Yeah, a bit less flexibility, but that has been going away more and more previously as well (ie. pre Apple Silicon).
Based on your photo, you weren't there. Jobs did lie and mislead people about the future of PowerPC and the G5.
My first Mac was an LC. I was there long before Jobs’s return.
Howso? Do you really think he would have bothered making big hay out of a partnership with IBM if he had thought they’d never deliver a 3 GHz G5? No. He was hoping they would. Then they didn’t, so he went with plan B.
I literally had one of those, and no, it wasn’t.
OK. (What?)
I’m not sure what ”stand on the sidelines” means. Obviously, Apple won’t be supporting Intel Macs for very long. But while they still work, which they do, just, uh, use them?
I think you underestimate quite a lot of the Mac using customer base. In fact the low end has usually gone to a Windows or even Chromebook user. But it's true that the now modest M1 SoC is fine for quite a lot of people.
If they introduce new chips every year and new Macs every year, then would you hold off forever? With the parts shortages, that plan will probably be interrupted.
I think they will be considered slow things that people will hate to use but they will anyway.
I can see a lot of servers doing bitcoin mining switching to power efficient M1 Mac minis.
Why do you think this? The A15 cores in the iPhone were barely any faster than the A14 cores. The next iteration probably has the best chance for reasonably improved performance (A16 based).
LOL no man. That stuff is all done on proprietary FPGAs and similar.
Stand on the sidelines means use the Macs you already have which run on Intel chips. For the moment, they are 100% compatible with everything. The Apple Silicon prototypes (Mac Mini M1, MacBook Air M1, MacBook Pro 13", even the new 14" and 16" MBP) are just that prototypes and have issues with memory management and stability. If you don't need a new computer, now is a great time to wait. In a year or two, the software bugs will be worked out and the Apple Silicon hardware will be much more powerful.
That is CPU benchmarks, he specifically mentioned GPU so that might change things.
That's the thing, the G5 was a pretty fast chip. It just wasn't going to work well in laptops. But, neither was what Intel had until the Core series took off. I wonder how much influence Apple even had in that move?
I guess we're back to that again.
The CCP has plans to help Intel get back in the game, by taking over Taiwan, then directing all TSMC production to Chinese companies. Apple (and others) will be in big trouble, left to beg Samsung and invest in Intel.
Arizona
Arizona
TSMC says has begun construction at its Arizona chip factory site
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd (2330.TW) (TSMC) has started construction at a site in Arizona where it plans to spend $12 billion to build a computer chip factory, its chief executive said on Tuesday.www.reuters.com
I use my computer to do work and process photos and edit video, not run benchmarks. A Mac Pro Classic 12 core (I have a 3.1 GHz so it's much quieter than a 3.33 or 3.46) outruns an M1 Mac Mini handily, despite being 3x slower in single processor benchmarks and slightly slower on multi-processor benchmarks. The Radeon VII smokes any current Mac GPU. Big thanks to @tsialex and collaborators here for enabling hardware acceleration in Radeon GPU. This is why Apple won't let us have towers: so they can force us to throw away computers to upgrade GPU (which is where the action is these days with photo-video software).
Clearly you weren't around either. The Mac Pro's at the start of the Intel era were not over priced. Infact they were far better spec than you could configure a PC/Hackingtosh for. The only thing stopping the 1,1 2,1 and 3,1 Mac Pro's was Apple crippling them by claiming that they could run more recent OS's. Something which has been proven to be a joke by the various patches/mods that are currently around.
