31 votes

Introducing the next generation of Mac - A new MacBook Air, 13-inch MacBook Pro, and Mac mini powered by M1, Apple’s chip designed specifically for the Mac

101 comments

  1. [5]
    tindall
    (edited )
    Link
    While there are obvious benefits to many, this is another step towards proprietarization and total vertical integration for Apple - now from the silicon right up to the applications software in...

    While there are obvious benefits to many, this is another step towards proprietarization and total vertical integration for Apple - now from the silicon right up to the applications software in the desktop space, as well as the mobile space. This is also probably the end of most peoples' ability to run "hackintosh" machines, so anyone wanting to use, say, Logic Pro will have to pay the Apple tax.

    20 votes
    1. [4]
      ali
      Link Parent
      what keeps the rest of the computer world to move to ARM longterm?

      what keeps the rest of the computer world to move to ARM longterm?

      1 vote
      1. [3]
        tindall
        Link Parent
        Software compatibility. Microsoft's value proposition is mostly about compatibility. Yes, they could do Rosetta-like emulation too, but it's not going to be perfect, and it takes time to develop....

        Software compatibility. Microsoft's value proposition is mostly about compatibility. Yes, they could do Rosetta-like emulation too, but it's not going to be perfect, and it takes time to develop.

        To be clear, I think we'll mostly ditch x86 eventually (though not entirely - remember, some modern devices still use a Z80!). I'm just not sure Apple doing so is going to cause an immediate seismic shift.

        2 votes
        1. [2]
          Weldawadyathink
          Link Parent
          Windows on arm already has a comparability layer for x86_32 to arm. They are working on x86_64, but I’m not sure when they are releasing it. Also, Apple has the ability to throw a processor that...

          Windows on arm already has a comparability layer for x86_32 to arm. They are working on x86_64, but I’m not sure when they are releasing it.

          Also, Apple has the ability to throw a processor that is strictly better in many ways than anything intel can create (at least for laptops. We will see what Apple can do for desktops). Even if Rosetta 2 isn’t very performant, the m1 can brute force through to good performance. I don’t think Qualcomm or Samsung have anything that can come close.

          1 vote
          1. tindall
            Link Parent
            Absolutely. I just down see how them doing that is going to cause a sudden flood of adoption from other laptop manufacturers.

            Absolutely. I just down see how them doing that is going to cause a sudden flood of adoption from other laptop manufacturers.

            1 vote
  2. [4]
    jcdl
    Link
    The base model MacBook Air gets a slightly cut down GPU (7-core vs 8-core) and is almost certainly a lower binned part with lower clocks (for the fanless design). Nothing unexpected or surprising...

    The base model MacBook Air gets a slightly cut down GPU (7-core vs 8-core) and is almost certainly a lower binned part with lower clocks (for the fanless design). Nothing unexpected or surprising but it would nice if Apple said how much lower the clocks are.

    The most interesting thing here is the “unified memory” design. It certainly looks like HBM, which is frankly a big deal.

    11 votes
    1. [3]
      ali
      Link Parent
      What’s that?

      HBM

      What’s that?

      2 votes
      1. tindall
        Link Parent
        High Bandwidth Memory - memory physically closer to the CPU and with a higher-width bus, for lower latency and higher throughput. It's essentially impossible to make it modular, and having it can...

        High Bandwidth Memory - memory physically closer to the CPU and with a higher-width bus, for lower latency and higher throughput. It's essentially impossible to make it modular, and having it can make up for a lot of deficiencies in a CPU architecture.

        7 votes
      2. jcdl
        Link Parent
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Bandwidth_Memory I don't know if it has been confirmed that Apple is using HBM instead of more standard DDR4 that just happens to be close to the CPU, so this is...

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

        I don't know if it has been confirmed that Apple is using HBM instead of more standard DDR4 that just happens to be close to the CPU, so this is just speculation on my part.

        5 votes
  3. [3]
    emdash
    Link
    This is about what I expected, right down to the name of the chip—M1—which replaces the previously used M prefix for the motion co-processors in the A-series chips. Eventually those were...

    This is about what I expected, right down to the name of the chip—M1—which replaces the previously used M prefix for the motion co-processors in the A-series chips. Eventually those were integrated into the die of the A-series, but you have to wonder whether Apple realised they'd made a slight boo-boo right around the time they internally decided to head towards ARM-based Macs by using the M prefix on something so dull as a motion chip in a phone!

    I'm shocked about the lack of product segmentation here, both between individual product lines and the series of notebooks themselves. Take the MacBook Air for example: there's some binning going on in that lineup with the 7 core versus 8 core GPU, but it doesn't seem like enough of a differentiator to force people to upgrade? That's a lot of binned chips. Then there's the MacBook Pro 13", with its "integrated" graphics and the exact same chip as the MacBook Air—except in this instance, it's actively-cooled. You just have to "know that", I guess? And infer that you're going to get better sustained performance from the actively-cooled model.

    My question is how is that any more obvious that just providing maximum clock speeds? Apple's rapidly encroaching in on the territory where they're losing the ability to differentiate their products easily because they're so determined to obfuscate technical specifications. They had this occur with the iPhone's this year, for example. Because they refuse to discuss RAM in their phones, you wouldn't know that the iPhone 12 has 4GB, and the iPhone 12 Pro has 6GB. The entirety of the differentiation came down to, essentially, camera features and materials.

    I both understand it and I don't. On one hand, yes, sure, you don't need to know how your computer works, it's there to do work—but it's not entirely a hermetically sealed abstraction. We want that information to be able to make informed decisions around our purchases. It's like Tesla removing the kWh ratings from their vehicles and dropping back to "standard range" and "long range". Frustrating and irritating. There isn't really an issue for product differentiation around the Mac mini here, because the Mac mini is its own class of consumer desktop, and its own unique form factor. That isn't true for the MacBook, which are all—fundamentally—laptops at the end of the day.

    I don't understand the constant gripes about not updating the design or around repairability here (the latter is especially true given Apple's stated goals of using recycled materials and creating an end-to-end recycling loop to accept old devices as a way of making new ones). There was clearly a conscious choice to ensure people feel at home with their existing designs, and knowing that these new devices with new internal architectures will just work, although one can't help but lament the continued existence of that fucking Touch Bar.

    10 votes
    1. skybrian
      Link Parent
      If you don't know how it works, I think you're just supposed to assume that a Pro goes faster than an Air.

      If you don't know how it works, I think you're just supposed to assume that a Pro goes faster than an Air.

      5 votes
    2. babypuncher
      Link Parent
      The differentiator between the Air and the Pro (besides the binning) is the presence of active cooling. The Pro will be much more suited for consistent workloads like video rendering, machine...

      The differentiator between the Air and the Pro (besides the binning) is the presence of active cooling. The Pro will be much more suited for consistent workloads like video rendering, machine learning, and video games. The Air might be able to hold high clock speeds for a minute or two but then it will throttle back down to base clocks as the thermal solution won't be able to keep up.

      If your use cases are reliant on quick bursts rather than sustained workloads, then the Air definitely seems like the better value.

