We have no idea what license Apple has, but I’m pretty sure it’s not a boilerplate license.
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.
Apple's 'M2' Next-Gen Mac Chip Enters Mass Production, Expected to Debut in Redesigned MacBooks Later This Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It’s my understanding that’s what they’ve been doing for years now.
The Apple ISA
Apple is on track to diverge from ARM and x86 to design its own proprietary instruction set. This good for the future of hardware–software co-design.
Former Apple engineer details how the magic of M1 Mac performance began 10 years ago - 9to5Mac
The first M1 Macs have been a huge big success on a number of levels and the tech industry is...
9to5mac.com
Much of this is beyond me so feel free to chime in with your assessment, I think you’re better versed than I.
Well, as I pointed out, every core on both machines were pegged during the build. The go compiler definitely parallelizes things across cores.
There is no M1x. It was naming assumption to identify Apple Silicon M family variations in the same manner that you saw A12 Bionic and A12X SoC's for iPhones and iPads as an example. Another is the A12Z in the DTK.
The problem that is pointed out is that comparing M1 to Intel is that there is less RAM that can be accessed (16 GB Max), not equivalent GPU performance and less I/O. Therefore Apple has to go to another more powerful ARM based SoC (M2) to acquire those necessary features for more powerful Macs.
I never liked where someone describes computers as being desirable based on simplicity such as you are implying. Macs already have a OS that helps users not be so computer literate to use. But since most computers are sold and used by businesses, so the 24" iMac wouldn't meet everyone's requirement. Even that 95% to 95% guess I feel is incorrect.
Fixed that for you … ;-)If the M2 is akin to the A15 its still 5nm process , but enhanced, bigger size, more transistors, with improved CPU performance & Graphics performance though more cores. All things one would utilize in performance based products like the 30/32" iMacs or 16" MacBook Pro laptops.
Agreed. There are a range of licenses that are publicly offered. What you’ve listed above matches what would be expected if they held an Architectural license. However, as I wasn’t there when it was signed (Not because of lack of WANTING to be there.It’s my understanding that’s what they’ve been doing for years now.
The Apple ISA
Apple is on track to diverge from ARM and x86 to design its own proprietary instruction set. This good for the future of hardware–software co-design.www.cs.cornell.edu
Former Apple engineer details how the magic of M1 Mac performance began 10 years ago - 9to5Mac
The first M1 Macs have been a huge big success on a number of levels and the tech industry is...
Much of this is beyond me so feel free to chime in with your assessment, I think you’re better versed than I.
) I can’t say if Apple is holding THAT license or a separate agreement that, to those outside the agreement, looks just like an Architectural license. So much so, that I’m far from the only person to have made that connection.From: https://www.anandtech.com/show/7112/the-arm-diaries-part-1-how-arms-business-model-works/3
Finally at the top of the pyramid is an ARM architecture license. Marvell, Apple and Qualcomm are some examples of the 15 companies that have this license.
Last edited:
Okay cool. Still does not explain why the 99.5% of the rest of us have to have a card slot so that you can avoid getting a hub...but granted you have no choice but to remove the card and insert it somewhere.
A15-based chips (for phone or Mac) will not be out till September or so.
If this is due in, say, July, it's A14-based.
Not sure I follow?
I know several folks who are sharp as a tack in other ways yet would be utterly lost if you tasked them with choosing the components for a desktop setup based on a Mac Mini. Further tasking them with assembling/connect said combination of mini, monitor, webcam, speakers, etc. would leave them deeply frustrated. Should something later go wrong with one of the components they would be even more lost in trying to figure out who to call on for assistance.
It is these sorts of folks who tend to find value in an AIO system such as an iMac. One source for all the stuff that's already largely "assembled". One source for assistance if something should not be working right.
I don't understand what you're trying to say in the bold text?
Last edited:
Does your dash cam actually use SD cards, or are you having to put the microSD card into an adapter first before you can insert it into your imac?
Apple won’t offer processor upgrades ever (again) for three reasons: 1 Apple lacks the diversity of CPUs to offer choices, 2. Apple’s CPUs are more akin to APUs with everything on one board—they are designed as SOCs, and 3. Apple uses hardware configurations to differentiate its platforms.
The bigger is question is this—when will Apple offer TB 4?
The reason that the 27" size worked as a AIO system was that it was close to the typical 30" PC display setup that gave you enough desktop resolution to compare a couple of word documents. It's not however adequate to someone running large spreadsheets, engineering CAD, remote administration or control over a user or lab computer with session windows. The 21" iMac was certainly not something I really cared for to recommend. Then recently companies found it was to their efficiency advantage to use computers that could drive a couple of displays (built in for a AIO and a external) so that employees could compare windowed documents on multiple screens. While I think the 24" iMac has a logical selling position for its abilities. I think its a solution for education, personal home with a screen larger then a laptop. For a lot of us, it wouldn't be adequate to replicate our work environment especially in Apple's home turf area where we have thousands of engineers, professionals working remotely. As for people that are sharp as a tack but utterly lost if you task them choosing a computer setup. I believe in educating people when helping them so that they understand the steps you took for given reasons, and don't need to contact others so often. Of course some people its irrelevant as they can't be bothered to learn.
I should also add that there are a lot that do the same using a powerful laptop driving large displays do similar work. Laptops can certainly be comparable to desktops as you know as can be referred to a AIO also
There ya go!
It's only because they've HAD to learn the specs in order to get something that works for their process.
If I'm building another PC, I want an i9 with 64 or more gigs RAM, 8 TB SSD space, and the capability to drive 5 monitors directly and 3 more over the air. I know this because the PC industry has required me to come up to speed and learn the technical jargon in order to make a good purchase.
