3 ms·

Contrast with Apple: M1 and pump! launched it the major selling laptop. That is how you know Apple mean business. And this is how you know fucsia/google will

by mamcx 5y ago

Contrast with Apple: M1 and pump! launched it the major selling laptop. That is how you know Apple mean business. And this is how you know fucsia/google will not.

justapassenger 5y ago
Where else could've they launched it? It's not like Apple has tons of HW products that require M1. If Google would chose to launch Fuchsia as a base of next Android and force all OEMs on it, that would mean people managing release should be fired, as that's not how you stage major changes.
- mamcx 5y ago
  > and force all OEMs ???? This not make much sense, but if Google launched it in his own, then at least some OEMs could go along (supposing Fucsia is good, I don't know which could their selling point)
izacus 5y ago
Apple has been launching the "M1" piece by piece for years now. They started with Qualcomm/PowerVR cores and ended up with custom designs over years of iterative product launches. I have no idea why do you think M1 is such a green field effort when it obviously shares so much of it's design with A series SoCs you've been seeing in your favorite iDevice.
rvz 5y ago
You do realise that Apple's M1 processor + OS porting was a 10 year goal to produce the results that you see before you? Several years ago [0], the same ones here were calling Fuchsia dead since 2016 - 2018 and theoretically today it should already have died. Today Google has surprised the skeptics here and just released Fuchsia 1.0 on a real device (earlier than expected) and now you're already calling it dead again? This whole thread sounds like a Linux meltdown club to me. In fact, Google is taking / controlling Fuchsia in the same direction as to what Apple has always done with iOS / macOS and its own silicon. Perhaps when this decade ends, you will be looking at this comment (and this one [1]) via a phone running Fuchsia. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17568335 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17568335 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22005286 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22005286
- mamcx 5y ago
  So? Of course this take time, but when Apple LAUNCH it, it do it with confidence.
  - rvz 5y ago
    > but when Apple LAUNCH it, it do it WitH cONfIdeNCE. The answer I'm looking for is that during this 10 year effort Apple had already and always used their existing designed ARM chips in their iPhones and iDevices. Once they improved it over time and it surpassed their Intel counterparts, it was the time to target the Mac which is why you are hyping over the M1 performance. In fact, macOS was already on ARM years ago. It's just that it would have ran slower and wasn't ready which is why they waited and here we are. But this claim: > And this is how you know fucsia/google will not. How can you be so certain that the owner of the world's most used mobile operating system [0] and a very competitive desktop OS on the market [1] cannot or 'will not' launch Fuchsia with confidence (even when they just did)? Don't you think it's extremely too early to make such vacuous claims without ANY compelling evidence? [0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/272698/global-market-share-held-by-mobile-operating-systems-since-2009/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/272698/global-market-sha... [1] https://www.geekwire.com/2021/chromebooks-outsold-macs-worldwide-2020-cutting-windows-market-share/ https://www.geekwire.com/2021/chromebooks-outsold-macs-world...
Jetrel 5y ago
Apple apologist here, but uh, really the M1 isn't a first-gen product, it's more like a TENTH-gen product. It's a direct evolution from the A4 chip series, and apple only did the big sexy "we mean business" rebrand when, after a decade of R&D, they'd basically bred a mouse up to the size of a mammoth. Apple quietly ramped it up year over year; at its initial release, it was just another "me too" phone ARM chip, but as they built it, after a few years they had their own chip design team and were no longer just popping in generic ARM Cortex designs. Then it quietly got 2, then 3x faster than the other phones on the market. Finally it reached full parity with common-market intel chips; apple made sure their "intel on arm" emulator was working well. They still didn't release it! They waited a couple more years - until it was so fast that even emulated, it would be comparable with a brand new low-end intel machine, and then, finally, they branded it as the M1 and released it. --- Google's strategy seems to be playing out really similarly. Put it out in the wild in some devices where they won't get flak for the usual teething problems. Work all of those out, and then, once it's pretty robust, make the big confident "sexy play" to deploy it on an android phone.