      3 votes
  4. [9]
    stu2b50
    (edited )
    Link
    Design - a little disappointed that it's literally the exact same chassis, but to be honest there wasn't any reason to expect this year to be different. Still has the largeish bezels, a 720p...

    Design - a little disappointed that it's literally the exact same chassis, but to be honest there wasn't any reason to expect this year to be different. Still has the largeish bezels, a 720p webcam, and no touch screen. I think next year's the year for an actual redesign.

    Performance - who knows, but I believe them on battery life at least. 20 hours for video watching is pretty amazing. I think that Baldur's Gate footage is pretty promising too; the minimum graphics spec for that is a GTX 780, recommended is a 1060. If that Mac Mini is between 780 and 1060 levels performance... that's actually a good deal. It would genuinely be among the high end for 13'' laptops. edit: I realized this was confusing; the Mac mini, being $700, would be a pretty solid deal for that performance; the macbook pro would have fairly high tier graphical capabilities for 13''.

    Obviously performance from these Apple presentations should be taken with several large grains of salt, so I'm excited for reviews to come out next week.

    7 votes
    1. [8]
      tindall
      Link Parent
      My biggest worry here, other than things like repairability that Apple is explicitly against, is thermal performance. These laptops are so thin, the battery fraction is so high, and the chips are...

      My biggest worry here, other than things like repairability that Apple is explicitly against, is thermal performance. These laptops are so thin, the battery fraction is so high, and the chips are so dense, that I'm really not convinced the fanless design is workable at high levels of performance like that without doing serious long-term damage to the batteries.

      1 vote
      1. [5]
        stu2b50
        Link Parent
        I'm not particularly worried, these are fundamentally beefed up iPhone chips, evidently throttled enough it's nowhere near hot enough to cause such damage.

        I'm not particularly worried, these are fundamentally beefed up iPhone chips, evidently throttled enough it's nowhere near hot enough to cause such damage.

        2 votes
        1. [4]
          tindall
          Link Parent
          Taking the same comparison as above, the GTX780 is a 150Wthermal part. The GTX 1060 is a 120Wthermal part. Let's assume Apple employs Gandalf as well as going to 5nm, and is getting that level of...

          Taking the same comparison as above, the GTX780 is a 150Wthermal part. The GTX 1060 is a 120Wthermal part. Let's assume Apple employs Gandalf as well as going to 5nm, and is getting that level of performance with 80Wthermal from the GPU. Where is that 80W, in addition to the thermal power from the CPU running all-out, going to go? No, it's going to throttle, no question.

          3 votes
          1. [3]
            stu2b50
            Link Parent
            Well, yeah, that's why they only showed BG3 on the Mini and Pro, where it does have a fan. Likely the main performance difference is that the Pro won't have any throttle at load. Also, the...

            Well, yeah, that's why they only showed BG3 on the Mini and Pro, where it does have a fan. Likely the main performance difference is that the Pro won't have any throttle at load.

            Also, the comparison to the 780's power isn't exactly fair. That's a GPU from 2013. If you just compare even Intel's latest integrated graphics to its discrete equivalent, there are extreme gains in efficiency. And according to apple, they're 2x more efficient than something.

            1. [2]
              tindall
              Link Parent
              These are all the same chip, so it's not like they're putting a lower powered GPU in the Air. You're right that it's a perk of the Pro to be able to actually use its processor, but that seems...

              These are all the same chip, so it's not like they're putting a lower powered GPU in the Air. You're right that it's a perk of the Pro to be able to actually use its processor, but that seems really silly. Maybe it's just me being old-fashioned, but I really don't think it's acceptable to pay $1000 for really nice silicon and then only be able to use it for 2 minutes at a time. I guess if the market bears it, it's alright.

              5 votes
              1. jwong
                Link Parent
                We'll have to see once it comes out, but maybe it's something akin to turboboost. Although I hate turbo boost because of the immense heat it generates -- I actually turn it off on all my laptops...

                We'll have to see once it comes out, but maybe it's something akin to turboboost. Although I hate turbo boost because of the immense heat it generates -- I actually turn it off on all my laptops (MBP 2015, 2018) so they run cooler since the boost in speed isn't really noticeable for my workloads.

      2. [2]
        Akir
        Link Parent
        That's one aspect that I'm not too incredibly worried about; with that kind of energy efficiency thermals don't tend to be much of a problem.

        That's one aspect that I'm not too incredibly worried about; with that kind of energy efficiency thermals don't tend to be much of a problem.

        1 vote
        1. tindall
          Link Parent
          But... what kind of energy efficiency? We don't have specs for that, and while they're promising a lot of battery life, that has historically come from a very large mass fraction of energy...

          But... what kind of energy efficiency? We don't have specs for that, and while they're promising a lot of battery life, that has historically come from a very large mass fraction of energy storage, deep-cycling batteries, tight control of P-states and sleep states of peripherals, efficient screens, and in many ARM devices, in-device hybrid sleep. You will not get that level of energy efficiency while gaming.

          1 vote
  5. [5]
    stu2b50
    Link
    https://www.anandtech.com/show/16226/apple-silicon-m1-a14-deep-dive/4 Anand tech coverage, much more deep into the technicals than other articles. In particular, it's truly insane that the...

    https://www.anandtech.com/show/16226/apple-silicon-m1-a14-deep-dive/4

    Anand tech coverage, much more deep into the technicals than other articles.

    In particular, it's truly insane that the iPhone's cpu is roughly equivalent in performance already to the top of the line Intel and AMD CPUs. Might see some truly spectacular numbers when the hardware comes out.

    The performance numbers of the A14 on this chart is relatively mind-blogging. If I were to release this data with the label of the A14 hidden, one would guess that the data-points came from some other x86 SKU from either AMD or Intel. The fact that the A14 currently competes with the very best top-performance designs that the x86 vendors have on the market today is just an astonishing feat.

    7 votes
    1. [4]
      tindall
      Link Parent
      This is misleading. It competes with CPUs in a similar wattage class, accounting for transistor scale and ARM having some inherent advantage in power usage. This makes it sound like it's...

      The fact that the A14 currently competes with the very best top-performance designs that the x86 vendors have on the market today is just an astonishing feat.

      This is misleading. It competes with CPUs in a similar wattage class, accounting for transistor scale and ARM having some inherent advantage in power usage. This makes it sound like it's outperforming Threadripper.

      1. [3]
        stu2b50
        Link Parent
        It's not. Look at this graph from the article, for instance https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph16226/111168.png That ain't no mobile chip. That's barely losing to the Ryzen 9 5950X, and...

        It's not. Look at this graph from the article, for instance

        https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph16226/111168.png

        That ain't no mobile chip. That's barely losing to the Ryzen 9 5950X, and beating the i9 10900k. Desktop class CPUs with 10x the power usage.

        The fact that Apple is able to achieve this in a total device power consumption of 5W including the SoC, DRAM, and regulators, versus +21W (1185G7) and 49W (5950X) package power figures, without DRAM or regulation, is absolutely mind-blowing.

        The 5W A14 seriously competes with a 50W Ryzen CPU. Hence why it's mind boggling.

