Is Silicon M1 a Game Change?

[gustavopi]

In the market for half year (if I'm not mistaken), the new Apple products is in our daily lives, we have many reviews, comparisons, some responses from the competitors... so what? What's your view about the days ahead with Apple MacBooks, minis, pros, etc.?

I became curious about because of what I see now in Brazil, this chaotic land: an unexpected situation where the Macbook Air is beating the competition considering the price as reference. You can buy some nice machines with the same money, but side by side the M1 will be better. The problem we have is, in fact, any good device is very expansive, and Apple became "stylish" things of rich people - most of them don't know how to use it, just bought because it is an Apple. Even so, I am now considering this insanity...

I will advance my opinion, that might change (or I won't be posting this), about how I see the market today. I think as happened with iPhone X, Apple is showing the is still the leader, but again, as a company, is not that different after all. We learn in basic administration that we should not try to sell something we can't deliver (as perceived), than we got some job, start to rise and learn how to forget it... So Apple tell me my live will never be the same but Big Sur is still Unix based heavy OS with it's icons, the bar in the top, the Dock etc., I will go the the store and the Macbook Air seems just pulled out from the envelope by Steve... "nothing" changes, not as the hundreds of articles around the web by fans are claiming!

You that has at list 2/3 of my age might remember the game change of an iMac PowerPC G3, the first actually notebook, the upgrade to Mac OS X with aqua interface (how I miss that interface). Apple now don't get close to this by changing OS numbering and the motherboard of the Macs. At that time, we see people that had difficulties with PC's, or didn't use one at all, feel comfy with a Mac - that's game change IMO!

Finally, I will tell what I think we have: a good well designed "engine" that is a revolution in power consumption and performance with one of the best OS I have worked (and I am now typing with an unsupported Macbook Pro 2012), all in a qualified package with good cloud services. That's awesome already because changing the game is getting harder since the market is mature. Unfortunately this seems not be enough for Apple, and I will stop for now. Maybe a game change will be stop saying so.

 

[Internaut]

More a once in a generation leap forward (and a great one at that). If mNext is as exciting, I shall seek a chocolate hat.

 

[Apple_Robert]

It is definitely a game changer. In fact, I think it is the foundation for life changing technology that many have been pining for for years. The evolution will be incremental at times but, I think Apple has turned the tech world upside down with the M1 design. I look forward to what comes next.

 

[Kung gu]

I am waiting for the M1X Macs models, they too will be game changers.

 

[glenthompson]

I think this is the first time Apple has been able to tailor the processor to their product line instead of vice versa. As they release new software platforms, the chips can be optimized for it.

 

[UBS28]

It is not a game changer. We have had the “M1” in the iPad Pro’s for years.

It was predicted a long time ago that Mac and iOS devices would merge at some point. First OS X got iOS like and now they are using the chips from iOS devices.

 

[Kung gu]

It is not a game changer. We have had the “M1” in the iPad Pro’s for years.

yes but Macs can make use of that power where as iPad's can't. That's why its a game changer.

Look at the iPad Pro it's great hardware but the software lets you do very little power user work.

 

[George Dawes]

To hit the ground running with just the first and most basic iteration and to literally blow the competition away is at the very least extremely impressive

Can you imagine the stuff apple can make in just a few years time ? Pretty mind blowing methinx

 

[thenewperson]

It’s definitely game changing that people have to start bringing in CPUs and GPUs with much higher power profiles into the conversation to beat the M1.

it’s also definitely game changing that you can get the stellar battery life we’ve seen so far at that performance level.

The bigger chips will probably take things to even higher levels. So yeah, it’s a game changer.

 

[nieks]

To hit the ground running with just the first and most basic iteration and to literally blow the competition away is at the very least extremely impressive

You do realize that the M1 is not a "first and most basic iteration"? Apple has developed the A-series for years, the M-series is just tailored to Mac. And vice versa: Mac to M1.

That being said and to answer the OP: I do think the M1 is a game changer. It gives Apple even more control over the quality of their products. The M1 runs circles around the previous Mac processors (Intel) while using only about 20 something Watt.
It's low power, high performance and successors will indeed take things to higher levers.

 

[leman]

It was predicted a long time ago that Mac and iOS devices would merge at some point. First OS X got iOS like and now they are using the chips from iOS devices.

