea supporting products like these. Personally, Siri can screw off. I am more than happy to check the weather myself. :)
- zoul 9y ago
  If Apple wants to eavesdrop on you I don’t see how Siri changes the situation. You already have a networked device with a microphone, turning or not turning on an additional service hardly makes a difference.
  - tritium 9y ago
    And that's just it, isn't it. Siri is just a name. A cartoon. The reality is that at a minimum, it's an organization of profit motivated people trying to listen to you. Maybe Apple is controlled by nice people today, but how many other companies will justify their own actions by pointing to Apple's practices. And when those companies are bought and sold, or go out of business after a period of desperation, what happens in those moments? Justify this with Apple, and ten more organizations follow in those footsteps.

JustSomeNobody 9y ago

Makes perfect sense for them to do this for Siri and Security. Otherwise they'd end up with two separate implementations.

izacus 9y ago

I'm worried this is going to be some kind of TouchBar-and-Siri type useless gimmick instead of something that genuinely makes this a good useful machine.

GeekyBear 9y ago

Steven Sinofsky had an interesting tweetstorm throwing a bit of cold water on the notion that this was a sign that Macs were moving to ARM. https://twitter.com/stevesi/status/932116692620079104 https://twitter.com/stevesi/status/932116692620079104

runeks 9y ago
> 12/ Or do you allow cross-compilation? Then the access to underlying system undermines "iOS" walled approach. Only "certified apps" isn't so interesting to most people. I don't get this point. How does ARM translate to "walled garden"? I see no reason to tie ARM and the walled garden-approach together, just because that's the way it is on mobile. Non-certified apps would work just fine on OSX if the developers build for ARM. Assumption 1: Most interesting OSX apps are active ones, where the authors have the source code, and are thus able to cross-compile and publish ARM binaries. Assumption 2: Due to volume (and using an indenpendent foundry) the A11 chip is at least 10x cheaper than an Intel CPU. I'd love to see a Macbook with 10xA11s, for a total of 20 high-performance cores, even if it can only run non-legacy apps ("legacy" meaning apps that depend on x86 code somehow). Does anyone know how much space the four inefficient cores on the A11 take up? Perhaps the A11 volume is just so large that Apple can spit them out at a cost so low that it doesn't matter if four of the cores remain unused? I don't think they'd be of much use in a Macbook -- at least not the 40 of them that would be available in a 10xA11 setup.
- photojosh 9y ago
  > Does anyone know how much space the four inefficient cores on the A11 take up? Have a look at the die photo at [0]. Not much. [0]: http://techinsights.com/about-techinsights/overview/blog/apple-iphone-8-teardown/ http://techinsights.com/about-techinsights/overview/blog/app...

egypturnash 9y ago

I wonder if it'll shut off if, like me, you turn off Siri. I'm glad they're trying this first in Macs that're expected to always be plugged in, rather than laptops.

jbverschoor 9y ago

Apple did it before and they will succeed again. Fat binaries.