        8 votes
        1. [2]
          tindall
          Link Parent
          Oh, I totally misread that. That's very impressive single core performance.

          Oh, I totally misread that. That's very impressive single core performance.

          1 vote
          1. xnaas
            Link Parent
            Yeah I didn't realize ARM single-core performance had gotten so good either. That's crazy impressive, if accurate.

            Yeah I didn't realize ARM single-core performance had gotten so good either. That's crazy impressive, if accurate.

            1 vote
  6. [3]
    stu2b50
    Link
    There are some leaked benchmarks now of the M1, which are mostly inline with what people expected (slightly better single core perf than the A14, which note is incredibly high, and multicore that...

    There are some leaked benchmarks now of the M1, which are mostly inline with what people expected (slightly better single core perf than the A14, which note is incredibly high, and multicore that is scaled up from the A14).

    But they would mean that the new Macbook Air (which was specifically the leaked benchmark) is strictly stronger in CPU in both single core and multicore than the i9 on the 16 inch MBP. Which would suddenly make the Air from a meh price/performance to probably the best price/performance laptop in the market.

    5 votes
    1. [2]
      Akir
      Link Parent
      Are these leaked benchmarks supposed to be reliable? I'm a bit skeptical at the moment because I noticed that Apple is also currently selling the equivalent Intel based MBP at a higher price. If I...

      Are these leaked benchmarks supposed to be reliable? I'm a bit skeptical at the moment because I noticed that Apple is also currently selling the equivalent Intel based MBP at a higher price. If I were Apple, I'd be trying to keep the price high if the performance is really that great.

      That being said, since the majority of software at launch is still going to be written for x86, I'm sure there's going to be a fair amount of performance penalty to negate these numbers, and perhaps that lack of confidence is why Apple doesn't want to keep the price up. Beside that, I'm sure they're making plenty of profit simply because they aren't paying the Intel tax.

      1 vote
      1. stu2b50
        Link Parent
        Not particularly, but they are about what you'd expect. The iPhone chip already performs better than the i9 10900k (yes, the desktop one) and only slight behind the Ryzen r9 5950x (yes, the 50w...

        Not particularly, but they are about what you'd expect. The iPhone chip already performs better than the i9 10900k (yes, the desktop one) and only slight behind the Ryzen r9 5950x (yes, the 50w desktop one) in single core performance, and it has about 3800 multicore score with 2 high performance cores.

        So the single core performance is slightly higher (but which would put it as the highest single core performance on any consumer CPU), and the multicore is about 2x what the iPhone chip has (since the M1 has 4 high performance cores vs 2 on the A14).


        As to price, I mean Apple needs to prove to consumers why this is a worthwhile thing to do.

        1 vote
  7. stu2b50
    Link
    Emulated benchmarks have come out, testing the M1s performance after going through Rosetta 2. https://www.macrumors.com/2020/11/15/m1-chip-emulating-x86-benchmark/ They show a predictable drop in...

    Emulated benchmarks have come out, testing the M1s performance after going through Rosetta 2.

    https://www.macrumors.com/2020/11/15/m1-chip-emulating-x86-benchmark/

    They show a predictable drop in performance, but surprisingly, they still outperform every Intel MacBook. Even when emulating x86-64. Good sign for the prospect of running all the software that hasn't been recompiled for ARM.

    5 votes
  8. [4]
    skybrian
    Link
    $700 for the Mini is fairly cheap for a desktop Mac, but Apple's tech specs aren't very useful. I will wait for an independent review.

    $700 for the Mini is fairly cheap for a desktop Mac, but Apple's tech specs aren't very useful. I will wait for an independent review.

    4 votes
    1. Akir
      Link Parent
      You know what, I've always bitched that Apple's Mac Mini pricing was always way higher than when it first came out, but if you look at inflation, this one is only about $50 more and comes with...

      You know what, I've always bitched that Apple's Mac Mini pricing was always way higher than when it first came out, but if you look at inflation, this one is only about $50 more and comes with what's supposed to be a high-end processor.

      If you believe the marketing (and I for one would be highly cautious as these are really first-generation devices), the pricing on the laptops are really not bad either. $999 is pretty choice pricing for the Air model.

      9 votes
    2. Greg
      Link Parent
      I seriously considered buying one this morning, but it's an extra £200 for 16GB RAM, which killed it for me. The almost-decade-old Mac Mini it'd be replacing already has 16GB RAM and 256GB SSD,...

      I seriously considered buying one this morning, but it's an extra £200 for 16GB RAM, which killed it for me. The almost-decade-old Mac Mini it'd be replacing already has 16GB RAM and 256GB SSD, and is honestly still a pretty great machine, it just can't drive modern displays at full resolution/refresh rate - £700 for a solid upgrade, better thermals, better connectivity, plus the nerd fun of playing around with the new architecture was pretty close to a sale for me. Pushing it up to £900 or having to take a step back on memory (again, nearly 10 year old machine) was enough for me to hold off for the moment.

      3 votes
    3. NaraVara
      Link Parent
      Yeah they talked me off the ledge with building a PC instead with the Mini announcement, but I think I’d still rather wait a year or two before making the switch. Hopefully they’ll have a much...

      Yeah they talked me off the ledge with building a PC instead with the Mini announcement, but I think I’d still rather wait a year or two before making the switch. Hopefully they’ll have a much better chip and eGPU support in the next iteration.

      Which is a shame though. I was looking forward to upgrading this year as my current iMac is getting a bit long in the tooth.

      1 vote
  9. [4]
    JXM
    Link
    Very interesting...I have high hopes for Apple Silicon. It looks interesting and I'm excited to see how they deal with some of the higher end computers (especially what they'll do with 3rd party...

    Very interesting...I have high hopes for Apple Silicon. It looks interesting and I'm excited to see how they deal with some of the higher end computers (especially what they'll do with 3rd party graphics cards). I like the ability to run iOS apps. I think that'll be a big attractor for people who own an iPhone but use a Windows PC.

    I'm also disappointed they didn't announce cellular support or touch screen support. Hopefully we'll get a major design refresh soon that adds those features.

    I do think it's a good thing they kept the external appearance the same, to help ease the transition.

    But the thing that jumps out at me is that two of the biggest issues haven't been solved by this transition:

    • RAM still starts at 8 GB on all models (even the Pros)
    • Storage starts at 256 GB on all models (again, even the Pros)

    It doesn't matter that a computer has an SSD that's two times faster if it's full within a week and you're constantly relying on external drives for storage.

    8 GB of RAM and 256 GB of storage on a $1,300 laptop is shameful. It's fine for the most basic of uses but someone who is buying a MacBook Pro probably isn't looking for something "basic". And RAM also maxes out at 16 GB, which seems like a weird step backward for a laptop who's previous version supported up to 64 GB of RAM.

    I feel like it goes in cycles with Apple where they raise their minimum specs, then they wait way too long to update the specs again. During that time, resentment and annoyance grows until a few years later when they bump up their specs. It feels like we're at the peak of that wave where they are way behind everyone else, sort of like we were for the last few years with the 16 GB iPhones. Until earlier this year, Apple was still selling laptops with 128 GB of storage.

