Ridiculous! Sure, during a rocket launch I could imagine using an Intel powered Laptop. Then I wouldn't hear the noise of the fans.
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's Anti-Mac Ad Campaign Highlights M1 Shortcomings
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Intel has been stagnant for too long. While I could not make the switch to an M1 Mac (I need Windows), the performance Apple is getting out of the M1 Mac is impressive. Personally, I'd like to see them continue to offer an an x86 option, even if it was only in the "pro" lineup (instead of Intel, I'd rather see an AMD Mac - I know, it'll never happen). Given the performance of the Ryzen 5000 series mobile CPU and the M1, Intel should be concerned.
Competition is good for innovation. Hopefully this pushes Intel to do something worthwhile.
Competition is good for innovation. Hopefully this pushes Intel to do something worthwhile.
That's sad...
Why mention gaming...Macs to my knowledge have never been thought of as a gaming rig.
As far as touch screen. What does that have to do with the chip? That's just a design choice. I'm sure if Apple wanted to put a touchscreen in the M1 line they could.
I've got a Lenovo Thinkpad Yoga and a Surface Pro Laptop that have a touch screen and rarely use the touchscreen other than maybe flicking the screen to scroll but I mostly use the touchpad gesture to do it
I've been a PC guy, bought my son a M1 this past Christmas and he said he can't see himself going back to Windows or using his HP Laptop unless he had to.
I'm thinking about making the switch too maybe later this year.
Why mention gaming...Macs to my knowledge have never been thought of as a gaming rig.
As far as touch screen. What does that have to do with the chip? That's just a design choice. I'm sure if Apple wanted to put a touchscreen in the M1 line they could.
I've got a Lenovo Thinkpad Yoga and a Surface Pro Laptop that have a touch screen and rarely use the touchscreen other than maybe flicking the screen to scroll but I mostly use the touchpad gesture to do it
I've been a PC guy, bought my son a M1 this past Christmas and he said he can't see himself going back to Windows or using his HP Laptop unless he had to.
I'm thinking about making the switch too maybe later this year.
I think I saw some early demos of Parallels on the M1 running Windows based games quite successfully. Don’t really play computer games myself any more - took me 10 years to finish Half Life 😂
A 52 yr old company this desperate? First they should get rid of all the MBA's running the company, such campaigns show weakness which isnt good for investor confidence of consumers. Even AMD never resorted to this, and AMD was about to go bankrupt.
ROFL! Yeah "Go Mac" sure, I have a M1 and like it, but this made me almost spit out my coffee...
Go PC:
Go Mac:
lol "Go Mac" bwahahah I'm still laughing...
Last edited:
Actually Intels largest consumers are cloud servers not retail, they make more money selling expensive chips to corporates and Cloud customers. But they keep their dominance through market share and importanly mind share with the masses. Afterall the people making those decisions in corporates are consumers too. If they loose mind share on Desktop they loose market share of Servers. ARM is a threat and M1 is making it feasible to the change the perception.
That John dude gets paid by intel, why didn't he mentioned that at beginning?
With the launch of the M1 Macs last November, Apple officially began its transition away from Intel's chips, and it's clear from Intel's latest advertising campaign that the company is feeling threatened by Apple's decision.
In ads shared on Twitter, Intel has been highlighting the shortcomings of Apple's M1 Mac lineup. An ad this week, for example, points out the gaming capabilities of Intel chips. Intel mentions Rocket League, a game that is not available on Apple's platform.
An ad from last week highlighted by 9to5Mac points out the lack of a touchscreen on Apple's Macs. "Only a PC offers tablet mode, touch screen and stylus capabilities in a single device," reads Intel's tweet.
Intel's tweets link to a video from YouTuber Jon Rettinger demoing laptops equipped with Intel chips and comparing them to the M1 Macs.
Apple's M1 chips received a lot of attention at launch due to their impressive speed and power efficiency, which is not matched by Intel chips. Earlier this week, Intel launched a series of "carefully crafted" benchmarks designed to prove that Intel's 11th-generation processors are better than the M1 chips, but the benchmarks were designed to favor Intel machines and were described by Apple columnist Jason Snell as "M1-unfriendly."
Intel's anti-Apple advertising is likely just getting started, as Apple plans to be largely free of Intel chips within a two year period. Apple is transitioning its entire Mac lineup to Apple silicon chips, with the MacBook Pro and iMac set to be refreshed next.
