4 ms·

> I think it really was the M1 Chip that killed Mighty. The product itself looked like it was working great. Agree with this take. It's amazing he was able to

by runako 4y ago

> I think it really was the M1 Chip that killed Mighty. The product itself looked like it was working great. Agree with this take. It's amazing he was able to get this funded at a time it was fairly obvious from their product roadmap and language that Apple was going to release ARM Macs. Props to him for the skill it took to get funding in the door.

swyx 4y ago
didn't need funding skill, didnt need to look at apple roadmap, suhail's prior success as a founder was good enough for most pple
- ignoramous 4y ago
  Certainly has the skill to layoff by the dozen, so given the current investment climate, that might come in handy too ;) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10869419 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10869419 In seriousness, going by what Suhail's been documenting through their tweets, they seem to fit the relentlessly resourceful bracket to a tee, which (according to pg, at least) means they have an above average chance at succeeding doing venture-scale startups: http://www.paulgraham.com/relres.html http://www.paulgraham.com/relres.html
  - hyuuu 4y ago
    what things did he do that make him relentlessly resourceful you think?
dan-robertson 4y ago
I remember people being very impressed with the performance of the arm macs at the time. Maybe they were impressed that it met expectations though and correctly predicting it would be good.
foldr 4y ago
>It's amazing he was able to get this funded at a time it was fairly obvious from their product roadmap and language that Apple was going to release ARM Macs It's easy to forget, but a lot of people were rubbishing the idea of ARM Macs as a viable replacement for Intel until it actually happened.
- runako 4y ago
  I did see that opinion expressed, but it was just silly given Ax performance in iPad/iPhone pre-M1. In no world does the flagship laptop use a more expensive, less efficient, and slower chip than the mid-range iPhone for more than a couple of product generations.
  - themoonisachees 4y ago
    I don't think it was that silly to expect a transition from a stable, mature architecture, sold (albeit too expensive) by an established chip maker, to a new (to desktop) architecture designed in-house by a company known for its phones, especially when you consider that desktop workloads are very different from "here is an API for our walled garden" workloads. Add to that the fact that a successful transition was entirely dependant on how well rosetta works (it turns out it works well, but that wasn't a given at all), evidenced by how people got burned in the powerpc-x86 transition
    - runako 4y ago
      > when you consider that desktop workloads are very different from "here is an API for our walled garden" workloads. This is a solid point, but iPad workloads were pretty clearly converging with laptop workflows. (And Apple was obviously moving in the direction of converging the SDKs even before the M1 was announced.) Plus, they already had the ability for devs to build apps to run on MacOS & iPad/iPhone. This was a strategic move that was visibly underway for years. > a successful transition was entirely dependant on how well rosetta works (it turns out it works well, but that wasn't a given at all), evidenced by how people got burned in the powerpc-x86 transition All the more reason to expect them to make a transition -- they had pulled it off successfully (if with some hiccups) before. I would not be surprised if they had some of the original Rosetta team around to revise for this time around.

by runako 4y ago

swyx 4y ago

didn't need funding skill, didnt need to look at apple roadmap, suhail's prior success as a founder was good enough for most pple

ignoramous 4y ago
Certainly has the skill to layoff by the dozen, so given the current investment climate, that might come in handy too ;) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10869419 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10869419 In seriousness, going by what Suhail's been documenting through their tweets, they seem to fit the relentlessly resourceful bracket to a tee, which (according to pg, at least) means they have an above average chance at succeeding doing venture-scale startups: http://www.paulgraham.com/relres.html http://www.paulgraham.com/relres.html
- hyuuu 4y ago
  what things did he do that make him relentlessly resourceful you think?

dan-robertson 4y ago

I remember people being very impressed with the performance of the arm macs at the time. Maybe they were impressed that it met expectations though and correctly predicting it would be good.

foldr 4y ago

>It's amazing he was able to get this funded at a time it was fairly obvious from their product roadmap and language that Apple was going to release ARM Macs It's easy to forget, but a lot of people were rubbishing the idea of ARM Macs as a viable replacement for Intel until it actually happened.

runako 4y ago
I did see that opinion expressed, but it was just silly given Ax performance in iPad/iPhone pre-M1. In no world does the flagship laptop use a more expensive, less efficient, and slower chip than the mid-range iPhone for more than a couple of product generations.
- themoonisachees 4y ago
  I don't think it was that silly to expect a transition from a stable, mature architecture, sold (albeit too expensive) by an established chip maker, to a new (to desktop) architecture designed in-house by a company known for its phones, especially when you consider that desktop workloads are very different from "here is an API for our walled garden" workloads. Add to that the fact that a successful transition was entirely dependant on how well rosetta works (it turns out it works well, but that wasn't a given at all), evidenced by how people got burned in the powerpc-x86 transition
  - runako 4y ago
    > when you consider that desktop workloads are very different from "here is an API for our walled garden" workloads. This is a solid point, but iPad workloads were pretty clearly converging with laptop workflows. (And Apple was obviously moving in the direction of converging the SDKs even before the M1 was announced.) Plus, they already had the ability for devs to build apps to run on MacOS & iPad/iPhone. This was a strategic move that was visibly underway for years. > a successful transition was entirely dependant on how well rosetta works (it turns out it works well, but that wasn't a given at all), evidenced by how people got burned in the powerpc-x86 transition All the more reason to expect them to make a transition -- they had pulled it off successfully (if with some hiccups) before. I would not be surprised if they had some of the original Rosetta team around to revise for this time around.