What a load of nonsense. Mac and iOS always used the same OS (OS X) and they've shared over 90% of their source code from the very beginning (the only difference being the UI subsystem). And yeah, people have been claiming these nonsensical things for a while, and 10 years later there is still no sign of macOS and iOS merging.

 

[Fomalhaut]

What a load of nonsense. Mac and iOS always used the same OS (OS X) and they've shared over 90% of their source code from the very beginning (the only difference being the UI subsystem). And yeah, people have been claiming these nonsensical things for a while, and 10 years later there is still no sign of macOS and iOS merging.

What I would like to see if a truly good implementation of an adaptive OS in a convertible device - add a keyboard and mouse/trackpad and it's a Mac...take the screen only, and it's an iPad.

Not sure if Apple will ever do this for market segment reasons, or if there are compromises in overall user experience. I wonder if we will see anything at WWDC that hints at this possibility.

 

[machinesworking]

What a load of nonsense. Mac and iOS always used the same OS (OS X) and they've shared over 90% of their source code from the very beginning (the only difference being the UI subsystem). And yeah, people have been claiming these nonsensical things for a while, and 10 years later there is still no sign of macOS and iOS merging.

Except for the fact that Big Sur looks like iOS, and can host iOS apps, not to mention the exact same chip that's in the new iMac went into the iPad Pro. I don't think you're wrong about them not merging, but to say there aren't any signs is a stretch. It wouldn't be much of a leap to think they might. There are in fact plenty of signs if you were looking for them.

 

[leman]

What I would like to see if a truly good implementation of an adaptive OS in a convertible device - add a keyboard and mouse/trackpad and it's a Mac...take the screen only, and it's an iPad.

Not sure if Apple will ever do this for market segment reasons, or if there are compromises in overall user experience. I wonder if we will see anything at WWDC that hints at this possibility.

I think it's entirely possible, and even likely, but Apple will probably want the developers to implement adaptive UI (SwiftUI and Catalyst already build a strong foundation for this).

 

[leman]

Except for the fact that Big Sur looks like iOS, and can host iOS apps, not to mention the exact same chip that's in the new iMac went into the iPad Pro.

Just because two platforms from the same company share some of the visual language doe snot mean that they are merging. The simply fact is that macOS and iOS rely on different modes of user interaction and have entirely different security models. Yes, they use the same chip and macOS can now run iOS apps. This does not mean that macOS is subject to the same restrictions as iOS is or that iOS apps need to implement user interface you expect from macOS software. They are not merging. They are, and always have been the same OS, just adapted to different usage scenarios.

Mind you, I can totally imagine that Appel will announce that iPads will be able to run full macOS when paired with a keyboard and trackpad and transform back to iPad OS that runs a subset of apps once you detach them. Again, this is not "merging". This is adapting.

I don't think you're wrong about them not merging, but to say there aren't any signs is a stretch. It wouldn't be much of a leap to think they might. There are in fact plenty of signs if you were looking for them.

There are plenty of signs for anything if you look for them. That's how conspiracy theories are born. Apple always used iOS devices to experiment with new UI paradigms and new technologies. They have much higher user base and much more rapid development cycles, allowing them to change things quickly without users complaining. Successful experiments stay long-term and get adopted into macOS. Apple's redesigned subsystem (layers), Metal, APFS etc. — all this was battle-tested on iOS first. And again, this does not mean that macOS is getting iOS-ified or that iOS is more important. It just means that Apple has a smart software development and testing roadmap.

 

[Bodhitree]

I would just say, yes it is a big step forward, but it is subtle. In essence the M1 is not faster than an 11th generation, most recent Intel Core i7, but what Apple has done is bring that power to it’s entry-level machines, at a low thermal power point. With M1 as a standard for all the basic machines, I would call it a sea change in the industry.

But really we haven’t seen the full lineup of Apple Silicon. The M1 sets out the architecture, the instruction set, compilers, app translation, unified memory, neural engine, iOS apps. Those things will stay, and pro-level chips will show what the architecture can really do in terms of high performance.

 

[MrGunny94]

We are already seeing Qualcomm trying to make their move onto the PC space with it's own dedicated Snapdragon chips for it (not the phone ones currently being sold) and Samsung is moving forward with Exynos for their own laptops as well paired with RDNA2 GPUs.