by mamcx 5y ago

Contrast with Apple: M1 and pump! launched it the major selling laptop. That is how you know Apple mean business. And this is how you know fucsia/google will not.

justapassenger 5y ago

Where else could've they launched it? It's not like Apple has tons of HW products that require M1. If Google would chose to launch Fuchsia as a base of next Android and force all OEMs on it, that would mean people managing release should be fired, as that's not how you stage major changes.

mamcx 5y ago
> and force all OEMs ???? This not make much sense, but if Google launched it in his own, then at least some OEMs could go along (supposing Fucsia is good, I don't know which could their selling point)

izacus 5y ago

Apple has been launching the "M1" piece by piece for years now. They started with Qualcomm/PowerVR cores and ended up with custom designs over years of iterative product launches. I have no idea why do you think M1 is such a green field effort when it obviously shares so much of it's design with A series SoCs you've been seeing in your favorite iDevice.

rvz 5y ago

You do realise that Apple's M1 processor + OS porting was a 10 year goal to produce the results that you see before you? Several years ago [0], the same ones here were calling Fuchsia dead since 2016 - 2018 and theoretically today it should already have died. Today Google has surprised the skeptics here and just released Fuchsia 1.0 on a real device (earlier than expected) and now you're already calling it dead again? This whole thread sounds like a Linux meltdown club to me. In fact, Google is taking / controlling Fuchsia in the same direction as to what Apple has always done with iOS / macOS and its own silicon. Perhaps when this decade ends, you will be looking at this comment (and this one [1]) via a phone running Fuchsia. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17568335 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17568335 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22005286 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22005286

mamcx 5y ago
So? Of course this take time, but when Apple LAUNCH it, it do it with confidence.
- rvz 5y ago
  > but when Apple LAUNCH it, it do it WitH cONfIdeNCE. The answer I'm looking for is that during this 10 year effort Apple had already and always used their existing designed ARM chips in their iPhones and iDevices. Once they improved it over time and it surpassed their Intel counterparts, it was the time to target the Mac which is why you are hyping over the M1 performance. In fact, macOS was already on ARM years ago. It's just that it would have ran slower and wasn't ready which is why they waited and here we are. But this claim: > And this is how you know fucsia/google will not. How can you be so certain that the owner of the world's most used mobile operating system [0] and a very competitive desktop OS on the market [1] cannot or 'will not' launch Fuchsia with confidence (even when they just did)? Don't you think it's extremely too early to make such vacuous claims without ANY compelling evidence? [0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/272698/global-market-share-held-by-mobile-operating-systems-since-2009/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/272698/global-market-sha... [1] https://www.geekwire.com/2021/chromebooks-outsold-macs-worldwide-2020-cutting-windows-market-share/ https://www.geekwire.com/2021/chromebooks-outsold-macs-world...

Jetrel 5y ago

Apple apologist here, but uh, really the M1 isn't a first-gen product, it's more like a TENTH-gen product. It's a direct evolution from the A4 chip series, and apple only did the big sexy "we mean business" rebrand when, after a decade of R&D, they'd basically bred a mouse up to the size of a mammoth. Apple quietly ramped it up year over year; at its initial release, it was just another "me too" phone ARM chip, but as they built it, after a few years they had their own chip design team and were no longer just popping in generic ARM Cortex designs. Then it quietly got 2, then 3x faster than the other phones on the market. Finally it reached full parity with common-market intel chips; apple made sure their "intel on arm" emulator was working well. They still didn't release it! They waited a couple more years - until it was so fast that even emulated, it would be comparable with a brand new low-end intel machine, and then, finally, they branded it as the M1 and released it. --- Google's strategy seems to be playing out really similarly. Put it out in the wild in some devices where they won't get flak for the usual teething problems. Work all of those out, and then, once it's pretty robust, make the big confident "sexy play" to deploy it on an android phone.