Article Link: Intel's Anti-Mac Ad Campaign Highlights M1 Shortcomings
Maybe someone should tell Apple that " The days of a monopolistic stranglehold are over". Apple seems bent on being the MS of the 90s with its services and policies.
Being a producer, I feel like this is very much scripted - paid promotion - sorry guys. I don't think it's honest.
USB vs USBC
USBC is a standard that allows high throughputs and electrical power consumption that the older USB variants don't allow. USBC or Thunderbolt 3 - is a technology that is just as versatile as its predecessor without the need of constantly trying to turn the USB cable around to get it to fit in the port. The bigger problem is it's not backward compatible. All your older stuff needs to go through conversion and if it's media devices sometimes that conversion breaks an important part of the driver's API. If you're holding onto USB hard drives, I strongly recommend migrating to USBC by the end of the quarter. USBC speeds are great across Macs and PCs. So if you use a PC... that supports USBC, your good to go.
Outdated Technology
System on a Chip is the latest advancement to move high computational and specialized hardware into a more compact and progressive shell. It's mainly about performance. What would require another chip, another bus, and massive motherboard configurations (if your trying to stay compact) now all goes to the processor... which essentially just becomes the heart of the system. Intel tried this. Apple tried using Intel chips for this. When Intel released a variant of their chipset for creatives (onboard H.264 encoding and decoding and other specific formats) - on the iMac Pro... I can tell you embracing the technology required apps to write specialized access API's and frankly my iMac Pro is a very expensive paperweight when it comes to the M1. Very expensive. I use it for real-time graphics processing because of its graphics card but its editing capabilities and its animation processing will be outshined on the M1.
Introducing Apple Silicon, SOC, ARM... well we think. Apple needed a way to be able to incorporate special hardware processing while unifying the API's the developer's use. While I don't have a love for Swift, developers now have a standard way to interact with Apple's products since iPhone. Since the A... whatever chips, Apple has been field testing, improving, and integrating advanced technologies (that are honestly server class) into their petite little phones.
The Mac (before M1) doesn't have Neural Engines and honestly a whole host of technologies that bridge well-developed iOS apps to the Mac OS.
Intel's philosophy of integrating a universal instruction set without integrating new cores, and improving its computational power (and its efficiency) is an old model. Intel will probably release chips much like the M1 soon, so competition could heat up.
The PC, in my humble opinion, is an open architecture money-sucking power hog... ok. Now I'll tell you why.
Field test: 30-minute program in Adobe Premiere. Includes Animations (from After Effects), rows of video, sound, and assorted effects. A PC running hyper-threaded octa cores... so they appear as 32 cores to the OS (don't ask me, ask a processor guru). With 64 gigs of ram. A 4-6gig video graphics card designed for broadcast - has "genlock". A simple 3 hard drive system. OS, Editing, and Export hard rives... SSD and Gigabyte network. Render. 3-4 hours.
That same program on a Mac Book Pro, 16 gigs of memory, running Intel chips... (it was the high end, 2017 model). Export. 30 minutes. PC cost around $4,000. Mac cost around $2,000 and change.
PC's modular design is not a flaw, but the innovators have stopped at the point the modularity requires specificity. Apple hasn't. Apple threw in the towel of modular systems for a fully controlled hyper tuned environment. They take the time to verify chip X will perform Y functions. Other PC manufacturers have to trust on-chip X to perform Y functions... until the latest update that removes the drivers you needed keep X working at its prime.
Mac wins for increased stability, durability, and its embracing of new technologies.
Technology is going to change. You and your organization need to have a path for upgrading all tech in a decent time frame. Some suggest 5 years, more progressive people (like me) suggest 2 years. The hurt and the pain of yesterday's tech are always fixed in tomorrow's innovations which help you work more efficiently and be more creative.
If it wasn't for the Mac, my 10-year research and labor of love would not be used by clients today. Development tripled. Why? The PC crashes, the PC apps don't talk well, and the OS is in a state of instability (in a new area every time).
This is why I'm Mac... and this video made my soul turn.
Please don't buy into the hype of a cheap netbook or lab top if you are investing in your future... Get it done right by choosing a Mac. That is for now... who knows maybe the Mac pushes PC developers into a whole new world and PCs out do Macs. For now, Mac is king.
