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.
Intel Urged to Take 'Immediate Action' Amid Threats From Apple Silicon and AMD
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
M1's are the entry level Macs. I think we all expect the next Macs that will be coming out will be much better than M1s. If Macs start to blow away existing systems (including PCs), you may see a good number of people coming over to Macs.
And the fact that the M1, which is Apple's worst processor and entry level systems, are performing even better than a $15,000 Mac Pro in some tasks makes things even more interesting. If the M1 is THAT amazing, imagine what the M* processor for the Mac Pros would be. It is crazy to even think about. 5 streams of 16K video editing?
Yes, but on some moonlit nights you can still see the ghostly outline of his Mercedes SL55 AMG parked in a handicapped spot.
I think Mac consumers, excluding corporate, have risen in the past few years based on branding alone. The transition from iOS to MacOS is not as daunting anymore
We should profile the remaining consumers that are still on PCs to determine if/how next Macs may impact them. I think performance, albeit amazing, is not as important on the totem pole compared to other things. For example, PC apps will always have the same if not more features than their MacOS counterpart.
Still he could have been around when the decission was made, if the rmbp launched in 2012 it should have been in the works a couple of years before.
Yes, but the entire thing of “people freaked and he assuaged them” is clearly made up. (Perhaps it was a reference to the Air.)
Jobs would have absolutely removed the optical drive eventually, yes. If anything, he was more radical in that regard than today’s Apple.
the point of the intermediate term buffer is that it gives them time to have a shot - especially for x86 and AMD, which I do not expect is going to anywhere soon (and again Linus agrees with me)
software is generally more entrenched and expensive to replace than hardware. and for a desktop or server computer it's almost completely moot at this point (energy use being the only benefit) - a $1000 pc desktop computer runs software i have to have and just as snappy as with an M1 laptop (i don't need/use anything that would take advantage of the specialized AS processors)
Would love to enjoy the benefits of this technology for my laptop, but there's like 5 reasons my businesses are going to continue to put up with the competitive disadvantage of those products.
Last edited:
Yes apple is doing great in the new markets it created and will certainly grow in the consumer computer markets particularly with well heeled customers as you mentioned. But while doctors can buy macs at home all they wish, at the clinic or the hospital they use PCs and it doesn't appear to be anything in motion to disrupt that at any significance.
I bought an M1 notebook as sort of an ipad replacement/toy that lets me use cloud software and remote in to computers that run the software i have to use in my professions and lets me travel with one device. I agree lack of upgradability is not that important which is why I didn't mention it.
But down the road, unless new use cases for smartphones and laptops emerge for non media creation folks, other products may catch up with apple's performance to the point of differences being insignificant due to diminishing returns, and apple may need to revert to its other advantages to keep it's high margins.
The answer should be obvious. If (w)intel did what apple did, there would be anti-trust suits galore because software would cease to function.(imo)
Last edited:
Maybe I’m misunderstanding what you’re saying again... How does anti-trust figure into whether Intel needs to provide native hardware support for 40 year old code?
Apple in 2025: we’re deprecating 64 bit code. Our new processors will only support 75 bits.
While apple already pulled the plug with 32 bit code, if intel did something similar it may warrant some attention.
Interesting. I used an ARM based dev machine in 2,005 or a bit earlier. 200 MHz. Code compiled for ARM ran about the same speed as 800 MHz Pentium IV code.
A shot at what? The market doesn't owe Intel or AMD a shot, Intel and AMD let their customers down.
I'm not entirely sure that's true. Microsoft has already ported their office suite to Apple Silicon. Didn't take that long...
Windows is already running native on AS and other Arm platforms. Legacy x86 binaries that aren't recompiled to the new target still run as fast or faster through translation under both MacOS and Windows.
Can you share some of them?
Less the point of who and more the point that apple, unlike intel cuts out processor features that renders software obsolete, which would be a problem in the x86 world.
Software failing to function would have nothing to do with anti trust law. There would be no such suits.
Violation of 69 U.S.C. §-1.4: People Who Don’t Understand The Law Making Up Law
Windows on arm is not the same as windows on x86. Not all windows x86 programs runs on windows on arm. Compatibility vs speed. Sometimes the two are mutually exclusive. If speed was the only metric x86 would have lost out 15+ years ago.
Ok, so not anti-trust in any way shape or form. Not a regulated action. The government wouldn't be involved.
That aside, I think both Apple and Microsoft have shown that the software isn't obsolete-- they both have solutions for running x86 on Arm.
Even that is really only important for the first couple years, after which most of the software most people use will have already been moved to native execution.
There would be some legal action if intel pulled an apple.
I guess we view this differently. A half a solution is not really a solution.
who said anyone is owed a shot? It’s available based on the current state of affairs.
1. Key revenue generating software that doesn’t run on macOS (and often for which the mac alternative is non existent or poor)
2. cost of migration (hardware, software, training) with insufficient perceived or aroi -
3. Further reduction of ability to negotiate with IT suppliers in future (Give power to Apple)
4. negative morale effects for those running existing IT infrastructure internal and external as well as many other users outside of IT (on the net, people don’t like change)
5. Expectation that advantage will not last. (The tech environment is dynamic). Again they may be wrong but the average decision maker doesn’t think Apple is going to dominate “forever”
6. Dongles
No there wouldn’t. There is no legal requirement to continue to support old software (beyond any contracts Intel may have entered into with specific customers, which presumably would be short term supply contracts).
Hell, Intel’s plan with Itanium was to replace x86 and phase out backward compatibility after the first couple chips.
What exactly does Microsoft and Amazon use from Intel? I know Microsoft uses Intel chips in it's surface products but other than that? Also I highly doubt they'll make in-house chips as they don't have an x86 license unless they plan to make ARM windows not suck. Amazon makes kindles that are Arm powered. If there's an Intel one thats news to me.