With that being said, the ARM storm coming over to the mobility space on the laptop scene is definitely happening... And this push was definitely started by Apple in the consumer space, M1 products are really good.

Personally I'm still using a 16" because I bought it in November 2019 and it's still going strong, but I'm definitely planning to switch to the new 14" Pro or new M2 Air.

 

[Tenkaykev]

I would describe the introduction of the M1 chip as a paradigm shift in mobile computing. Outstanding battery life combined with stunning performance in a silent lightweight eminently portable design. Despite the pushback by Intel et al, behind the scenes they are developing bridge products to give themselves breathing space while the designers go back to the drawing board.
The other recent paradigm shift has been in rocketry, the landing of the Falcon 9 boosters has completely changed the landscape with regard to Space exploration.

 

[gustavopi]

I saw an interesting experiment of a guy trying to do daily tasks with a smartphone connected to a keyboard and a screen, as if it was a notebook or PC. I was expecting something like this from Apple, some change from the way we use computers, or some sci-fi stuff bring to real life as holograms, lasers, you know, something outside the box. That's why I personally consider an "almost" game changing.

However, I must admit this box became very powerful, and in this aspect Apple have made a good reading of the market. So some last gen Intel i7 or i9 or i11 with a powerful dedicated GPU can be a bit faster than the Air... who cares? Side by side the Intel machine seems a drag-race car trying to beat a Ferrari , what's the point? The market was calling for a portable device that runs good everything, even a good game, but don't feel like I am causing global warming and, yes, the silence speaks loud this time! By these aspects, yes, is a game changing.

Anyway, Apple has put a big powerful card in the table of this market, his own secret card, and now the other players look at their own cards and themselves with their poker faces! I bet inside of some of them there is some Baron Bomburst claiming - That car. That car! I want it. I want it! I want it! I want it!

 

[wyrdness]

The first Arm-based desktop computer was launched in 1987, was faster than the Intel machines of the time and promised a revolution in computing. I guess that you could say that it did, but not in the way that was hoped for.
Maybe the time of Arm has finally arrived. Since Apple has led the way, I can see more Arm-based laptops appearing from other manufacturers. I also think that Arm will make major inroads in server farms. These generally use Intel or AMD processors which use a lot of power and generate a lot of heat. More power is then required to extract this heat. Arm processors could save a lot of energy by producing less heat and requiring less cooling. Amazon are already producing their own Arm server processors and I'm certain that others will follow.
So we could really be experiencing the Arm revolution that was promised 35 years ago.

 

[NewUsername]

Too some extent it is exaggerated. I had a 2010 MacBook Air, then a 2015 model, now I have the M1. Of course it is way faster, but the 2015 model was also way faster than the 2010 model. Yes, they are great value for the amount of money you pay for it, the battery life is fantastic, and it is completely silent. However, you still have the typical Mac problems: premium price; dongle hell; hardly any games. For me personally, I think it is a big leap, but I also miss Boot Camp. Even with the M1's superior performance, many people are still better off buying a Windows PC right now.

Of course, much depends of what we will see in the next 3-5 years. If Apple can manage to make big improvements to the performance of every generation and if Apple can make its GPUs compete with AMD and NVIDIA, I don't see how it will have much competition left. It is a bit early to tell now though. I am very curious which chips will be in the new MacBook Pros, 27" iMacs and in the Mac Pro. Anyway, I do wonder what Intel's answer will be, because even if they can still somewhat compete right now, at this rate they will be obsolete in a few years time.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

I said no they're not.

There's no doubt that they are pushing the industry forward with battery life, heat, and raw power, but I don't think it's a major game changer.

The M1 isn't much better than AMD's best offerings. Battery life isn't amazing compared to any other ARM based PC, and in real world usage I've found that even Intel is able to compete with the M1 Airs battery life under majorly ideal circumstances.

Where the M1 really shines for Apple is the lack of heat, but that's not a major concern since most PC manufacturers actually design proper cooling systems (e.g. everyone except Apple).

So individually there's not much in the way of improvements. What Apple was able to do, which is fantastic, was take all of those individual best-in-class stats and package them into a single chip. And it will take AMD/Qualcomm a year or three to catch up. But fundamentally the M1 is just a bigger and better x86 chip. It has yet to produce any fundamental differences yet.

