Where does Intel say it is 10%? Analysts have pinned it at 3-5%?
Apple is 10% of the market, and previously bought only Intel chips.
Where does Intel say it is 10%? Analysts have pinned it at 3-5%?
LOL. Except that the M1 is faster than all but the fastest Intel processors, and those faster Intel processor burn 4 or 5x the power to beat M1.
And I’m sure M1 is the end of the line - the M2 coming out in August won’t be at all faster than the M1, right?
They don’t even had a non-gui Server OS for it, a must for serious servers, and Darwin is almost incomplete.C’mon Apple! Bring back Xserve on Apple Silicon! Do it!
It's not about flocking to Apple, it's about the form factors and devices Apple can make and how that affects perception of Windows devices for the manufacturers.
Let me put it this way: the new Macbook Pro's come out and, for arguments sake, pack mini LED displays along with the usual high end everything construction etc. M2 provides great performance *and* great battery life with little to no fan noise and minimal heat. This gives the likes of Dell, HP etc a massive headache. Not only does Apple have the advantage in terms of what the silicon can do it's also benefiting from lower costs for that SoC which gives it more overhead to put in new tech like that mini LED screen.
Now if you're one of the top end decision makers at Dell... how long until you start looking at what Apple are doing and wondering why you can't do the same thing? Sure you need Windows to come to the party and support it but if the third largest PC vendor came knocking on MS's door with a proposal to transition the bulk of their product stack to ARM how long would it take them to agree to support that project (properly this time)? Same for hardware manufacturers, they're not going to turn down that potential market if the investment is there.
*That's* the real danger to Intel here, the potential for Apple to show the benefits of using a SoC rather than a typical x86 CPU. And this is just the surface stuff, don't underestimate the value of having all that custom silicon in place to help with specific tasks (the obvious example right now being the image pipeline for webcams). Remember that over 75% of PC's sold in 2020 came from just five companies and the top three accounted for 62.5% (Apple 4th with around 8%). That's all it'd take, just three companies deciding there's a better way to go for a majority of their sales, and Intel could see 50% of its PC market vanish in very short order.
I doubt it.
All the reviews I have seen about windows 11 are awesome. and all the parts to the new OS are not even there yet.
Which means lots of new pc's are going to be purchased.
I'm building an AMD box.
But Still.
LOOKS LIKE WINDOWS 11 IS A SUCCESS. They say it's just like MacOs only better!
You just proved my point. Well done.you haven't seen the iMAC with an Intel I9 smoking the M1 ?? Also the Intel I9 was being throttle because of the power supply on the iMac. Go check it out on YT.
lolyou haven't seen the iMAC with an Intel I9 smoking the M1 ?? Also the Intel I9 was being throttle because of the power supply on the iMac. Go check it out on YT.
10% of the laptop market, sure. Could be even higher than that. But not 10% of Intel’s revenues, because that includes servers, where Apple has around 0%. If Intel only had the PC market this would hurt a lot more… unfortunately ARM and AMD are coming for them in the data center as well- which is a far greater threat to them then Apple will ever be.Apple is 10% of the market, and previously bought only Intel chips.
Wait a few years and we may see Microsoft offer an ARM-based version of Windows beyond their own Surface machines, then, if other PC manufacturers start offering some ARM-based machines (taking advantage of lower component costs and reduced power usage), then we may see Intel's market share fall quite a bit further.Digitimes...
It can fall no further than 10% since the mac market share is around that
Maybe it will fall also due to amd latest cpu that a lot of windows OEM took into consideration
Funny how Apple (fanboy) website always assume that CPU market is affected by Apple products.
As if AMD and Intel depend on Apple… Clearly NVIDIA is also doing perfectly fine without Apple!
Both Intel and AMD are doing greate in the x86 market!
It is also where the benefits of extremely low power consumption are so extremely clear. In a data centre, it isn't just how hot the machine runs, but how you get rid of the heat dissipated from the machines.People also likes to forget that those companies like Intel are deep into the server marke
Apple has upwards of 10% of the PC market. Of course it's going to affect the PC CPU market.
The article speculated that Intel's marketshare will be reduced to 80%.
AMD doesn’t have the ability to produce enough processors to take 10% of Intel’s marketshare, so if they drop by roughly 10%, that’s practically all Apple.But there's also the AMD factor.
