I'm running High Sierra on my Late 2009 iMac 27. And will continue to until I dispose of the system. I do not know if I will upgrade beyond Mojave for my 2014 and 2015 MacBook Pros. I'm fine with that.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
After Anti-M1 Ads, Intel Wants to Make Future Apple Silicon Chips
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm running High Sierra on my Late 2009 iMac 27. And will continue to until I dispose of the system. I do not know if I will upgrade beyond Mojave for my 2014 and 2015 MacBook Pros. I'm fine with that.
As of now M1 still uses Thunderbolt controllers. As far as I/O goes, the M1 is a 3rd generation chip for the Mac, which started in the T1 and T2 controllers—also uses separate Thunderbolt chips. If Apple is going to merge those controllers with the main processor, it would have done so already.
Even iOS devices still need separate modem chips, despite multiple generations of Apple-designed application processors.
It will hurt them because they currently have the fastest ARM processors. Qualcomm isn’t even close. Even with this Macs are a niche product. The majority of retail computer users want the cheapest possible device. They wouldn’t know the difference between a Celeron and a Xeon if they had both in their hands. This is why Chromebooks and super low end Windows laptops are sold at most big box stores. The only contradiction to that low end market is gamers and that’s another niche market with desktops.
so this means Apple will still make money by selling chips to the low end market which were never going to pay the Apple premium. So even more money for Apple.
The m1 has thunderbolt controllers ON THE SAME DIE AS THE CPU. It doesn’t use separate thunderbolt controller chips.
Apple unleashes M1
Apple today announced the biggest leap forward for the Mac with M1, the first system on a chip designed specifically for the Mac.
www.apple.com
“The M1 chip is packed with a number of powerful custom technologies, including:
...
- An Apple-designed Thunderbolt controller with support for USB 4, transfer speeds up to 40Gbps, and compatibility with more peripherals than ever.”
Die Shots of Apple's A14 Bionic & M1 SoCs Compared: Same Architecture, Different Goals
Reverse engineering analysts compare Apple's latest SoCs
”Meanwhile, the M1 also features PC-specific interfaces, such as DisplayPort and Thunderbolt/USB 4.“
Well, the smart strategy, which Apple will likely pursue, is to not respond publicly to these silly ads. But if they did, John Hodgman is probably available for ApplePay. Hodgman was always the reason those iconic and funny ads worked so well. Justin was a walk-on for the dopey Gilligan character.
Still, you gotta admit, tacky as they are, they're kind of funny in a Jr. High snappy comeback kinda way.
I'm sure the classic rhetorical come of <i>"I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I?"</i> is just around Intel's marketing corner.
Still, you gotta admit, tacky as they are, they're kind of funny in a Jr. High snappy comeback kinda way.
I'm sure the classic rhetorical come of <i>"I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I?"</i> is just around Intel's marketing corner.
Sure, currently. However that’s likely to change this November. In two years time there will be no more Intel chips in new Macs.
It would be more accurate to say majority of retail computer users want the cheapest and yet most powerful device. The M1 (and later M1x or whatever Apple calls it) Macs are aimed at that market. In term of price and power/watt the M1s kick the butt of any PC out there. The best the PC crowd can some up with are really cheap PCs that the M1 curb stomps...at less than 15W.
Apple still has to overcome the "it won't run Windows" problem. No matter how good the ARM Macs are Apple still faces an uphill battle getting people to switch to Macs.
Yeah,they screwed the pooch, why would Apple want to delay product launches, while it waits for chips? Apple is so over that crap!
What "it won't run Windows" problem? Here is a video on how to install and run Windows on an M1 Mac and one on Windows 10 x86 Emulated on M1 Mac.
As for booting natively on the M1 - what sane person would want to cut their computer's performance by about one-half? Windows for ARM runs slower natively on Microsoft's own hardware than it does under Parallels on an M1. The speed bonus Windows for ARM under Parallels on an M1 is largely due to the tight integration of the MacOS and M1 - something Windows would not have if it booted natively.
The only thing holding Windows back on the M1 is Microsoft not Apple. The reality is x86 code is a bloated mess because Microsoft has users who want to run code, such as 16-bit, that should have been put out of its misery years ago.
Last edited:
Are there that many people running windows on their Macs, or absolutely have to run windows? Compared to using windows because that’s what came on the laptop that they purchased.
You want professionally supported software in a corporate environment. You don't run Betas for production and development.
I have an M1 mini. It sits next to a big Windows desktop. The M1 performs poorly compared to the desktop for my professional programs.
Windows 10 x86 Emulated on M1 Mac is an example of a beta?! Say what? Sure it blows goats on the M1 but it shows the problem is, again, on Microsoft's end not Apple's.
Last edited:
1) Does the organization that makes QEMU professionally support it?
2) What's the Geekbench 5 on an M1 running x64 Windows? Would anyone actually want to run this or will you get far better performance with a cheap Dell desktop?
Of course it does. The Mini is an entry level Mac and poorly designed x86 software (like Windows X85 itself) blows absolute goats via catapult on the M1.
That's the problem with M1 systems. Might not be in the future but that's the current state of things. I'm not sure that M1X will be a sufficient improvement, especially since single-core performance isn't going to improve.