The Intel models are the way to go. Can run Windows if you need to and apps should just work whereas it’ll take time for some developers to make ARM versions of their apps if they do at all.
Intel apps still run on M1’s through Rosetta and in many cases still faster.The Intel models are the way to go. Can run Windows if you need to and apps should just work whereas it’ll take time for some developers to make ARM versions of their apps if they do at all.
Given these are different markets I'm not sure it's really like that. Apple isn't going to weigh Intel vs AS. And I doubt PC manufactures are worried about Apple. To be honest, I'd think they are more worried about people buying ANY PCs at this point.
just my 2 cents.
Rosetta is no solution for everything that uses JIT (Just in Time Compilation), which is a large part of today's software. The software is first compiled to Intel-code and than by Rosetta to ARM-Code. At least most software developers need Java, Javascript etc. and for these people the M1-Macs are useless before there is native support for this kind of software. And look at the software, which is available vie homebrew. A lot will currently not run on M1. And as long Apple doesn't get involved in all those projects, it will take in many cases at least until summer.Intel apps still run on M1’s through Rosetta and in many cases still faster.
Isn't the concept of JIT that software is compiled directly into the platform's native machinecode? I can't see any reason why you would use Rosetta for that. When there's a JIT compiler in the M1 version of Big Sur, which I'm sure is available one way or the other, the Java or JavaScript code will be compiled directly to M1 and not through the Intel -> M1 route.Rosetta is no solution for everything that uses JIT (Just in Time Compilation), which is a large part of today's software. The software is first compiled to Intel-code and than by Rosetta to ARM-Code. At least most software developers need Java, Javascript etc. and for these people the M1-Macs are useless before there is native support for this kind of software. And look at the software, which is available vie homebrew. A lot will currently not run on M1. And as long Apple doesn't get involved in all those projects, it will take in many cases at least until summer.
Isn't the concept of JIT that software is compiled directly into the platform's native machinecode? I can't see any reason why you would use Rosetta for that. When there's a JIT compiler in the M1 version of Big Sur, which I'm sure is available one way or the other, the Java or JavaScript code will be compiled directly to M1 and not through the Intel -> M1 route.
Even if these native compilers are not available at the moment, its just a matter of time before they are. It would be a very temporary problem.
The beige Mac Classic circa 1991 I used in college went on to live in my uncle's printing business for the next decade serving its purpose dedicated to printing labels.The one thing that really turns me off about the M1 though, is that when Apple drops OS support for the model, it’s done. In contrast, my 2011 MBA, discontinued by Apple years ago, lives on like a champ running latest Windows and Linux OSes.
My understanding is that it will only be able to run ARM Windows, which is super limited app-wise. And since it’s not actually sold right now, you’d need to have an ARM Windows machine to convert to a VM.
Microsoft is definitely going to have to make Windows on ARM a thing. When you consider that Windows competes as a platform to run on anything for any purpose, it's only going to make sense that ARM components will be all over the world with IoT, alone. ATMs, cash registers, security cams, dedicated machinery for industry and the medical world. In my own experience in a hospital, there are lots of embedded systems which run a split between boutique Linux platforms and Windows.And currently there is only 1 Windows machine running on ARM: The Surface Pro X.
Simple reason, drivers. Apple didn't write them so they aren't available. Nothing to do with the platform."...For whatever reason, the Apple Silicon machine isn't compatible with external GPUs, including the Blackmagic eGPU that Apple has promoted alongside other Macs and that is available through the online store. That means the M1 MacBook has to rely on its own built-in GPU cores to supply graphics power, which could be a deal-breaker for some..."
cmon aapl no egpu support---ugh
Software is already the biggest roadblock on the intel macs too.. I own a Mac Pro from 2019 and while for example davinci resolve and final cut are crazy optimized and it through all sorts of videos like butter, Adobe premiere is a pain to work with! Just simply too old legacy code that gets dragged along and never being rewritten nor properly optimized. Really interesting what Adobe will do with these m1 macs... will they react or just disappear?True enough. I'm really hoping the crazy performance numbers inspire developers to put in the work to get running natively on M1. Software at this point is the biggest roadblock for me, as it will be for a lot of people. PowerPC was pretty good, clock-for-clock (at least early on), but performance was never inspiring enough to be a "reason" for devs to support the Mac. With what we're seeing of the M1 so far, that may not be the case this time around. Time will tell, I suppose.
