dev_tty01

You could have said "still thriving" or something similar. "Still alive" has connotations of barely surviving. This team has been doing incredible work incredibly quickly from the beginning.

The question is why are they leaving after 24 months? Perhaps the company is lacking a clear path for development in terms of responsibility, impact, and renumeration. Not adequately training because they are expected to leave after 24 months is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Great stuff. Thanks. Gotta love the data tape reels on the "home" computer.

27" LG Ultrafine 5k running at 60 Hz. The connection is Thunderbolt 3, direct to the 16" M1 16MB Pro, no dock. The monitor has a USB 3.1 hub built in and that has also been well behaved. This is the latest rev of the LG Ultrafine, the 27MD5KL. It has been flawless. Their first couple of versions had some issues. See the following for more info on those versions:

https://apple.stackexchange.com/questions/371124/difference-...

I have also used this laptop with lots of generic HDMI displays plugged in directly to the HDMI port. No issues. I have had mixed success with no name USB-C to HDMI adaptors. Some of those have problems. I throw those away or send them back.

I am using Bartender and BetterSnapTool. Nothing else third party that messes with windows or spaces. Hope it works out for you.

Hmm. That is interesting. When I disconnect, the Spaces for the external just become added to the set of Spaces for the internal. When I reconnect, the Spaces go back to the external. Running Monterey. Any chance you are running a third-party window manager that is getting in the middle of that process?

Sorry you are having issues, but I have found the support for multiple monitors to be great all the way back to a Mac IIci I got in 1989. At the moment I am running a 16" M1 MB Pro with an LG 5K over Thunderbolt. It finds the monitor and puts my spaces back to the right monitors every time I plug it in. It sleeps and wakes from sleep with no issues.

I have had Macs for over 30 years and never experienced these kinds of issues and have used laptops with external monitors (except for some random issues while running beta system software). I have to believe there is something about your software environment that is different. I hope you find the issue, but I can tell you from a large office full of Macs and my own personal experience that your situation is not typical. Good luck.

I watched a lot of videos made by technicians and did a lot of reading. It doesn't take too long to study enough to get the basic certification, but that is not the whole story. I have done lots of electronic prototyping and test system creation, copper plumbing, etc., so I felt comfortable with tools and electro-mechanical systems. If your entire career has been behind a keyboard, you have a lot more than an hour of studying ahead of you.

I got irritated with the size of a quote for my heat pump repair, so I got an HVAC certification and did the repair myself. A little time, $300 worth of equipment from Amazon and it is still running great after several years. I needed the HVAC certification to buy the refrigerant. Saved several thousand dollars.

My daughter has a web presence in the music domain. There are a couple photos of her playing the piano or doing something else in a professional capacity as an artist, but her personal details are carefully kept private. If you could just see a sampling of the absolute crap that is sent to her business contact points, you would not wonder why people want to maintain privacy.

</rant_on> Just as an aside, if you see a person on the internet, it is incredibly rude and infantile to comment on their physical appearance, unless those comments are specifically solicited. Comment on their profession, hobby, art, or whatever else the business or site is about, but nobody gives a crap about your opinion on their looks, their clothes, their eyes, etc... Grow up and keep your teenage fantasies to yourself. </rant_off>

True enough. Perhaps a standard or a reg could require no ads or tracking if a site accepts micro payments. Maybe the browser could enforce the reg or standard.

If I could trade making micro payments per visit and have NO advertising and NO tracking and NO cookie config popups, I would take that deal. When I click on some obscure site to read one story, a site I may never visit again, I would much rather toss a tip in the jar to support their efforts than to fill out forms and be prompted to turn off an ad blocker, etc....

Thanks. In case anyone is interested, I looked around a bit more and found these descriptions of Safari's (Webkit) intelligent tracking prevention starting from 2017 (in reverse chronological order):

Safari Tracking Prevention background:

https://webkit.org/tracking-prevention/#intelligent-tracking...

Blog posts about tracking prevention updates:

https://webkit.org/blog/11545/updates-to-the-storage-access-...

https://webkit.org/blog/10218/full-third-party-cookie-blocki...

https://webkit.org/blog/9521/intelligent-tracking-prevention...

https://webkit.org/blog/8613/intelligent-tracking-prevention...

https://webkit.org/blog/8311/intelligent-tracking-prevention...

https://webkit.org/blog/8142/intelligent-tracking-prevention...

https://webkit.org/blog/7675/intelligent-tracking-prevention...

Here is their tracking prevention policy definition:

https://webkit.org/tracking-prevention-policy/

Is this better or worse than Safari's "Prevent cross-site tracking" feature?

https://support.apple.com/guide/safari/prevent-cross-site-tr...

It appears Safari is just blocking the cookies, while Firefox is isolating the cookies. I guess Safari has to keep track of who to block while Firefox just isolates everybody. Are there other benefits to the Firefox approach?

Frankly, I have a hard time understanding why this Cookie Sandbox approach wasn't implemented a long time ago. I get that 25 years ago we weren't concerned about privacy, but there has been plenty of time to fix this. Advertiser influence?

