Okay, fair, but why would I get an Apple device when I can get a Linux device with some monster motherboard that has a dozen memory slots?
Looks like Mac Minis had a 64 GB model (hard to get now) for roughly $1,600. You could get a 3 of these (192GB) & thanks to the Thunderbolt 5 connection, they out performed any single board AMD for a similar price that had more memory. If you tried to do so something similar with Nvidia GPU you're looking at a lot of watts, cooling & a much faster experience but only 48 GB of memory.
This does really feel like the first milestone for voice assistants that are equivalent to talking to a human. Not suggesting it's perfect - but the tech is only going to improve from here.
Plots with no axis labels or units displayed? In fact if you're literally just comparing two things, why not just write down the two numbers? Or better yet strengthen your argument by comparing more than just literally two options?
And the pictures. You seriously couldn't be bothered to just go find a picture of four Mac minis stacked on top of each other, and had to genai a picture of four vaguely-mac-mini-shaped blocks?
Apple is not doing anything magical with hardware that other companies, including Nvidia, cannot do for roughly the same price/performance. The M series is amazing, but there are comparable products out there now. If you want to say eventually demand for Nvidia will fade because demand for training frontier models will decrease with time, fair, but that doesn’t suddenly make Apple the king of AI.
Also, for new better AI models to happen someone will need to train those new better models and that isn’t going to happen on 5000 Mac minis duct taped together.
but of course author chose to use a.i to write this.
& bury very important points which are 1. Chinese Memory Manufacturers 2. Apple Unified Memory + their own chips which are a result of their 'car' effort.
If not Apple should sue Open AI to oblivion to just then buy it. Their voice conversation tech is unparallel as Gemini (subscriber to both) tries but no way matches theirs.
Perhaps AI serves also as an attempt to reverse course on this: raise prices on general-purpose computing hardware (excluding phones, which are increasingly locked down) so that it becomes again inaccessible to consumers.
The king of AI isn’t the shop with the biggest/bestest model, or whose machine has the bandwidth and unified memory.
It’s the company who has the loyal users. And Apple was smart enough to give OpenAI the finger, point their ship in a “byo service” direction, and focus on building out the part that everyone really wants. With the privacy protection and with access to the data you want AI to have without sacrificing the former.
We’ll see if they’re going to pull off exactly that, very soon. If they have, they’ll have managed to negotiate this hype train, far and away, better than anyone.
The way I see it, is that they missed the boat on how powerful those models will become meanwhile other players are integrating deeply into their ecosystem. It might go down as the fall of the empire similar to Nokia, Kodak etc. It is still too early to tell.
num42•1h ago
My comment won’t add anything to the discussion. As far as I know I have heard same idea * several times from George Hotz blog posts. I guess that’s what tiny corp wants to do.
kimjune01•34m ago