If Intel's share does go down... it could be difficult to pin it solely on Apple.
AMD doesn’t have the ability to produce enough processors to take 10% of Intel’s marketshare, so if they drop by roughly 10%, that’s practically all Apple.
LOOKS LIKE WINDOWS 11 IS A SUCCESS. They say it's just like MacOs only better!
My point exactly. The major movers for Intel’s CPU shipments will be Apple and Intel, not AMD.Then there's the possibility of Intel increasing their own shipments by 10%... and the effects of Apple are nullified.
Now you see them, now you don’t! They don’t go as quickly as PS5’s, but if you’re looking for their latest just produced stuff, you’ll have to be looking for it to catch ‘em..BTW... I had no idea AMD was so constrained. I see Ryzen processors all over the front page of Newegg and the PC parts section of Amazon.
I had vowed never to buy an Apple PC again but the M1 was too tempting. Apple should allow arm based windows to run on their Mac's, I would buy another two M1 Mac mini's if the did. It's a win win for Apple and Microsoft if this happens.
Will it be able to access 1.5TB of main memory like the Xeon based Mac Pro?The first generation is expected to be similar to the current M1 chip but instead of 4 high performance cores, there will be 40 of them. And a similar boost to graphics.
Remember the M1 is already faster than the 32 core Intel Mac Pro for some operations - so it would be a significant upgrade.
It will likely also be cheaper - those high end Intel chips sell for thousands of dollars.
I remember the same comment about them keeping the ”10”. They probably are just following what Apple has done .I think windows 10 is pretty close to macOS now anyway. I used to actively hate having to use windows around the vista period and before, but now I just remember the differences and get on with it. Both do a good job of remaining largely in the background and doing what you expect them to do, and both are innovative in their own ways. Didn’t even know a windows 11 was in development - I thought they weren’t going to ever do any more whole number updates for some reason.
Let's get things straight. AMD doesn't produce anything, TSMC does. And just as AMD relies on TSMC so does Apple so if AMD can't fill that 10% hole then Apple won't be able to do it either, not in the near term anyway. It's not like they are in a better position than AMD, on 5nm TSMC has even less capacity than on 7nm.AMD doesn’t have the ability to produce enough processors to take 10% of Intel’s marketshare, so if they drop by roughly 10%, that’s practically all Apple.
I worked a contract for one of the major developers of signal and power integrity simulation software. As expected their software is mainly published in Windows but they also offer a Linux version. As far as I know the only major customer for the Linux version is Apple. Even though it runs on Linux it requires some software that emulates the Windows registry. Although the GUI on the main version of the software looks fairly modern, the GUI on the Linux version looks like Windows 95.Nah usually Windows Apps are far more advanced and mature than macOS Apps.
On Windows you can use all kind of Apps and Hardware, which makes it far more productive and flexible.
The macOS UI is fine but sadly it is becoming too iPad'ish, and macOS also has an unmaintained Unix+Tools beneath, but that's all. Beside Games, there are many "professional" Software types for Windows which never existed for macOS. Simply because it does not worth developing these Software types for macOS. macOS is fine for Office, Apple Ecosystem Software development, bit of Video editing and Music creation, and few other minor things.
But real business and productive Apps are primary being used on Windows and Linux, Software types that keeps the World running.
E.g. CATIA, SolidWorks, ProEngineer
Even the Milling Machines that Apple uses to manufacture their devices runs on Windows or Linux.
Most Animation Studio Pipelines are build on Windows and Linux.
Whole Cloud Clusters runs on Windows, Linux, FreeBSD.
Even Apples own AppStore is build on top of JAVA running on Linux.
All the AAA+ PC and Console Games are developed primary on Windows.
Medical devices runs mainly on Windows, Linux.
And there is so much more...
Not that it wouldn't be possible to run these Software on macOS, but macOS running on Apple Hardware is too inflexible, and just build for the low tech consumers.
I mean look at the Hardware that Apple offers, it's a joke, even when they used Intel as CPU.
They always offered older CPUs, older GFX, slower RAMs, etc. and all for twice the price.
With a PC and Windows you simply get more bang for your bucks.
Can’t really see much change out of £2200 for the 16 when it arrives.And yet for some strange reason the savings will not be passed on to the consumer. Oh, wait, we're the product being sold.
Not Don Draper:Most businesses would love to have a market share of 80%!