Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple does not innovate. Like really?
Do you remember: Apple silicon for example. Or miniLED displays, or Vision Pro with over 4000 patents, or iPhone X, smaller things like dynamic island and much more?

And just to name a couple more... crash and fall detection that has saved many lives. Ditto with SOS messaging via satellite where cellular coverage is non-existent. Face ID on iPhone X. Apple Watch irregular heart rhythms detection and notification.
 
TensorFlow, Kubernetes, Nvidia GPU's, OLED/WOLED, S3 containerization advancement, 3D CPU/memory architecture, next gen DWDM, 1,000 more things in virtualization, etc. etc. Many companies released a car, a functional digital assistant, an advanced television and lot's of other stuff, heh heh.

Think its pretty clear I was referring to consumer electronics 😑
 
Apple does not innovate. Like really?
Do you remember: Apple silicon for example. Or miniLED displays, or Vision Pro with over 4000 patents, or iPhone X, smaller things like dynamic island and much more?

I was with you until.... "Vision Pro" and then you lost me fully with "dynamic island".

Let's talk again when the ever rumored, actually hyper innovative, under screen FaceID comes along, and then suddenly it'll be:

"dynamic what?"

"island who?"

"was that a TouchBar relative?"

"new phone, who dis?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: 01cowherd
I agree with comments that he’s worked 27 years at Apple and that he deserves retirement! It’s a long time to be in that type of role. Also, it’s obvious that Tim Cook isn’t Steve Jobs. But, think how horrible it could have been. And remember, Steve Jobs chose Tim Cook.

Everyone here on the thread is knowledgeable about the industry, much more than I. Could you list 2-3 people who you would eventually choose to run Apple instead of Tim Cook? And why? A name and a short sentence? This isn’t a sarcastic post, I’d really like to learn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: orbital~debris
Those are just more powerful GPUs, there's nothing particularly exciting or innovative about them. I'd argue Apple Silicon is just as exciting and innovative as Nvidia GPUs, if not more so.

I agree that Apple Silicon is impressive but Nvidia has a near monopoly on AI inference and related tooling thanks to its GPUs and proprietary software stack.
 
Those are just more powerful GPUs, there's nothing particularly exciting or innovative about them. I'd argue Apple Silicon is just as exciting and innovative as Nvidia GPUs, if not more so.
This is so not true in modern compute architecture:
IMG_0008.jpeg
 
The hate on here towards Tim. Unbelievable. Without merit.
Apple has had its turn of lousy leadership, it almost went under.
Tim took it to the top of the stock market value leader board, it couldn't be any healthier, and that's the reaction he gets on here?
No pleasing some people.
I don't come here for great insights if I'm honest but often just to laugh at the cynics and haters.
 
Good to know about the changes within Apple. Think he will be present in the launch event for the last time in the upcoming September event.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mganu
High end modeling training isn't using a gaming RTX GPU. It's B200 in a rack, just like it's MI350/x in a Rack. Grow up.
Nonsense. That was in comparison to consumer products - Mseries vs. a comment that Blackwell was no big deal in comparison. RTX 5xxx is Blackwell and scaled CUDA Tensor architecture just as much as B series. Are M series chips export controlled? Lose the bias, it’s a sign of maturity.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.