>But the Saturn V as a launch vehicle was simply too expensive.

Sure, at that moment in time. You are, however, discounting the abilities of clever people to innovate and improve the $/kg performance. I prefer to think we engineers are pretty good at reducing the effective cost of tech over time.

However, none of this is about Saturn V vs Shuttle vs some other platform. If NASA remained the sole customer over that period, there would not have been adequate incentives to drive that cost down. In that situation I think improvement would have been slow independent of platform choices.

It is the telecommunications age creating scaled incentives that has led to cost efficiencies and companies like SpaceX (and many others) competing to drive those costs down. Lacking the current scale of global incentives, SpaceX and others still wouldn't exist. They certainly couldn't have acquired the necessary funding back in the 70s.

Here are my numbers for the original M1 (not Pro or Max) soon after release:

ARM Geekbench single core on M1 MacOS is 1734. ARM Geekbench single core on WinARM in VM on M1 is 1550. x86 single core on i9 MB Pro MacOS is 1138. x86 in emulation on M1 MacOS is 1254.

Yes, 72% x86 Rosetta vs. M1 Native. However, x86 Rosetta on M1 was faster than the previous i9 2019 Macbook Pro x86 native. I consider that to be performant for running code that was compiled for a very different architecture.

Interesting. Where did you see that? I'm still trying to get a handle on the latest changes.

See my comment on original question. Apple's latest beta system, Ventura, enables using Rosetta within Linux VMs. Looks like they have done a lot of work on the virtualization frameworks since last year.

At least some aspects of this issue are getting better as we speak. The latest Mac OS (in beta) supports virtualizing ARM Linux but also enables the ARM Linux system to use Apple's speedy Rosetta 2 x86 binary compiler and JIT compiler to run x86 programs within the ARM Linux VM. Based on descriptions, it seems that the rest of the hypervisor VM framework has also matured substantially this release.

https://developer.apple.com/documentation/virtualization/run...

https://developers.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2022/10002/

If you are not familiar, Rosetta is how Apple Silicon Macs run existing Mac x86 binaries and it is highly performant. It does binary pre-compilation and cacheing. It also works with JIT systems. They are now making that available within Linux VMs running on Macs.

Wow. Hate to imagine the FDA approval process for this.

Interesting project. Not useful for me, but best of luck. Quick question: If Apple (working with MS) releases a blessed version of Boot Camp for running Win10 ARM on a Mac, does the project end? In other words, are there goals beyond what Boot Camp offers on Intel Macs?

No, I bought a license and Windows activated itself running in Parallels. What is the risk?

I bought a Windows license and successfully activated WIN10 ARM running in Parallels.

This is a huge overstatement. A few engineers went to Qualcomm, not the "Apple M1 team." Market forces at work. However, I do suspect they will help Qualcomm come closer to being competitive. How close they will get in performance remains to be seen. The M2 is already about 20% faster with the same number of cores.

Are you saying the table is wrong? I don't see that in your response. If the table is right, then artists are making less money per stream on Spotify. An artist might make more in absolute terms if there are more total streams on Spotify, but the artists are still being devalued and they would do better if the rates were higher. Personally, I want to use a service that values and pays artists well. ("Well" is a relative term here...)

I think you mean profit, not revenue. In terms of surviving difficult economics, revenue is useless if not accompanied by profit. Cutting 33% of their workforce will at least temporarily stop an awful lot of bleeding. Long term effect, probably not good. If losing 33% doesn't hurt them long term, then they have been doing some incredibly bad hiring. They might make it to the other side of this and I know nothing about their specific situation, but judging from the history of other failures, this is sadly often the first step in a death spiral.

>Nobody is giving startups money to sit on it.

Depends on the economic environment. We are headed for a difficult cycle. Downsizing and doing a raise to at least partially "sit on" might be the best strategy at this moment. Money flow can go from huge to nothing faster than one might imagine.

I find Word is only tolerable when used like Latex. I.e., extensive use of Styles. Define a Style for every object type in your doc. Also, carefully choose the Next Style option. Define Sections if columns or pagination vary across the document. With that in hand, it is now just a matter of plugging in text and images. If something isn't working quite right, edit the Style instead of macdinking the text on the screen.

You are still left with formatting equations, but Word lets us use Latex-ish syntax for that now, so you can keep the fine control of Latex within the GUI context.

Don't get me wrong, I hate Word, but it is required in many environments. Adopting a rational use strategy helps a bit.

https://www.wordsense.eu/macdink/#English

If you consider a "design" to result from a process where someone sketches out a plan, builds it, and it works first time. I've designed a lot of systems, and it is clearly an iterative process. Balancing tradeoffs, figuring out the essentials, build prototypes, test, etc. If you are patient and diligent a solution emerges. That sounds a lot like evolution, so in my mind everything in nature has been designed by the collective intelligence of an iterative process that rewards useful optimizations.

You don't seem to understand the history of the time. There are two names on the report. There was very little, if any, political support at that time for giving her "extra" credit. The more likely scenario is that she should have been first author. That sort of thing happened a lot.