Apple Silicon OpenGL & Vulkan Drivers Updated In Mesa 24.3 Git

[intelfx]

Do you have any links to good places I can learn about this? I did a quick couple google searches, and most of what i found seemed to say it's not that different.

I'd suggest reading research papers on exploitation of the SEP, or perhaps there are any writeups by the Asahi folks.

I think the main things I found were that it can be updated remotely unlike a TPM, and we don't know what that will mean in the future. Are we sure SE can't be updated? Seems unlikely. The other thing I saw was just people saying that pluton was still kind of full of unknowns and people weren't sure what it did yet, which is maybe because those were written a while ago before full implementations were out. Is there a good current source on it you can share?

It does not matter one bit that it can be updated remotely, or that it has more processing power than a TPM, or anything else of that sort.

It simply does not have unlimited access to the rest of the system: it cannot meaningfully affect (or snoop on) the AP or the main memory or any peripherals except specific ones that have something to do with security and authentication (like biometrics readers). Also I'm not talking about Pluton, I'm talking about the SEP and the SEP only.

[smitty3268]

Well yes, and it shows.

Do you have any links to good places I can learn about this? I did a quick couple google searches, and most of what i found seemed to say it's not that different.

I think the main things I found were that it can be updated remotely unlike a TPM, and we don't know what that will mean in the future. Are we sure SE can't be updated? Seems unlikely. The other thing I saw was just people saying that pluton was still kind of full of unknowns and people weren't sure what it did yet, which is maybe because those were written a while ago before full implementations were out. Is there a good current source on it you can share?

[YamashitaRen]

Now that am at C level, I don't want to waste my time learning 1000 friggin' ways to skin a cat. I just want one efficient way that works.

Too bad if the one and only proposed way does not work for you... which is my case. I cannot suffer OSX Window Management.

[jonkoops]

No he's right about graphics. Remember the whole situation when Apple sold Macbooks with defective Nvidia chips?

We're talking specifically about Linux support for their new M-series hardware, no such defects exist there. You can grab any large vendor and cherry-pick from their history to justify a similar response. Try to stay on topic at the very least.

[xhustler]

It is certainly easy on the eyes and polished. Like a pretty toy. However, often, I want to be productive on my computer and sadly MacOS ruins it.

My experience is the exact opposite. Almost everyone talks about how customizable open-source DEs are and how one can get things done in a myriad ways. Whilst I was a techie and middle manager, I enjoyed this immensely.

Now that am at C level, I don't want to waste my time learning 1000 friggin' ways to skin a cat. I just want one efficient way that works.

[intelfx]

<...> But like I said, I know very little on this whole topic.

Well yes, and it shows.

What's the difference? Secure Enclave is a co-processor on the SOC running a full OS on it, next to OSX on the main ARM64 chip. Which sounds a lot like Pluton - maybe it doesn't have all the same functionality, I guess, but you're kind of trusting Apple at their word on that given that it's a pretty black box.

The fact that it's running an entire OS makes me think it can do a lot.

It does not matter what runs on the Secure Enclave. What matters is that SEP does not have full access to the rest of the system. SEP communicates with AP using a small number of dedicated interfaces, which is indeed much more similar to a TPM than to a ME/PSP-style coprocessor.

So no, it does not sound "a lot like Pluton" (well, maybe to someone with a very superficial understanding of the subject matter), and you don't have to trust Apple at their word (more so than you have to trust any other hardware manufacturer).

[Dukenukemx]

Because Apple makes the best hardwares, and I'd like to use the best hardware daily.

The only people who believe this are people who never buy anything but Apple products.

Moreover, it's high quality, standardized, fixed hardware. That scenario allows for extra optimizations like how console modders, etc are able to squeeze every bit of performance out of a system.

Except you still have to deal with Intel Macbooks. It's not like Apple gives you the option to use an API like Vulkan, but instead force developers to work with Metal.

Please stop, this is all opinion and not fact based, or even motivated with sources aside from your incredibly lacking statements.

No he's right about graphics. Remember the whole situation when Apple sold Macbooks with defective Nvidia chips?

Haven't had any of such issues myself, nor have any of my colleagues AFAIK (like ~20 users of various M-series MacBook Pros). But this is an issue I have seen pop up online, and I do find the tolerance between the screen and body a bit too tight for my taste, often see my keyboard stained on the panel. But is this failing more often than competitors?

Remember when the M1's were released and wearing out SSD's extremely fast? What do you think happened to those devices?

That makes even less sense and quite the egoist perspective - you're implying here everyone should just follow your principles? And like I said, you're not really rewarding them if you're ditching the only thing that's actually profitable for them.

How about when the US government does it?

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-apple-monopolizing-smartphone-markets

Sure, but those are people who use Apple's products as intended. People who run Linux on them are a lot less likely to be apologists, seeing as they're intentionally going against the grain.

Most Windows computers are not designed to run Linux, but here we are. The difference is that AMD and Intel are making sure their hardware also works on Linux.

Whatever distrust you might have for Apple's policies or software, the hardware seems quite suited as the foundation of a secure, user-centric platform, that's also modern and powerful.

Except when they have an unpatchable hardware flaw called GoFetch. GoFetch doesn't even need root.

https://www.intego.com/mac-security-blog/unpatchable-flaw-in-apple-m1-m2-m3-chips-gofetch-is-the-new-spectre/

And save, perhaps, those latest Windows 'AI' ARM laptops, which is it's own mess of performance/compatibility/big-brother-energy, you won't find any other laptop that's the same machine on battery as it is plugged into the wall, much less at the performance level of Apple Silicon.

Except for AMD's new Zen5 based chips.

[smitty3268]

You couldn't be more inaccurate there. Secure Enclave is Apple's take on the TPM, not ME/PSP/Pluton. Totally different things.

What's the difference? Secure Enclave is a co-processor on the SOC running a full OS on it, next to OSX on the main ARM64 chip. Which sounds a lot like Pluton - maybe it doesn't have all the same functionality, I guess, but you're kind of trusting Apple at their word on that given that it's a pretty black box.

The fact that it's running an entire OS makes me think it can do a lot. But like I said, I know very little on this whole topic.

[qarium]

With Catalina being the last version of macOS that doesn't require online activation via Apple's DRM platform, in around 20 years, Linux and BSD may well be the only way to reuse the hardware rather than it going into landfill.

this is really horrible news to me.

[YamashitaRen]

I find macOS a joy to use. It is easy on the eyes and polished. I dare any of you to refute this.

It is certainly easy on the eyes and polished. Like a pretty toy. However, often, I want to be productive on my computer and sadly MacOS ruins it.