    4 votes
    1. [3]
      stu2b50
      Link Parent
      For RAM, the X factor is that it's using shared memory, and possibly HBM for that matter. It looks like it's on the SoC itself. For normal laptops, increasing RAM is as simple as sticking more of...

      For RAM, the X factor is that it's using shared memory, and possibly HBM for that matter. It looks like it's on the SoC itself. For normal laptops, increasing RAM is as simple as sticking more of it into the motherboard. That probably isn't low latency enough to work as both ram and vram.

      Hence why you can't go >16 GB no matter how much money you throw at the configurator.

      3 votes
      1. [2]
        JXM
        Link Parent
        I get that - but the technical limitations aren't the problem of the end user. Apple has to know that eventually they'll need to make laptops with more than 16 GB of RAM. Unified memory does...

        I get that - but the technical limitations aren't the problem of the end user. Apple has to know that eventually they'll need to make laptops with more than 16 GB of RAM. Unified memory does change the equation somewhat, but like you said, it will depend on type/location.

        It's the same problem they created for themselves when they used LPDDR3 RAM and had a 16 GB RAM limit in the previous generation of laptops.

        2 votes
        1. tindall
          Link Parent
          Pretty important for my company's devs who are very much end users of Apple computers and have a ton of VMs up all the time. Along with instruction set incompatibility, this will probably push us...

          Pretty important for my company's devs who are very much end users of Apple computers and have a ton of VMs up all the time.

          Along with instruction set incompatibility, this will probably push us off of Apple entirely. Not that I'm complaining, but still.

          2 votes
  10. [11]
    teaearlgraycold
    (edited )
    Link
    I really hope this spurs a greater movement towards ARM on laptops. I want to buy an ARM linux laptop, but the only ones out there right now are very budget focused. The new macbook is very close...

    I really hope this spurs a greater movement towards ARM on laptops. I want to buy an ARM linux laptop, but the only ones out there right now are very budget focused. The new macbook is very close to what I'd want, but my ideal laptop would be more user serviceable and have ports that aren't USB type C.

    4 votes
    1. [9]
      tindall
      Link Parent
      It almost certainly won't, since this silicon is completely proprietary and can't be licensed or bought.

      It almost certainly won't, since this silicon is completely proprietary and can't be licensed or bought.

      4 votes
      1. [6]
        stu2b50
        Link Parent
        It practically already has. It's going to create market pressure, because these ARM CPUs have a killer feature that is going to make other manufacturers want them: battery life. 20 hours of...

        It practically already has. It's going to create market pressure, because these ARM CPUs have a killer feature that is going to make other manufacturers want them: battery life. 20 hours of battery life on media consumption, on a laptop that thin?

        Just impossible with current, and almost certainly future, x86-64 CPUs from Intel or AMD.

        Microsoft, for instance, has already partnered with Qualcomm to produce ARM CPUs for their own ARM based laptop/2-in-1 (https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/surface/business/surface-pro-x/processor). Now, Qualcomm is so far behind Apple it's not even funny. But, unlike x86-64, ARM actually is a very open ISC. Practically everyone has a license. They're cheap and easy to obtain.

        Once Apple proves this is a successful possibility, ARM CPUs by other companies (Samsung, for instance, which already makes the Exynos line) are going to start popping up for laptops.

        3 votes
        1. tindall
          Link Parent
          That's true, I suppose theoretically it'll exert some pressure there. We'll see, I'm skeptical of how much manufacturers are going to go in on this, at least initially. It seems premature to say...

          That's true, I suppose theoretically it'll exert some pressure there. We'll see, I'm skeptical of how much manufacturers are going to go in on this, at least initially.

          It seems premature to say it already has.

          2 votes
        2. hungariantoast
          Link Parent
          Eh, the "Intel Evo" laptops releasing in 2020 have to get at least fourteen hours of battery life to be certified, and Intel and AMD are embracing big.LITTLE-esque designs in their upcoming chips....

          and almost certainly future, x86-64 CPUs from Intel or AMD

          Eh, the "Intel Evo" laptops releasing in 2020 have to get at least fourteen hours of battery life to be certified, and Intel and AMD are embracing big.LITTLE-esque designs in their upcoming chips. Intel already released Lakefield, which was pretty good for a first generation design, and Alder Lake and Meteor Lake are going to be taking that much further. Twenty hours of battery life from Intel or AMD laptops really isn't that much of a stretch.

          And let's be honest for a second: Windows is the biggest issue for battery life on laptops these days. My Dell Chromebook 13 running Linux, with its old and degraded 5500mAh battery, can still get almost twenty-four hours of screen-on time because I've moderately tuned my software environment and the hardware.

          1 vote
        3. [3]
          skybrian
          Link Parent
          We'll see what that 20 hours really amounts to, but it seems like far more than you'd ever need? You have to sleep sometime. For most people I think this rounds to "more than enough to last all day."

          We'll see what that 20 hours really amounts to, but it seems like far more than you'd ever need? You have to sleep sometime. For most people I think this rounds to "more than enough to last all day."

          1. tindall
            Link Parent
            Or "I don't have to carry a charger on one day trips", which is a huge deal

            Or "I don't have to carry a charger on one day trips", which is a huge deal

            2 votes
          2. HoolaBoola
            Link Parent
            It's also worth considering how the battery will behave a couple years after buying. I'd want mine to hold enough charge even then.

            It's also worth considering how the battery will behave a couple years after buying. I'd want mine to hold enough charge even then.

            1 vote
      2. [2]
        teaearlgraycold
        Link Parent
        But there are plenty of other ARM chips out there

        But there are plenty of other ARM chips out there

        1. tindall
          Link Parent
          True! But they've been out there. And some laptops exist using them.

          True! But they've been out there. And some laptops exist using them.

          1 vote
    2. babypuncher
      Link Parent
      The problem right now is that Apple is the only company making ARM chips fast enough to compete with Intel in performance laptops. Qualcomm's flagship ARM SoC gets a little more than half the...

      The problem right now is that Apple is the only company making ARM chips fast enough to compete with Intel in performance laptops. Qualcomm's flagship ARM SoC gets a little more than half the single-core performance of the A14. The M1 is likely significantly faster, needing active cooling in the new MacBook Pro.

      1 vote
  11. [4]
    ohyran
    Link
    Is this a good or bad thing for people who like Macs? I always feel super confused myself as that brand of computers never felt like it was for me and the cost of them is kind of high (plus from...

    Is this a good or bad thing for people who like Macs? I always feel super confused myself as that brand of computers never felt like it was for me and the cost of them is kind of high (plus from what I understand its messy to reinstall them now with the new chip) - AND I've always wanted someone who likes Apple PC's to go "Yup this is a good thing" or "This is generally bad" and just interpret it in to shorthand

    1 vote
    1. [2]
      tindall
      Link Parent
      Definitely positive for most people. If you already replace your computer every few years and don't use any specialized software or need lots of RAM, this means better battery life and cheaper...

      Definitely positive for most people. If you already replace your computer every few years and don't use any specialized software or need lots of RAM, this means better battery life and cheaper Macs. Maybe. For now they're recouping R&D costs.