Yeah but why is it, that when anyone says:Honestly I don't think PC makers care, they aren't going to lose much to Apple. I know it's nice to think that Apple will see amazing market share growth because of the blazing fast M1, but if as you say history is a guide, Apple will remain in roughly the exact same spot they have been in for decades.
The massive size of the Windows ecosystem, the fact that you can get a useable Windows PC for less than $400 are a part of it. The availability of upgrade parts, ability to build your own machine are another part. And not to mention games. If you are serious about gaming on a computer, the Mac just doesn't compare to what you get with a Windows computer.
I would love to see Apple get more support from developers for the M1, but honestly I just don't see it happening as you say the way Microsoft saw in the 90s.
I never said it wouldn’t succeed, as a matter of fact I specifically said that I hope it does. I just don’t think it will reduce the windows world to rubble the way some around here do.Yeah but why is it, that when anyone says:
A $1300 MacBook etc, is such-n-such, and then they go YOU CAN'T SAY it's a $1300 MacBook, because you gotta get 16GBs of RAM and 512GBs of SSD, etc.
Well I am gonna throw one back your way, YOU CAN'T SAY it's a $400 PC.
I heard this story, about oh PCs are $400, from like 2014-2019. I was like you know what I am just gonna get a $400 PC to do website tests, and programming, (this was before the NEW EDGE browser).
I went to look for a $400 PCs, couldn't FIND ONE! not ONE! then I am like wtf, ok well and then guess what?
Had to add this and that, next thing I knew I was up to $1300!! What a laughable night that was.
You keep telling these people to buy $400 PCs and those things will end up "dusty" real quick!
Then I realized, it's a FREAKIN' SCAM. But in the worst way, sure Apple has $1300 MacBooks that they use as a low-ball so that they can say "Hey we've got $1300 MacBooks," and then Education Bulk, maybe as low as $1100.
But the $400 PCs? Dude those things are the worst, that's the bottom of the bucket to say "Oh but you can get a PC as low as $400!" SCAM. Because people think they can get play a game on those? or even USE them? Like I said they will collect dust SOON.
This is because their mom's iPhone or iPad will get stuff done 10x quicker than that $400 PC.
So cut the BS with oh you can get a $400 PC, that's CRAP!
A $1300 MBA or MBP will WORK! Solidly.
And yes it's true, you HAVE to have 16GB and at least 256GB, but when you spec match and processor match, PCs and Macs with Intel chips, were, within $100-300 of each other LAPTOPS. But the PC makers always had these models that were way below Apple's lowest spec. Apple just refused to make them, not for price, just usability.
EDIT (ADD)
A little drunk but this is a funny metaphor for the new Intel or Intel+Win "world" that's out there:
It's like Jor-EL, is running around on Krypton, telling every PC guy, hey Intel Chips are long in the tooth, like they MAXED out, it's been this way for over 5 years, something big is coming! But now is the time, it's gonna end, I am telling you it's gonna end...
You get the gist.
It's like when they say, IN GENERAL, with most things in LIFE and on the planet, "And then someday there will be a new LEADER in charge, or a new TOP DOG", etc, and now is that time..."
It's just like it's freakin' over dawgs! 1968-2020 = 52 years MAN... gees
If you think about if a guy started with them in the begining at 18+52 years he's freakin 70 years old!
They DIDN'T teach the next in line the tricks needed to "re-invent" to make something pass on the legacy...
And Apple just HAD to because of circumstance, and lucked into having to.