Maybe with the 14"/16" M1 MBP release I'll have to eat my hat - and hopefully I do - but for now I'm not seeing it. I use an Intel MBP for work, and my wife has a M1 air. My Surface Go 2 has the best battery life of all 3 devices for reading ebooks on. I still use the same programs on the M1 air as I did on the previous laptop, and I'm still bound by how fast I can process what I'm seeing on the screen.

 

[gustavopi]

The first Arm-based desktop computer was launched in 1987, was faster than the Intel machines of the time and promised a revolution in computing. I guess that you could say that it did, but not in the way that was hoped for.
Maybe the time of Arm has finally arrived. Since Apple has led the way, I can see more Arm-based laptops appearing from other manufacturers. I also think that Arm will make major inroads in server farms. These generally use Intel or AMD processors which use a lot of power and generate a lot of heat. More power is then required to extract this heat. Arm processors could save a lot of energy by producing less heat and requiring less cooling. Amazon are already producing their own Arm server processors and I'm certain that others will follow.
So we could really be experiencing the Arm revolution that was promised 35 years ago.

That's why I mention - market reading. Yes, speed was crucial in 1987 but there was some other factors more important as system knowledge, software available, support and others that you can't live considering there was no Internet. My father wished to work with x86 because it was the default in the college where he was teacher - he wish not a machine he had no control. Now, people trust in Apple and are confident in find solutions in the online community, is different - the ecosystem. Linux community will provide official support for the next kernel upgrade... I think we can expect a big tech game change next years!

Too some extent it is exaggerated. I had a 2010 MacBook Air, then a 2015 model, now I have the M1. Of course it is way faster, but the 2015 model was also way faster than the 2010 model. Yes, they are great value for the amount of money you pay for it, the battery life is fantastic, and it is completely silent. However, you still have the typical Mac problems: premium price; dongle hell; hardly any games. For me personally, I think it is a big leap, but I also miss Boot Camp. Even with the M1's superior performance, many people are still better off buying a Windows PC right now.

Of course, much depends of what we will see in the next 3-5 years. If Apple can manage to make big improvements to the performance of every generation and if Apple can make its GPUs compete with AMD and NVIDIA, I don't see how it will have much competition left. It is a bit early to tell now though. I am very curious which chips will be in the new MacBook Pros, 27" iMacs and in the Mac Pro. Anyway, I do wonder what Intel's answer will be, because even if they can still somewhat compete right now, at this rate they will be obsolete in a few years time.

And this is the other side I see: the device is perceived as pretty much the same with better technology, the same car model with a new awesome engine. But now I don't think Boot Camp as we know is a missing feature, Windows 10 is really outdated and is getting worst. Somebody has to do something - enough with Windows! Maybe if the new 10X or some improved ARM Windows version Apple might consider some MS support, right now I must painfully admit Apple is right.

 

[gustavopi]

So individually there's not much in the way of improvements. What Apple was able to do, which is fantastic, was take all of those individual best-in-class stats and package them into a single chip. And it will take AMD/Qualcomm a year or three to catch up. But fundamentally the M1 is just a bigger and better x86 chip. It has yet to produce any fundamental differences yet.

I understood what you mean, but fundamentally x86 and M1 are different concepts of how to process data and how to write a code, despite both are still all-in-one big chips. This has been discussed by the low level coders, the market is still focused in x86, the way higher languages are compiled, but this is about to change with more optimized assembly in the years to come, so we can expect more performance improvements in RISC based chips. Maybe is not an Intel killer, but I will bet the x86 will become a second class technology.

 

[leman]

I understood what you mean, but fundamentally x86 and M1 are different concepts of how to process data and how to write a code, despite both are still all-in-one big chips. This has been discussed by the low level coders, the market is still focused in x86, the way higher languages are compiled, but this is about to change with more optimized assembly in the years to come, so we can expect more performance improvements in RISC based chips.

Could you expand a bit more on this? There are some differences, sure, but I have to say that this statement surprises me a bit. On a conceptual level, I don't see much of a contrast between the two. I wouldn't approach writing code for an ARM platform any different than writing code for an x86 platform (which is incidentally the main reason why existing software runs great on both x86 and ARM).