      3 votes
      1. ohyran
        Link Parent
        Cheers! Its news I want to have a loose grasp of, but really don't understand you know so helping clearing it out is good.

        Cheers! Its news I want to have a loose grasp of, but really don't understand you know so helping clearing it out is good.

        1 vote
    2. stu2b50
      Link Parent
      I would say... good thing. As the average mac user, your new computer is going to be faster, it's going to have waay longer battery life (17-20 hours), and it's evidently going to be the same...

      I would say... good thing. As the average mac user, your new computer is going to be faster, it's going to have waay longer battery life (17-20 hours), and it's evidently going to be the same price.

      There's really not much downside for the vast majority of mac users.

      2 votes
  12. [47]
    nothis
    Link
    This turns Macs into glorified iPads, which is probably exactly how Apple thinks of them. I remember how happy I was when Apple introduced Intel Macs. Suddenly, Macs were just PCs with a better...

    This turns Macs into glorified iPads, which is probably exactly how Apple thinks of them. I remember how happy I was when Apple introduced Intel Macs. Suddenly, Macs were just PCs with a better operating system. Now they’re back on track to lock you into Apple world completely, even desktop/laptop models. I’m sure their endgame plans for all software to be locked into the AppStore, too. That Chip sure has a lot of “security” features.

    Some else make a good desktop OS, please? Anyone who isn’t google?

    1. [4]
      emdash
      Link Parent
      I don't see how this is true, and it seems like kind of an overreaction. If anything, I was underwhelmed by the amount of changes made here. I also don't see how an internal architecture change...

      This turns Macs into glorified iPads

      I don't see how this is true, and it seems like kind of an overreaction. If anything, I was underwhelmed by the amount of changes made here. I also don't see how an internal architecture change that really isn't accessible to end users "locks you into the Apple world completely"? You couldn't service the MacBook RAM or replace the Intel chips in previous models, what's changed here?

      That Chip sure has a lot of “security” features.

      MacOS BS still ships with all of the same security features as Intel-derived macOS releases of years past. You can still disable and enable SIP. You can still boot into various recovery modes. Is there something fundamental you're expecting not to work in this new system that did work in previous models?

      There's lots to lament about this transition but honestly this seems like the wrong area to be pinging Apple on.

      10 votes
      1. [3]
        nothis
        (edited )
        Link Parent
        Well, ACKCHYUALLY, you could replace the RAM in Intel MacBooks up until some point (I remember doing that, you had to screw off the back plate and literally slide it in, it was plug and play). So...

        You couldn't service the MacBook RAM or replace the Intel chips in previous models, what's changed here?

        Well, ACKCHYUALLY, you could replace the RAM in Intel MacBooks up until some point (I remember doing that, you had to screw off the back plate and literally slide it in, it was plug and play). So yes, this started before their move to ARM but it's kinda the trend line I'm talking about. It seems like they're closing the Mac ecosystem down, gradually and have been doing so for years.

        Also my iPad comment – while definitely referring to the trend more so than the current state – is based on the recent macOS changes which, for example, allow iOS apps to run on Mac and changed the UI slightly to fit the iOS design better (which makes little sense for a mouse-based UI, btw).

        People don't like being pessimistic about things that have no alternative and I get that. But I certainly don't feel like I'm being delusional or overreacting when pointing out this trend. Apple clearly hated how Macs weren't integrated enough with their iOS cash cows and plan to close that gap. I don't really see a scenario in which this doesn't end up with a merger of macOS and iPadOS over the next 10 years or so. And the question then is: Among the incompatible parts, which side do they choose?

        1. [2]
          ali
          Link Parent
          do you mean MacOS and iOS? because iOS and iPadOS literally split last year. And apple emphasised that they're not planning to merge both OS. I mean I also don't see them ever locking MacOS down...

          . I don't really see a scenario in which this doesn't end up with a merger of iOS and iPadOS over the next 10 years or so

          do you mean MacOS and iOS? because iOS and iPadOS literally split last year. And apple emphasised that they're not planning to merge both OS. I mean I also don't see them ever locking MacOS down like iOS, this would just move developers away from the platform for sure...

          1 vote
          1. nothis
            Link Parent
            Yes, sorry.

            do you mean MacOS and iOS?

            Yes, sorry.

    2. [26]
      onyxleopard
      Link Parent
      This line of argument has been around for at least as long as iOS. Apple has had ~10 years now to “lock down” macOS like iOS. If they were going to do it, why wait a decade? Federighi already...

      Now they’re back on track to lock you into Apple world completely, even desktop/laptop models.

      This line of argument has been around for at least as long as iOS. Apple has had ~10 years now to “lock down” macOS like iOS. If they were going to do it, why wait a decade? Federighi already mentioned at WWDC that Big Sur on ASi will not be any more locked down than on Intel. The only real big lock down is that non Apple OSes will have to be virtualized. If you are running macOS, it’s still macOS. Install your software from the App Store, from .pkgs, from binaries off homebrew, or compile from source. Same old same old.

      4 votes
      1. [15]
        tindall
        Link Parent
        You say that, but they are getting progressively stricter about non-Apple-blessed software over time. The current UI is very much designed to dissuade people from running anything not Apple-approved.

        You say that, but they are getting progressively stricter about non-Apple-blessed software over time. The current UI is very much designed to dissuade people from running anything not Apple-approved.

        8 votes
        1. [8]
          NoblePath
          Link Parent
          This is only really true for non-power users, and is a great security feature for grandma. Every barrier can be disabled, with the intricacy and steps required proportional to the security risk....

          This is only really true for non-power users, and is a great security feature for grandma. Every barrier can be disabled, with the intricacy and steps required proportional to the security risk. Having the barriers in place make it harder for grandma to install malware.

          5 votes
          1. [7]
            tindall
            Link Parent
            Assuming anyone who doesn't give you a hundred dollars a year is malware is super predatory, and all of this has a massive negative impact on free software. Apple could have done this in a way...

            Assuming anyone who doesn't give you a hundred dollars a year is malware is super predatory, and all of this has a massive negative impact on free software. Apple could have done this in a way that didn't screw over small devs and free software and they chose not to. That's their right but I think it's scummy.

            1 vote
            1. [6]
              NaraVara
              Link Parent
              Running an unsigned app is as simple as holding the option key the first time you open it. I’m really having trouble seeing the problem here. That trade off seems more than worth it.

              Running an unsigned app is as simple as holding the option key the first time you open it. I’m really having trouble seeing the problem here. That trade off seems more than worth it.

              1 vote
              1. [5]
                tindall
                Link Parent
                The second time you open it. You have to try to open it and be rejected once before that's even an option. And anyway that's not the point here - parent comment was asserting that Apple computers...

                The second time you open it. You have to try to open it and be rejected once before that's even an option. And anyway that's not the point here - parent comment was asserting that Apple computers haven't been getting more locked-down over time, and this is an example of how that's not true.

                This article explains better than I can why I say this is designed more as a barrier to open source/free software than to malware.