USB vs USBC
USBC is a standard that allows high throughputs and electrical power consumption that the older USB variants don't allow. USBC or Thunderbolt 3 - is a technology that is just as versatile as its predecessor without the need of constantly trying to turn the USB cable around to get it to fit in the port. The bigger problem is it's not backward compatible. All your older stuff needs to go through conversion and if it's media devices sometimes that conversion breaks an important part of the driver's API. If you're holding onto USB hard drives, I strongly recommend migrating to USBC by the end of the quarter. USBC speeds are great across Macs and PCs. So if you use a PC... that supports USBC, your good to go.
Outdated Technology
System on a Chip is the latest advancement to move high computational and specialized hardware into a more compact and progressive shell. It's mainly about performance. What would require another chip, another bus, and massive motherboard configurations (if your trying to stay compact) now all goes to the processor... which essentially just becomes the heart of the system. Intel tried this. Apple tried using Intel chips for this. When Intel released a variant of their chipset for creatives (onboard H.264 encoding and decoding and other specific formats) - on the iMac Pro... I can tell you embracing the technology required apps to write specialized access API's and frankly my iMac Pro is a very expensive paperweight when it comes to the M1. Very expensive. I use it for real-time graphics processing because of its graphics card but its editing capabilities and its animation processing will be outshined on the M1.
Introducing Apple Silicon, SOC, ARM... well we think. Apple needed a way to be able to incorporate special hardware processing while unifying the API's the developer's use. While I don't have a love for Swift, developers now have a standard way to interact with Apple's products since iPhone. Since the A... whatever chips, Apple has been field testing, improving, and integrating advanced technologies (that are honestly server class) into their petite little phones.
The Mac (before M1) doesn't have Neural Engines and honestly a whole host of technologies that bridge well-developed iOS apps to the Mac OS.
Intel's philosophy of integrating a universal instruction set without integrating new cores, and improving its computational power (and its efficiency) is an old model. Intel will probably release chips much like the M1 soon, so competition could heat up.
The PC, in my humble opinion, is an open architecture money-sucking power hog... ok. Now I'll tell you why.
Field test: 30-minute program in Adobe Premiere. Includes Animations (from After Effects), rows of video, sound, and assorted effects. A PC running hyper-threaded octa cores... so they appear as 32 cores to the OS (don't ask me, ask a processor guru). With 64 gigs of ram. A 4-6gig video graphics card designed for broadcast - has "genlock". A simple 3 hard drive system. OS, Editing, and Export hard rives... SSD and Gigabyte network. Render. 3-4 hours.
That same program on a Mac Book Pro, 16 gigs of memory, running Intel chips... (it was the high end, 2017 model). Export. 30 minutes. PC cost around $4,000. Mac cost around $2,000 and change.
PC's modular design is not a flaw, but the innovators have stopped at the point the modularity requires specificity. Apple hasn't. Apple threw in the towel of modular systems for a fully controlled hyper tuned environment. They take the time to verify chip X will perform Y functions. Other PC manufacturers have to trust on-chip X to perform Y functions... until the latest update that removes the drivers you needed keep X working at its prime.
Mac wins for increased stability, durability, and its embracing of new technologies.
Technology is going to change. You and your organization need to have a path for upgrading all tech in a decent time frame. Some suggest 5 years, more progressive people (like me) suggest 2 years. The hurt and the pain of yesterday's tech are always fixed in tomorrow's innovations which help you work more efficiently and be more creative.
If it wasn't for the Mac, my 10-year research and labor of love would not be used by clients today. Development tripled. Why? The PC crashes, the PC apps don't talk well, and the OS is in a state of instability (in a new area every time).
This is why I'm Mac... and this video made my soul turn.
Please don't buy into the hype of a cheap netbook or lab top if you are investing in your future... Get it done right by choosing a Mac. That is for now... who knows maybe the Mac pushes PC developers into a whole new world and PCs out do Macs. For now, Mac is king.
My laptop is a space heater and it's Mac... but it's not M1. Waiting for larger pro screen, however I have used and tested an M1. So promising.
Again Intel using up its latest bullets before the glorious advent of the personal computer's saviour this spring, reborn in ARM shape.
In the meanwhile, Microsoft is quiet seeing how it's oldest besty is using its Surface Pro in this pathetic campaign, and at the same time is paving the way to their own exit of X86… crazy world. Who the hell is going to buy a X86 stove in 2-3 years?
I can feel the rats running away from Intel's basement.
They only have 2 months to sell out as much as they can… I'm not happy with others sorrow, but this is the truth.