So all in all if you're denying that the M1 is gonna succeed, YEESH
I don't think it will be supported as long as you think, and its resale won't be very good even if it is. I can't think of a good reason to buy any new Intel MacBook now...especially a 16" MacBook Pro (which isn't cheap). If I needed an Intel MacBook for a specific reason, used is probably a better option for most and will only get better as more M1 systems hit the market, driving down the price of used Intel Macs further.So with all this said...question...I am used to and much prefer a 15 inch screen...real estate and aging eyes. 13 has always seemed too small for me. I do not use an external display...so the device is really a desktop replacement. In this case, since I would like to replace my Late 2013 15 inch pro...the 16 inch seems like all I can choose. I don't "need" the power of even that, so seems like I would be fine...yes the new M1 is faster...but in day to day basic use...it really is the screen size that is what the experience is all about...for me at least. Thoughts? Seems like it should be supported for many years to come...or am I making a mistake and should just accept the smaller 13 inch screen size? Thanks
First, the new Apple Silicon Macs are such a huge leap ahead, even if you only look at Apple vs Apple products, but Apple has been stuck in the same place that every other PC maker has, with limited options for chips and having to follow the advancements, and lack thereof, of the chipmakers. That's no longer the case. Now they can advance on their own timeframe, which is clearly far outpacing other chip developers. And unlike every other chip developer, Apple isn't just making the chips. They're integrating hardware and software in a way that Microsoft can't, because each PC maker wants to be able to do their own thing, so MS has to design the software to work on the lowest common denominator. That's worked well enough for 20+ years, mainly because everyone was running chipsets that were mostly the same.That’s a nice crystal ball you have, but I disagree. You say it like you have all the answers but you didn’t address the a few things, and a few others you are wrong about.
The windows PC market gained and has massively retained the market using the exact same chips that caused apple to have problems? Do you have an explanation for that? What about the advances that AMD have brought in the last few years? How about the massive response to the new nVidia gpus? Are they selling out in seconds because the days of upgrading and building PCs are over? Plus, average people want something that works and is cheap. Low cost computers sell way more as a whole than MacBooks do. And that’s not going to change.
And you say gaming on pc is niche, umm no it isn’t. It is a huge market, all of the major pc makers have gaming machines for one reason, they sell millions of them.
The simple fact is that Windows commands approximately 78% of the OS market share. And until that changes developers aren’t going to abandon windows for the Mac. If I’m wrong in a few years I’ll admit it, but the chances of what you are saying actually happening are slim. I like apple, I have been a Mac guy since the mid 80s. I have a new air coming soon, and I’m typing this on an iPhone 12 Pro Max! But I have been around long enough to see how Microsoft won the pc wars, and this isn’t the windows killer. Sorry.
True enough about existing Intel software... But the initial Intel move encouraged a lot of developers to support the Mac, and my concern with M1 is that devs just won't do the work. It does, however, seem that Apple has made a real effort to minimize the pain of porting, so we'll see. I also wonder if seeing just how crazy these performance numbers are will inspire some on-the-fence devs to make the effort. Hope so. For me, it sounds like the main packages I use do have a plan/roadmap to get to native support, so that's cool.Software is already the biggest roadblock on the intel macs too.. I own a Mac Pro from 2019 and while for example davinci resolve and final cut are crazy optimized and it through all sorts of videos like butter, Adobe premiere is a pain to work with! Just simply too old legacy code that gets dragged along and never being rewritten nor properly optimized. Really interesting what Adobe will do with these m1 macs... will they react or just disappear?
Hey check this, Apps that were 10.5/10.6 universal, in Xcode, 13-14 years ago, you know how hard it was to make them Universal?True enough about existing Intel software... But the initial Intel move encouraged a lot of developers to support the Mac, and my concern with M1 is that devs just won't do the work. It does, however, seem that Apple has made a real effort to minimize the pain of porting, so we'll see. I also wonder if seeing just how crazy these performance numbers are will inspire some on-the-fence devs to make the effort. Hope so. For me, it sounds like the main packages I use do have a plan/roadmap to get to native support, so that's cool.