                Some people claim that Mac users can "just right click" to run unsigned software. But what does that mean exactly? Let's look at the user experience, in a series of screenshots.
                [...]
                I read a useful comment on Hacker News:

                I don't see it mentioned in the article, but what gets me every time is that the "right-click" trick only works the second time you try to launch the app. The first time, right-click or not, MacOS won't let you launch the app.

                In my testing on Catalina, this comment is correct. The first right click on an app will only display the first alert from my screenshots, with no Open button. The second right click will display the second alert from my screenshots, with the Open button. Also note that holding down the option key in the contextual menu makes no difference, although I seem to recall that it made a difference on earlier versions of macOS.

                The progression is clearly towards not allowing unsigned software at all. If you can still run un-blessed software on a new Mac in 2025 without disabling some large, integrated security component, I'll give you a hundred dollars.

                6 votes
                1. [4]
                  NaraVara
                  Link Parent
                  This is a slippery slope argument that is a bit far for me. The fact is that unsigned software is, as a rule, going to be less vetted and less reliable than something that has a dedicated...

                  This is a slippery slope argument that is a bit far for me. The fact is that unsigned software is, as a rule, going to be less vetted and less reliable than something that has a dedicated developer maintaining it and taking its use in the Mac environment seriously. People using such software should be wary and it should be gated behind some kind of impediment to make sure that only people who know what they’re getting into do it.

                  2 votes
                  1. [3]
                    tindall
                    Link Parent
                    Again - there are about a million ways to do this that are less predatory, less intentionally sensationalist, and less of a pain in the ass for people who do know what they're doing. The feature...

                    Again - there are about a million ways to do this that are less predatory, less intentionally sensationalist, and less of a pain in the ass for people who do know what they're doing. The feature itself is less of the issue; what bothers me is that Apple chose an approach that optimizes for FUD and doubles as a good way to make volunteer-developed software essentially irrelevant on the Mac unless it's backed by a large corporation or non-profit.

                    3 votes
                    1. [2]
                      NaraVara
                      Link Parent
                      I don’t know what’s “predatory” about pointing out “this app may be insecure” when you’re opening an app that hasn’t gone through the hoops to verify that it’s not insecure. It’s a statement of...

                      I don’t know what’s “predatory” about pointing out “this app may be insecure” when you’re opening an app that hasn’t gone through the hoops to verify that it’s not insecure.

                      It’s a statement of fact, not sensationalism. And if you’re someone who would be scared off by that anodyne message, you’re not someone who should be installing random apps off the internet in the first place. Seems like it’s working as intended to me. And, again, holding down the option key while opening the app one time ever is hardly a “pain in the ass.”

                      1. tindall
                        Link Parent
                        Let's walk through some scenarios. Scenario 1: I make a piece of software for my own use and release it on my personal website as open source. This software is designed for Linux users, but my...
                        • Exemplary

                        Let's walk through some scenarios.

                        Scenario 1: I make a piece of software for my own use and release it on my personal website as open source. This software is designed for Linux users, but my small but dedicated community of users convinces me - and maybe helps me - to port it to Windows and Mac OS. The software is useful, but not a smash hit; think something like MTMR, but more niche. Not something only techies would want to use.

                        The user flow on Mac OS is shit. Someone downloads my software, double-clicks to run it, and the first action they're given is to throw it in the trash. If the user survives that step - remember, you lose a percentage at every click - then have to somehow discover that the right flow is to right-click (an uncommon operation for many Mac users) and click Open, an option which wasn't available before they tried to run it at first. They then have to make it through yet another scarebox.

                        Oh but Nora! It's so easy to fix! Just give Apple a hundred dollars a year in perpetuity. That's fine for commercial software, but not something I made as a hobby. The result is I give up on those users, or maybe on Mac OS as a platform. Not good for anyone.

                        Scenario 2: I am offline and writing shell scripts. I cannot run them because Gatekeeper wants to reach out to its server. Currently, on Catalina, I either have to disable Gatekeeper or go online if I want to do that. What if I'm on a train or airplane? Is it really reasonable to expect me to disable the entire Gatekeeper system, a legitimately useful security measure, in order to do this?

                        Scenario 3: I'm a regular Mac OS Catalina user who wants to upgrade to Big Sur. The Gatekeeper server is overloaded. Upgrading to Big Sur requires running an unsigned component, or in an environment where the certificate store is being rebuilt (we're not sure which, yet). My upgrade fails. The "correct" solution is to put an entry in my hosts file. No regular user will do this.

                        I would ask that you recognize: I am not saying Gatekeeper is a bad idea. I am not speaking from a place of ignorance or malice. I am talking about problems I personally have in my day-to-day life on my work MacBook (I write shell scripts a lot!) and when supporting other Mac users. Nor am I saying Apple is under any obligation to serve my use case, support developers who don't give them money, or give a shit about anyone who isn't a stereotypical "just regular guy". What I am saying is that they have materially made steps away from general purpose computing in the last ten years, which is what the original exchange in this thread was about.

                        6 votes
        2. [6]
          onyxleopard
          Link Parent
          Can you name me a software that is not “Apple-approved” that was developed for macOS that you had trouble running? I have been using macOS as a daily driver since 10.4. I’ve never had an issue. If...

          The current UI is very much designed to dissuade people from running anything not Apple-approved.

          Can you name me a software that is not “Apple-approved” that was developed for macOS that you had trouble running? I have been using macOS as a daily driver since 10.4. I’ve never had an issue. If you want to go muck about in the system with SIP disabled, that’s one thing. But, just running stuff as a normal user or a developer is really painless in my experience. Hell, if anything, the maturity and stability of the macOS platform has only seen increased software support over time in my experience. Tons of software that might have been Linux only 15 years ago is now easily accessible on macOS.

          1 vote
          1. [5]
            tindall
            Link Parent
            Yes, I can. Proprietary resident configuration software for a keyboard I have, two open source screen recording utilities that I tried (of which one, LICEcap, I still use), QMK Toolbox, Pass for...

            Yes, I can. Proprietary resident configuration software for a keyboard I have, two open source screen recording utilities that I tried (of which one, LICEcap, I still use), QMK Toolbox, Pass for MacOS, and others. None malicious. Gatekeeper also interferes with some very common software patterns in the UNIX world, as I've mentioned before.

            I'm glad you haven't had this issue but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

            5 votes
            1. [4]
              onyxleopard
              Link Parent
              How is the ASi transition going to change anything on this front, though? If you are already having issues with legacy apps/kexts that are not signed, IMO that is on the developer of that...

              How is the ASi transition going to change anything on this front, though? If you are already having issues with legacy apps/kexts that are not signed, IMO that is on the developer of that software. I don’t see how it’s Apple’s fault you are reliant on abandonware. And I don’t see how the M1 changes this situation (for better or worse).

              1. [3]
                tindall
                Link Parent
                This is unnecessarily mean and aggressive. Not wanting to give Apple a hundred dollars a year so that people can use your free software does not make it abandonware, and I think you know that. It...

                I don’t see how it’s Apple’s fault you are reliant on abandonware.

                This is unnecessarily mean and aggressive. Not wanting to give Apple a hundred dollars a year so that people can use your free software does not make it abandonware, and I think you know that.

