Like all web browsers on ios, it uses WKWebKit, and not Chrome’s own rendering engine. It’s essentially safari but with different “chrome.”
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Developers Begin Receiving Mac Mini With A12Z Chip to Prepare Apps for Apple Silicon Macs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Chrome hogging memory is due to security sandboxing which is a positive so it doesn't get owned like Safari. DRAM is cheap vs security compromise.
https://www.thezdi.com/blog/2020/3/17/welcome-to-pwn2own-2020-the-schedule-and-live-results
Exactly. It doesn't matter much. It's not like it'll be anything like the same when the release version comes.
And yes, there is a fan inside.
Going to take a guess but maybe he's thinking of thermal throttling, which really isn't a big issue for iPad SoCs, given that it uses 5-8W and the iPad has enough cooling capacity without fan, so there's no real impact and sustained perf is very good for A12/A13 in latest iPhone/iPad models.
There was a rumor about upcoming Apple TV having A12X and some people said that it would be actively cooled, so pref would be slightly better than iPad Pro. I'm not sure that's really the case.
And what did some do? Immediately turn and run benchmarks. smdh humans will always find a way to ruin something.
Given that before the Blink fork Chrome used the WebKit on Mac as well that doesn't really matter. (insert bad 'you Blinked and missed it joke' here) I mean when does a fork stop being what it forked off from?
Besides with Big Sur on there will be a lot less differences between MacOS and iOS it will be interesting to see if Google continues to use "pure" WebKit or go with Blink for Big Sur and later MacOSes
Some people prefer Chrome because the fork did change the way stuff operates. Not me, but some people.
Yeah, I'm sure, but doing benchmarks on a chip that isn't going to be the chip seems odd. And people are running with some of the information like this is THE chip.
What is so hard to understand about Apple's statement that no-one should draw any conclusions about the upcoming hardware based on this DTK?
The chip in this thing is a 2 year old iPad SoC, and something they put together "...without even trying..."
Whatever they ship for the production Macs will undoubtedly be very, very much more capable and powerful and support all that you'd expect a Mac to support. I, personally, would not be surprised to see the Apple Silicon Macs run 3x to 5x (likely more) the processing power of the currently shipping Intel products.
The Macs are very likely to have a fan, even if these don't.
This matches what I said in another thread regarding all this "I have to ask. Just what part of prototype development machine did you (people) not understand?"
As you point out the benchmark out of this thing is likely worst then useless or as I put it elsewhere "This (the benchmarks) belong in the 'why did you waste our time with this nonsense?' category."
I'm with you. I just do not understand why everyone is going chunky peanut butter crazy with what at the end of the day is a development mac. All this mac is for is to allow programmers to rewrite their code so it runs reasonably well and doesn't blow goats on the actual production macs.
The only thing that has any validity is concern regarding things like WINE, Parallels, and VMFusion being unable to run x86 code but then again I think Microsoft is looking at the ARM CPU as an alternative as well but since they don't control the hardware are having a devil of a time getting anyone to develop for the darn thing.
Last edited: