Tinderbox Forum

Apple wants to change from Intel to Apple Silicon - Tinderbox compatible?

Will TB be optimized for the new Apple hardware?

I’m quite confident this will happen in a timely fashion.

It’s also likely that Tinderbox 8.x will run great with Rosetta II. Still, more speed for better AI will be welcome.

Am I right to think that once Tinderbox has been updated to run natively on the new Apple Macs it will also run on iPads?

No, that is not a likely consequence. The iPad and an Apple Silicon-based Mac may have a processor in common but that does not mean they have an operating system (or application frameworks) in common.

An Intel-based Mac can run Windows or macOS, developing an app for one does not mean it automatically will run on the other.

Ah, that’s a shame. I’d read that Apple said that many iPad apps would run without modification on Macs and was hoping the reverse would be true too!

1 Like

Just my opinion, but using Tinderbox requires a lot of work with the mouse, and trying that with finger touch or the fat cursor on an iPad would be an unpleasant and difficult experience.

I crossed my fingers and popped for the new MBPro with M1 processor yesterday. I’m going to hang on to my current MBPro for a couple of weeks to be on the safe side. Has anyone else made the leap yet? Anyone here a beta tester or developer who has used it? If so what did you think? OT, are we having a Zoom meetup at noon ET on Saturday?
– Bob Powell

Apple Silicon: so far, so good. We’ll need to run in emulation for the first few weeks, but a native build is not far off.

Saturday Meetups: yes. Noon, EST, 9am PST.

Thanks Mark! I have so many apps that I utterly depend upon that this silicon change is a bit concerning, but I think everything is going to work out. I needed to spring for it because = taxes and I’m hoping the machine learning, etc., will make a big difference over time.

1 Like

I ordered a new Mac mini because I’ve been straining with the internal SSD size I have in my current mini. But it turns out that the ports on these first units are constrained for video and the new mini won’t run my daisy chained 4K monitors. The memory is tight for photo processing as well. I cancelled the order.

I’ll have to wait for the next round. These entry level machines are said to be as fast as the base level Mac Pro. The next round should be even better. You see the challenge of more cores, more pooled memory and more I/O with an SOC. I wonder if multiple processors might not be the answer.

I wasn’t aware of the constraint on the video out. That, of course, stinks. I thought about waiting another year to buy, but I didn’t have enough deductions last year and am tired of giving Uncle Sam money for some of the programs (read atrocities) they are operating.

The most irritating thing about the new MBPros (so far) for me is that they only have two USB-C/Thunderbolt ports and my current 2018 MBPro has four. I typically use three, one for my normal power brick, one for my Time Machine Drive, and one for my LG HDR ultra wide monitor. Thankfully the monitor powers the MBPro as long as it is on. I don’t know if there is a compatible splitter available yet or not. I keep forgetting to check.

FWIW, my 2019 top-spec MBAir (with 16 GB RAM) is running 2 x Apple/LG 4k 24" external monitors; one monitor running from the Mac the second daisy-chained from the first. The limitation is I have to run the external in native res or WindowServer eats all resources. Still, thats an OS [sic] bug present in 10.14.x and unfixed in 10.15.x. Here’s hoping macOS 11 sorts it, as I’ll be jumping from 10.14 to 11 at some point.

Point of the above is even a new MBAir (lower $ cost) may have the grunt to run your external screens. I’d started with one and got a second after careful testing. The OS res-scaling bug is a pain but I have 2 x 1910x1080 4k extenal workspaces and can got higher if I don’t mind re-booting often (the only way to flush WindowServer unreleased resources).

The Apple-sold 24" LGs have another useful facet: 5 USB-C ports on the back. 2 are Lightning (2? 3?) allowing daisy chaining. The other 3 work as straight USB-C. I use 2 [sic] to support and external hub (USB-A, ethernet, etc); I had power issues until I connected a second USB-B cable monitor-to-hub. All this leaves 1 free USB-C/Lightning port on the Mac free. It would seem the chips needed to have breakout boxes with multiple USB-C ports are not yet in volume production and may not be until next year. These LG monitors are an exception (albeit and expensive hub!

HTH and saves some search for others trying to balance out all these factors. To avoid thread drift, if anyone want to follow up on the points above, I suggest splitting to a new thread so this one can stay on TB-with-Silicon as opposed to wider issues.


I actually called Apple Support to check about the monitor support because you could see how the specs had changed from the 2018 Intel mini to the new M1. And it’s a hardware support issue. The laptops only support a single external monitor the mini can support two, but one has to be HDMI. No daisy-chaining my LG monitors for now.

A full explanation is here. This is clearly a significant issue for mini users as dual monitor setups are pretty common.

But you’re right, we’re off topic here.

1 Like

It seems to be possible to connect more than 2 displays to your Mac mini (M1). This YouTuber was able to connect 5 in total. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kq_FyjcAULA

The current backstage build is native for Apple Silicon.

1 Like