                And I don’t see how the M1 changes this situation (for better or worse).

                It doesn't, beyond cross-compilation always being a nightmare. I mentioned it because you said:

                This line of argument has been around for at least as long as iOS. Apple has had ~10 years now to “lock down” macOS like iOS. If they were going to do it, why wait a decade?

                This is an example of slowly making things more locked down over time.

                12 votes
                1. [2]
                  onyxleopard
                  Link Parent
                  Sorry, I really didn’t mean to be malicious! You seem heavily emotionally invested in this so I apologize if what I said came off as mean. What I’m trying to say is that, if developers need to...

                  This is unnecessarily mean and aggressive. Not wanting to give Apple a hundred dollars a year so that people can use your free software does not make it abandonware, and I think you know that.

                  Sorry, I really didn’t mean to be malicious! You seem heavily emotionally invested in this so I apologize if what I said came off as mean. What I’m trying to say is that, if developers need to abandon macOS because of Apple’s developer program costs, then the users of that software should move away from Apple’s platform. This is true of any software—if the developer stops supporting it on your platform, then you need to either 1) find an alternative software or 2) get off that platform.

                  This is an example of slowly making things more locked down over time.

                  But it’s not locked down for users. It’s locked down for developers unwilling to sign their apps for whatever reason. If you want a truly open system, you never would consider Apple platforms to begin with. I’m trying to understand where you’re coming from, but I just am having trouble because you seem to have strange expectations about Apple and how they operate.

                  5 votes
                  1. tindall
                    Link Parent
                    Yeah. I don't like it, and am invested in it emotionally, because it could be so much better. If I had my way, I simply wouldn't use Mac OS. But yet, whenever I talk about things not being...

                    Yeah. I don't like it, and am invested in it emotionally, because it could be so much better.

                    If I had my way, I simply wouldn't use Mac OS. But yet, whenever I talk about things not being available on my platform of choice, or about Apple making Linux less useful on their hardware, people say the same thing; "that's not their fault, that's on you for not using Mac OS". Maybe the moral of the story is that I'm just fucked, but I kind of wish that weren't true.

                    5 votes
      2. [10]
        nothis
        Link Parent
        Tell me they haven't spent the last 10 years moving exactly in that direction.

        Tell me they haven't spent the last 10 years moving exactly in that direction.

        2 votes
        1. [9]
          onyxleopard
          Link Parent
          I’m telling you that they haven’t. If you bought a Mac in the past 10 years and it was within Apple’s support window for software and hardware and you kept up with OS updates and the software you...

          I’m telling you that they haven’t. If you bought a Mac in the past 10 years and it was within Apple’s support window for software and hardware and you kept up with OS updates and the software you used, I still contend that there was no appreciable “locking down”. If you were a developer for macOS and did not keep up with Apple, that’s not true. But that has never been true of developers for Apple platforms. So, I don’t see this as a real sea change. Just an inevitable reinforcement of the walls of their walled garden.

          1 vote
          1. [8]
            tindall
            Link Parent
            I guess we fundamentally disagree about what a user should be allowed to do. I think that computers should be easy to program as well as easy to install proprietary programs on.

            I guess we fundamentally disagree about what a user should be allowed to do. I think that computers should be easy to program as well as easy to install proprietary programs on.

            2 votes
            1. [7]
              onyxleopard
              Link Parent
              macOS is easy to program for and easy to install programs on. What is not easy (and is getting harder to do on all proprietary platforms, industry wide, not just macOS) is installing arbitrary...

              macOS is easy to program for and easy to install programs on. What is not easy (and is getting harder to do on all proprietary platforms, industry wide, not just macOS) is installing arbitrary programs from sources that the platform nor the user trust.

              1. [6]
                tindall
                Link Parent
                As I've said about a million times: there are designs that fulfill the same security goal, without also making it difficult for students, open source projects, and small developers to get...

                As I've said about a million times: there are designs that fulfill the same security goal, without also making it difficult for students, open source projects, and small developers to get adoption. What "regular user" is going to use software that pops up a warning from Apple telling me it's malware? Vanishingly few people.

                installing arbitrary programs from sources that the platform nor the user trust.

                No, in this scenario the user does trust that source. This is a critical distinction.

                5 votes
                1. [5]
                  onyxleopard
                  Link Parent
                  If the user does trust the source (but Apple doesn’t) then the user can still get through Gatekeeper, they just have to do a couple extra keystrokes/clicks. I don’t see how protecting those users...

                  No, in this scenario the user does trust that source. This is a critical distinction.

                  If the user does trust the source (but Apple doesn’t) then the user can still get through Gatekeeper, they just have to do a couple extra keystrokes/clicks. I don’t see how protecting those users who don’t know how to protect themselves by default while maintaining the flexibility for power users to run untrusted software is so draconian that we have to resort to hyperbole about macOS being “locked down like iOS”. On iOS, I’d have to do a lot more to side load apps to get around Apple’s approval process on the App Store. It’s not even close.

                  1. [4]
                    tindall
                    Link Parent
                    The argument wasn't "MacOS is as locked down as iOS". You said Apple was not moving in a direction of having more control over what software people ran on Mac OS and this is an example of them...

                    The argument wasn't "MacOS is as locked down as iOS". You said Apple was not moving in a direction of having more control over what software people ran on Mac OS and this is an example of them doing that.

                    1 vote
                    1. [3]
                      onyxleopard
                      Link Parent
                      The original claim was: This isn’t true. If you want to believe that Apple adding security features to macOS somehow turns it into iOS, or that Apple was somehow waiting 10 years to pull some...

                      The original claim was:

                      This turns Macs into glorified iPads, which is probably exactly how Apple thinks of them.

                      This isn’t true. If you want to believe that Apple adding security features to macOS somehow turns it into iOS, or that Apple was somehow waiting 10 years to pull some malicious bait-and-switch, I can’t stop you. All I can do is try to refute these claims with reasonable evidence.

                      1. [2]
                        tindall
                        Link Parent
                        I didn't say that, and in fact pushed back on it. I think the truth is between the two viewpoints and was trying to provide evidence of it.

                        I didn't say that, and in fact pushed back on it. I think the truth is between the two viewpoints and was trying to provide evidence of it.

                        1 vote
                        1. onyxleopard
                          Link Parent
                          Fair enough. I may have assumed you agreed with the original position due to the context when it wasn’t appropriate.

                          Fair enough. I may have assumed you agreed with the original position due to the context when it wasn’t appropriate.

    3. [3]
      tindall
      Link Parent
      Have you looked at any free desktops recently? Because we've been talking about this for a decade or more, and actively working on it.

      Have you looked at any free desktops recently? Because we've been talking about this for a decade or more, and actively working on it.

      4 votes
      1. [2]
        nothis
        Link Parent
        I have... I don't feel like there's a lot of respect for UX design in free software and the task of getting that extra level of polish and compatibility seems too big for non-commercial software....

        I have... I don't feel like there's a lot of respect for UX design in free software and the task of getting that extra level of polish and compatibility seems too big for non-commercial software. I want there to be a free and open alternative so bad, but I currently don't see any.