Apple only makes moves after lot of research and lot of future plans. ARM is not a fake movement to save some dollars. It's the logical future.
ARM has been doubling single core performance following Moore's law, which Intel stopped in 2012 almost a decade!!! (they basically just added more cores to keep with M'sL, but let's back to single core, which is the real important thing here as adding cores is just a money thing).
Apple was the brave, but PC is coming faster than light, so Intel please…
Let's see what happens in two years, when the whole Apple Silicon family, top end, medium and low end beat in performance and power efficiency any X86 XEON/Ryzen.
In the meanwhile, Microsoft is quiet seeing how it's oldest besty is using its Surface Pro in this pathetic campaign, and at the same time is paving the way to their own exit of X86… crazy world. Who the hell is going to buy a X86 stove in 2-3 years?
I can feel the rats running away from Intel's basement.
They only have 2 months to sell out as much as they can… I'm not happy with others sorrow, but this is the truth.
Apple only makes moves after lot of research and lot of future plans. ARM is not a fake movement to save some dollars. It's the logical future.
ARM has been doubling single core performance following Moore's law, which Intel stopped in 2012 almost a decade!!! (they basically just added more cores to keep with M'sL, but let's back to single core, which is the real important thing here as adding cores is just a money thing).
Apple was the brave, but PC is coming faster than light, so Intel please…
Let's see what happens in two years, when the whole Apple Silicon family, top end, medium and low end beat in performance and power efficiency any X86 XEON/Ryzen.
Last edited:
Well don't get too set in those ways. Apple is on a convergence of MacOS and iPadOS. There will be a desktop touchOS in Apple's future no matter what they are saying now.
Time to break these out again and switch out the chip names and I think we’re good:
The worst thing for Intel is that they're coming to the end of their process - there's only so much further they can go down this road and the gains are not spectacular. Apple are just at the start with the M1 - see where we are when they're doing comparisons with the M5 - and that'll be here sooner than you think. Other than ditching their current architecture and starting over, there's no way they can compete, and that's why the panic is setting in. They can see the future.
About Intel milking the system by releasing mediocre updates over the last decade.
Isn't that how the world revolves, just a few examples, instead of releasing the biggest capacity Hard disks producers release bigger capacities annually or worse..lowering capacity in Firmware, a manufacturer of AV systems like Yamaha/Denon/Marantz develop Mainboards for the most expensive models to then leave out components for cheaper models, a Frequency converter brand (We sell lots of them) that lowers the (KWatt) Power envelope by reducing it in Firmware, models/dimensions/components are exactly the same, just the firmware sets the Power rating.
And then there are those that cripple the products by releasing so called better products that reduce life expectancy.
Just and example, a washing up liquid manufacturer that releases a better working product, compare that one to the one they made 2 decades ago and it's clear the winner was the older version.
We built cabinets for Industrial automation, the cabinets are of a brand that was kind like Ferrari, you could not buy better ones, well thought out design, about a year ago they introduced "better" ones only to destroy their brand, the new line is a disaster, why they did it, for economical reasons, to make more money with lower quality.
Moral of the above, I don't blame Intel for this, it's how business seems to work, they realised they milked the system, now they start to moan about it, worse, attacking the one which releases a (much) better product, how sad.
Isn't that how the world revolves, just a few examples, instead of releasing the biggest capacity Hard disks producers release bigger capacities annually or worse..lowering capacity in Firmware, a manufacturer of AV systems like Yamaha/Denon/Marantz develop Mainboards for the most expensive models to then leave out components for cheaper models, a Frequency converter brand (We sell lots of them) that lowers the (KWatt) Power envelope by reducing it in Firmware, models/dimensions/components are exactly the same, just the firmware sets the Power rating.
And then there are those that cripple the products by releasing so called better products that reduce life expectancy.
Just and example, a washing up liquid manufacturer that releases a better working product, compare that one to the one they made 2 decades ago and it's clear the winner was the older version.
We built cabinets for Industrial automation, the cabinets are of a brand that was kind like Ferrari, you could not buy better ones, well thought out design, about a year ago they introduced "better" ones only to destroy their brand, the new line is a disaster, why they did it, for economical reasons, to make more money with lower quality.
Moral of the above, I don't blame Intel for this, it's how business seems to work, they realised they milked the system, now they start to moan about it, worse, attacking the one which releases a (much) better product, how sad.
