Remix.run Logo
readitalready 8 hours ago

Apple really dropped the ball here. They had every ability to make something competitive with Nvidia for AI training as well as inference, by selling high end multi GPU Mac Pro workstations as well as servers, but for some reason chose not to. They had the infrastructure and custom SoCs and everything. What a waste.

It really could have been a bigger market for them than even the iPhone.

A_D_E_P_T 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Just about everybody who isn't Nvidia dropped the ball, bigtime.

Intel should have shipped their GPUs with much more VRAM from day one. If they had done this, they'd have carved out a massive niche and much more market share, and it would have been trivially simple to do.

AMD should have improved their tools and software, etc.

Apple should have done as you say.

Google had nigh on a decade to boost TPU production, and they're still somehow behind the curve.

Such a lack of vision. And thus Nvidia is, now quite durably, the most valuable company in the world. Imagine telling that to a time traveler from 2018.

readitalready 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I think for AMD, they were focused on competing against Intel. Remember AMD was almost bankrupt about 15 years ago because of competing against Intel. But the very first GPU use for AI was actually with an ATI/AMD GPU, not an Nvidia one. Everyone thinks Nvidia kicked off the GPU AI craze when Ilya Sutskever cleaned up on AlexNet with an Nvidia GPU back in 2012, or when Andrew Ng and team at Stanford published their "Large Scale Deep Unsupervised Learning using Graphics Processors" in 2009, but in 2004, a couple of Korean researchers were the first to implement neural networks on a GPU, using ATI Radeons: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00313...

And as of now I do believe AMD is in the second strongest position in the datacenter space after Nvidia, ahead of even Google.

bigstrat2003 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> And thus Nvidia is, now quite durably, the most valuable company in the world.

Nvidia is the most valuable company in the world right up until the AI bubble pops. Which, while it's hard to nail down when, is going to happen. I wouldn't call their position durable at all.

gizajob 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The crashing and burning of Nvidia stock has been predicted for a while now and keeps not really happening. It’s gone pretty flat and volatile up there around $180 but they keep delivering the results to back it up. I was thinking this week that Apple is really primed to make a killing from people who want to run their LLM on-device coupled with an agent in the next couple of years. We’re a long way off being able to train the models – this is going to need an Nvidia-powered datacentre for the foreseeable future, but the local inference seems absolutely like a market that Apple could capture, gutting all the most premium revenue from Anthropic and OpenAI by selling Macs with a large amount of integrated memory to anyone who wants to give them the money to run their native OpenClaw/agent instead of paying ever-growing monthly bills for tokens.

HerbManic 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It is definitely a case that they will fall a long way but Nvidia will not fail as a whole. They have a way of maximizing their position relentlessly. CUDA turns out to endlessly put them in amazing positions on things like image recognition, AR, Crypto and now AI.

For all the faults of them leaning in hard on these things for stock market and personal gains, Nvidia still has some of the best quality products around. That is their saving grace.

They will not be the world most valuable company once the bubble pops, will probably never get back there again, but they will continue to be a decent enough business. I just want them going back to talking about graphics more than AI again, that will be nice.

user34283 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I might as well say that no, it is not going to happen.

As handwriting code is rapidly going out of fashion this year, it seems likely AI is coming for most of knowledge work next.

And who is to say that manual labor is safe for long?

greggsy 30 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They didn’t drop the ball at all?

They want to be able to sell handsets, desktops and laptops to their customer base.

Pursing a product line that would consume the finite amount of silicon manufacturing resources away from that user base would be corporate suicide.

Even nvidia has all but dropped support for its traditional gaming customer base to satisfy its new strategy.

At any rate, the local inference capabilities are only going to get cheaper and more accessible over the coming years, and Apple are probably better placed than anyone to make it happen.

Almondsetat 41 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If Apple doesn't offer a Linux product, they cannot be used seriously in headless computing task. They are adamant in controlling the whole stack, so unless they remake some server version of macOS (and wait years for the community to accustom themselves with it), they will keep being a consumer/professional oriented company

vlovich123 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Don’t mistake stock market performance for revenue. NVIDIA makes ~200B annually, same as what Apple makes from iPhones. It’s a big market but GPUs aren’t just AI.

readitalready 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I'm purely talking in terms of revenue. There's a huge demand for AI systems from personal workstations to datacenter servers, and Apple was one of the few companies in the world in a position to build complete systems for it.

But for some reason Apple thought the sound recording engineer or the video editor market was more important... like, WTF dude? Have some vision at least!

vlovich123 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It is more important. Both for the customer base that actually buys Apple machines as well as the cache and mindshare of being used by the people that create American culture.

Even if Apple had an amazing GPU for AI it wouldn’t matter hugely - local inference hasn’t taken off yet and cloud inference and training all uses servers where Apple has no market share and wasn’t going to get it since people had already built all the stacks around CUDA before Apple could even have awoken to that.

aurareturn 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Some people at Apple see it. That’s why they added matmul to M5 GPU and keep mentioning LMStudio in their marketing.

rudedogg 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Their rule of only releasing major software updates once a year in June is holding them back IMO. Their local LLM apis were dated before macOS/iOS 26 was even released. Just because something worked 20 years ago doesn’t mean it works today, but I’m sure it’s hard to argue against a historically successful strategy internally.

aurareturn 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Huh? What local LLM apis? It uses Metal.

aurareturn 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

$280b and growing 70% YoY.