        4 votes
        1. tindall
          Link Parent
          Fair enough. You should use what works for you.

          Fair enough. You should use what works for you.

    4. [13]
      stu2b50
      Link Parent
      In what way? I'm very confused. What about personal computers is married to x86?

      This turns Macs into glorified iPads

      In what way? I'm very confused. What about personal computers is married to x86?

      1 vote
      1. [12]
        tindall
        Link Parent
        It's not so much x86 as the relative openness around it. The T2 chip did much of this, but now that Apple owns the silicon, the computers are even more vendor-purpose.

        It's not so much x86 as the relative openness around it. The T2 chip did much of this, but now that Apple owns the silicon, the computers are even more vendor-purpose.

        1 vote
        1. [11]
          stu2b50
          Link Parent
          To be honest I really don't see the difference. It's not like ARM is Apple proprietary. It's less proprietary, even, than x86-64 considering all of 2 companies have a license for that. And it's...

          To be honest I really don't see the difference. It's not like ARM is Apple proprietary. It's less proprietary, even, than x86-64 considering all of 2 companies have a license for that. And it's not like you can run other x86 software without recompilation on MacOS, since the system calls, kernels, and so forth are already different. Software that does run without recompilation (i.e Java, good ol' Electron apps, other things that have their own runtime, etc) will do the same on ARM.

          What changes? Nothing stopped Apple from disallowing third party apps, that's a software thing. And they didn't for intel, maybe they will in the future, but they could've done that anyway.

          4 votes
          1. [9]
            tindall
            Link Parent
            Well, for one, the M1 almost certainly has a lot of on-chip proprietary peripherals. That means you now can't run Mac OS elsewhere, even in breach of TOS, which sucks. And you can't run non-Apple...

            Well, for one, the M1 almost certainly has a lot of on-chip proprietary peripherals. That means you now can't run Mac OS elsewhere, even in breach of TOS, which sucks. And you can't run non-Apple OSes on Apple Silicon unless they're uncharacteristically generous with documentation. That's a huge deal for me.

            2 votes
            1. [3]
              stu2b50
              Link Parent
              While the loss of bootcamp is sad for developers, with Windows also pushing for ARM I wouldn't be that surprised if we saw bootcamp for windows back in the future. But to be frank, this is...

              While the loss of bootcamp is sad for developers, with Windows also pushing for ARM I wouldn't be that surprised if we saw bootcamp for windows back in the future.

              But to be frank, this is extremely niche. If you're buying Apple hardware to run another OS... It's probably not the most efficient way to do things.

              Neither of these make the Mac "just a glorified iPad". Boot camp and hackintoshes don't define the Mac "experience"... Like at all considering the latter is explicitly not on a Mac to begin with

              4 votes
              1. [2]
                NoblePath
                Link Parent
                Well, bootcamp kinda did. That’s what made the mac so sexy in the time of the rise of the geeks. Even if you were never using it, you had a sense of freedom knowing it was there. From a marketing...

                Well, bootcamp kinda did. That’s what made the mac so sexy in the time of the rise of the geeks. Even if you were never using it, you had a sense of freedom knowing it was there.

                From a marketing perspective, causing nerdy influencers to get vocal about how awesome it was really raised the mac’s profile among the general public.

                1 vote
                1. tindall
                  Link Parent
                  This is basically a big EEE scheme, really. Embrace the PC architecture, Extend it with a proprietary UNIX, and then Extinguish your user's ability to use anything except your proprietary UNIX....

                  This is basically a big EEE scheme, really. Embrace the PC architecture, Extend it with a proprietary UNIX, and then Extinguish your user's ability to use anything except your proprietary UNIX. Embrace Extended Lock-in, maybe.

                  4 votes
            2. [5]
              emdash
              Link Parent
              For the majority of the market, I fail to see how any of this is relevant. Only an extraordinarily tiny fraction of people—I cannot emphasise how tiny—care about any of this. Most people just want...

              For the majority of the market, I fail to see how any of this is relevant. Only an extraordinarily tiny fraction of people—I cannot emphasise how tiny—care about any of this. Most people just want to get on with their lives and create, work, and do their job.

              Most people who care about "open" and "free" aren't in the Apple ecosystem anyway. So why is there always hand-wringing/concern trolling about this sort of stuff when Apple makes a change that—let's be honest—probably doesn't have any meaningful end-user effects?

              3 votes
              1. [3]
                Whom
                Link Parent
                This is a strange point to make. Of course we're responding to how it fits our own needs, not making a judgment for if it impacts enough users for it to be a bad business decision or whatever.

                This is a strange point to make. Of course we're responding to how it fits our own needs, not making a judgment for if it impacts enough users for it to be a bad business decision or whatever.

                8 votes
                1. [2]
                  emdash
                  Link Parent
                  Why is it strange? It's not bizarre at all to discuss whether there's merits to concerns being raised about a product especially if you're not part of the target market. Of course you're allowed...

                  Why is it strange? It's not bizarre at all to discuss whether there's merits to concerns being raised about a product especially if you're not part of the target market. Of course you're allowed to make judgements on them—although usually such judgements wear thin on Apple enthusiasts, there's nothing quite like an Android phone owner telling us why iPhones are bad for the trillionth time—just as I'm allowed to rebuke or question the validity of a judgement because my perception is that such judgement isn't really valid considering the intended purpose of the product.

                  1 vote
                  1. tindall
                    Link Parent
                    I'm not telling you not to use Apple products. I'm expressing my reaction to decisions Apple has made and their impact on my life, personally and professionally. I don't really see how that's like...

                    I'm not telling you not to use Apple products. I'm expressing my reaction to decisions Apple has made and their impact on my life, personally and professionally. I don't really see how that's like "an Android phone owner telling us why iPhones are bad for the trillionth time".

                    7 votes
              2. tindall
                Link Parent
                (Sorry for the previous somewhat snarky response.) I care about this because it affects me and people I care about. I use a Mac at work; people I know use Macs. Some of these people, in the past,...

                (Sorry for the previous somewhat snarky response.)

                I care about this because it affects me and people I care about. I use a Mac at work; people I know use Macs. Some of these people, in the past, have expressed displeasure with the way Mac OS works; some of them have had issues with newer Mac OS versions on their 2013-vintage Macbook Airs. These people are currently having great success with Linux on their Apple hardware.

                Yes. Some people don't care about this. I do, because I've seen it be important to people that I care about. It's saved them tons of money, since they didn't have to buy a new machine to get away from things that didn't work or that they didn't like. So I don't really appreciate being told I'm concern trolling or uselessly hand-wringing when I'm absolutely going to see negative effects from this on myself and people I care about. I already do, from the T2.

                5 votes
          2. hhh
            Link Parent
            technically 3. VIA has one too. sorry

            all of 2

            technically 3. VIA has one too.
            sorry

            1 vote
  13. NoblePath
    Link
    Itt-even tildes, and myself included, are not immune to the apple pc wars... Good clean fun compared to the recent political actions.

    Itt-even tildes, and myself included, are not immune to the apple pc wars...

    Good clean fun compared to the recent political actions.

    9 votes