If I'm buying an Apple M2 MBP, iMac, or Mac Pro, I just want to know if it will run Pro Tools, Logic, Cubase, Ableton, and a bajillion instances of Native Instruments plugins. And can I do all that without shutting everything down first?
I can have both conversations. But I'd really rather have the second conversation so I can pays my money and get busy with my craft.
This is what I'm saying. Apple has a juicy opportunity to completely redefine the conversation between computer and component makers, and their customers!
Right! We don't REALLY know if the expectation of "xGB RAM" is even warranted, because we're too busy applying our "legacy" Windows XP and early MacOSX knowledge to something so new that we don't know what it can do, let alone what needs or doesn't need to do that thing!
There was a comic in the 1980s called, "Mr. X". With Grendel short stories in the back. Does anybody remember those?
Yep, absolutely!
See how easy it is to fall back into our comparisons with "old" technology? You just did it. We don't know if 32 GB is right or not,but you said you'd be happy with it based on the above.
We don't know what we don't know. Can we just wait and see how the M chips wrap up and tie this off?
That's called a "loss leader". A chance to win a free ham or turkey will get a lot of people into the stores on any given day! And once you're there, you remember that you need to pick up some chicken or steaks or something...
these made-up names generally are meant to differentiate to a design based on a brand new CPU core design (M2), and a design with the same core design as M1, but more cores and other tweaks (M1X)
Your statements in bold match my assessment. The 24" iMac is aimed at the home user who for whatever reason wants an AIO desktop system rather than a laptop, with some overlap into education or similar low-intensity usage scenarios.
Sure.As for people that are sharp as a tack but utterly lost if you task them choosing a computer setup. I believe in educating people when helping them so that they understand the steps you took for given reasons, and don't need to contact others so often. Of course some people its irrelevant as they can't be bothered to learn.
IF they want to learn. As you note, there's plenty who have no interest.
Including university professors when I worked in academia. 🥸
Those who want to learn I am happy to help... while being careful about feeding stray cats since I don't want to spend all my nights doing free tech support.
You could I suppose, but I've yet to see any of the manufacturers classify laptops as AIO desktop systems in the three decades I've been in the industry.Laptops can certainly be comparable to desktops as you know as can be referred to a AIO also
Good point on the M1 Mini & iMac port reduction; I was thinking of the laptops.
One other aspect of I/O that has gotten worse is USB 3.1 support and speeds. There's another thread on this, but without doubt, USB transfer speeds via the TB3/USB-4 sockets are worse with the M1 Macs (all of 'em AFAIK). I tested 6 SSDs on my M1 Mini and they all lose between 50-200MB/s in either read or write speeds (measured with Black Magic Disk Test) compared to the same disks on an Intel Mac.
And yes, I would agree that the reduction on port numbers is an irritation on the Mini. I've just spent AU$400 to get a Caldigit TB3 dock because I don't have enough ports for my peripherals and screens. I was constantly doing the switcheroo on USB and TB3 devices. I also get back about 150MB/s write speed on my Samsung T7 by plugging it into the CalDigit dock, rather than directly into the computer. And it recognises another external USB 3.1gen2 enclosure at 10Gbps instead of 5Gps when connected directly to the computer.
You make a very good point; it is ultimately what the performance enables you to do, and not the specifications. I liked the analogy with car engines - I was surprised to learn that most Formula-1 racing cars have tiny engine capacities considering their power (1.8 or 2 liter, I think).
This tendency or counting cores/frequency/TDP or whatever is what seems to have confused the market. I recall reading posts by people who just refused to believe that a "mobile phone chip" could possibly power a performant laptop or desktop computer.
That said, the benchmarks that are run do often give some indication of actual capability, and they provide a yardstick with which to compare to "likely" performance of two systems. The waters are muddied somewhat by specialized functions that are now moving into on-chip hardware, like machine learning & video codecs. At the end of the day, we just want to see what the real-world experience is, preferably at somebody else's cost, which is why these interminable YouTube reviews are quite useful
I think he's saying that because businesses "need" more than 2 or 4 ports on the iMac, that it isn't suitable for them. However, in my experience most business use of computers hardly ever uses the ports.
1) Backups are generally done via the network and centrally managed, so no need for backup disks.
2) wired Ethernet is built into the power supply so you don't need a port on the machine.
3) The screen is already there, as are the camera, microphone and speakers. There is already a head-phone output.
So what port usage do most businesses need?
I need a minimum of five ports for: an additional monitor, wired full size keyboard, the local backup disk for my machine, at least one port for flash drive access, and I would like to have one for my phone. The new iMac is a failure on these very basic needs.
I gave this a thought as it’s an interesting point. Seeing as how the vast majority of folks at companies have been provided laptops for years (me being one of those), I’d guess a digital video out port of some kind would be riiiight on the edge between want and need.
Well, in my defence, I'm basing my assertion that I need 32GB of RAM on 5 months' experience with an M1 Mini with 16GB or RAM. We can debate whether M1 memory management is really much more efficient than the previous Intel MacOS versions (which it probably is, at least somewhat noticeably), but I doubt that there will be a huge difference between my memory requirements on the M1 and the next version.
I am typically using 5-10GB of swap with 16GB RAM in the M1 Mini, so feel that performance would be a little bit better with 32GB, which is what I have in my MBP16.
You could argue that Apple Silicon swap is super efficient and that 10GB of swap doesn't matter "in the new world". The M1 SSDs are certainly pretty fast and swap activity is barely noticeable. But it still requires lots of extra SSD activity, and that is undeniably slower than RAM.
I'm happy to be corrected if my understanding and analysis is wrong!
Nice summary. What are your thoughts on whether the next MacBook Pros will have a (suitably sized) M2, or whether they will be larger version of the current M1?