$1t backlog in orders in next 2 years.

HerbManic 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Those back log orders are wild! One does wonder that if the bubble collapses or more global upsets happen in that time, how many of those will ever be fulfilled? Reality might be not so impressive, but considering if it fell even 80%, that is still $200 B in revenue and that is huge.

Remember when a $1 billion valuation used to be a big thing? That is nothing compared with nowadays.

aurareturn 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Just look at the price of H100 cloud rental prices. Demand is increasing.

root_axis 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Nah, Apple made the right choice. Nobody except a niche market of hobbyists is interested in running tiny quantized models.

gizajob 2 hours ago | parent [-]

About the same niche market as the people who bought the Apple I, and we know where that went.

wtallis 2 hours ago | parent [-]

The Apple I was a pretty poor predictor of what mainstream mass-market computing was going to end up looking like. I don't think anybody has yet come up with the Apple II of local LLMs, let alone the VisiCalc or Windows 95.

kristopolous 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

this is what needs to come back with modern hardware and modern interconnect

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xserve

bschwindHN 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> They had the infrastructure and custom SoCs and everything. What a waste.

What are they wasting, exactly?

zer0zzz 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

How is this dropping the ball? I think they dropped the ball a long time ago by waiting until M5 to do integrated tensor cores instead of the separate ANE only which was present before.

For multi-gpu you can network multiple Macs at high speed now. Their biggest disadvantage to Nvidia right now is that no one wants to do kernel authoring in Metal. AMD learned that the hard way when they gave up on OpenCL and built HIP.

zer00eyz 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> something competitive with Nvidia for AI training

Apple is counting on something else: model shrink. Every one is now looking at "how do we make these smaller".

At some point a beefy Mac Studio and the "right sized" model is going to be what people want. Apple dumped a 4 pack of them in the hands of a lot of tech influencers a few months back and they were fairly interesting (expensive tho).

JumpCrisscross 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Apple is counting on something else: model shrink

The most powerful AI interactions I've had involved giving a model a task and then fucking off. At that point, I don't actually care if it takes 5 minutes or an hour. I've cued up a list of background tasks it can work on, and that I can circle back to when I have time. In that context, smaller isn't even the virtue at hand–user patience is. Having a machine that works on my bullshit questions and modelling projects at one tenth the speed of a datacentre could still work out to being a good deal even before considering the privacy and lock-in problems.

raincole 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Cool? And it has nothing to do with what kind of consumer hardware Apple should sell. If your use cases are literally "bigger model better" then the you should always use cloud. No matter how much computing power Apple squeezes into their device it won't be a mighty data center.

gizajob 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

For running the model once it’s been trained, all a datacenter does is give you lower latency. Once the devices have a large enough memory to host the model locally, then the need to pay datacenter bills is going to be questioned. I’d rather run OpenClaw on my device plugged into a local LLM rather than rely on OpenAI or Claude.

3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]
jiggawatts 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

What "tooling" do you use to let AIs work unattended for long periods?

root_axis 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> At some point a beefy Mac Studio and the "right sized" model is going to be what people want.

It's pretty clear that this isn't going to happen any time soon, if ever. You can't shrink the models without destroying their coherence, and this is a consistently robust observation across the board.

sipjca 6 hours ago | parent [-]

I don’t think it’s about literally shrinking the models via quantization, but rather training smaller/more efficient models from scratch

Smaller models have gotten much more powerful the last 2 years. Qwen 3.5 is one example of this. The cost/compute requirements of running the same level intelligence is going down

HerbManic 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I have said for a while that we need a sort of big-little-big model situation.

The inputs are parsed with a large LLM. This gets passed on to a smaller hyper specific model. That outputs to a large LLM to make it readable.

Essentially you can blend two model type. Probabilistic Input > Deterministic function > Probabilistic Output. Have multiple little determainistic models that are choose for specific tasks. Now all of this is VERY easy to say, and VERY difficult to do.

But if it could be done, it would basically shrink all the models needed. Don't need a huge input/output model if it is more of an interpreter.

kyboren 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, but bigger models are still more capable. Models shrinking (iso-performance) just means that people will train and use more capable models with a longer context.

sipjca 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Of course they are! Both are important and will be around and used for different reasons

Forgeties79 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Cheaper than what you’d expect though. You could get a nice setup for $20-40k 6mo ago. As far as enterprise investments go, that’s a rounding error.

a1o 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Not all enterprises are the same, I imagine many companies have different departments working with local optimums, so someone who could benefit from it to get more productivity might not have access to it because the department that is doing hardware acquisition is being measured in isolation.

zer00eyz 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Drop that down to 5k, and make it useful.

Give every iPhone family a in house Siri that will deal with canceling services and pursuing refunds.

Your customer screw up results in your site getting an agent drive DDOS on its CS department till you give in.

Siri: "Hey User, here's your daily update, I see you haven't been to the gym, would you like me to harass their customer service department till they let you out of their onerous contract?"

etchalon 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Nothing is a bigger market than the iPhone, let alone expensive niche machines.