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.
M2 Chip Rumored to Arrive in 2022 With Redesigned MacBook Air
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Haha. Nope? You speak for the entire general public? Okay. 😄
Please explain to us why the general public will think 1X is better than 2.
The "general public" doesn't get hung up on the technical details of the components inside. They go to the Apple Store, are asked questions by a Sales Associate on what they intend to use their new Mac for, and are then directed to the most appropriate model and configuration, therein.
They won't care about how many CPU cores it has, much less how many are performance cores and how many are efficiency cores. And they certainly won't care whether the performance cores are "Avalanche" or "Firestorm". If anything, all that nuance will just serve to confuse them, not educate them.
I think you make a fair point, in that many will discuss all this when they call Apple or go to a store. But the debate on here is about whether the nomenclature on its own would be confusing if Joe Smith was just clicking around on the Apple store at home and the answer is, yes, it probably would be, just as the Intel nomenclature and specs can be confusing as well.
It's hardly a "weird perception". We have been conditioned to assume significant annual improvements in Apple Silicon core-architecture. Looking at the graph below, I'd say my expectation is entirely normal.
Yes, I know an "M1X" would be a lot faster because of a larger number of performance cores, but trend for similar A-series chips is clear. A13 & A14 are both 4+2 core.
If the M-series chips follow the same pattern we would expect at least the design of an M2 to be finalized and ready to produce in Sep/Oct this year, and for that technology to be found in a new MacBook Pro.
Of course, it may well be the case that Apple can't do both core-architecture advances and horizontal scaling in the same year. We have no precedent on which to base the conclusion other than the fact that they have consistently done this with the A-series chips.
Maybe it will be A-series every year, and a tik-tock cadence for M-series. I don't know.
And neither do you.
We've been conditioned on that since the early 1990s. the 386SX and DX processors in 1991/1992, 486SX processors in 1992/1993, Pentiums in 1995. Each year we put our stake in the ground at the processor we want, and then for some reason, around that 18-26 month range, er believe that our computer is "slow", and needs an upgrade. And when that happened, the Pentium IIs and the 686 processors came out. 2 years later, they're slow, and we get the Athlon, Duron, and whatever Intel had out then as well.
Wash/rinse/repeat every 2 years and we've had almost 30 years of conditioning. And to make it worse, have you ever had a PC laptop, for some strange reason, just completely die on you 1-2 months after the 2-year warranty expires? If so, there's further conditioning, especially with the warranty.
In this case with processors, Apple is no different, especially after having "Intel Inside".
Works for me. If the MBP has good enough specs, I'm ready for Apple to take the money. Hell, it isn't as if I haven't had 10 years to save up for it!
BL.
Which is a perfectly feasible speculation, but...
One counter-argument is that Apple could have adopted your strategy from day one with the first M1 machines. Instead they decided to make the "M1" name a big deal. They could have also used that approach all along with the A-series chips in iPhone/iPad, but, again, they've made a modest deal out of the numbering.
Thing is, if you ignore the M1X for a moment, sometime next year (maybe even this year), Apple will release a new MBA with a next-generation core design which is faster and/or lower power but, probably, still a 4+4+8 CPU core configuration... or maybe some different permutation if the relative efficiency of the cores has changed... How do they distinguish the new, shiny 2021/22 model from the old 2020 model? Then in 2022/23 they'll probably have a shiny new 3rd-gen (maybe 3nm) processor to sell, but probably won't be planning on another major chassis re-design. So they'll probably want to call that "M3" or something.
Sure - this is a problem about superficialities and anybody who reads below the headline will be able to figure it out. However "first impressions" are still important in marketing, and nobody ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of their customers. Marshall probably missed a trick by not making his amps go up to 11...
Anyway, even to the more informed, "M1X" on an MBP closely followed by "M2" on an MBA still says "M2X coming soon!" and risks an indirect Osbourne effect.
Frankly, the idea that we could have the M2 and M1X within a couple of months of each other suggests that maybe something messed up the schedule ( dunno, global pandemics, shipping delays and component shortages or sommat..?) Can't help feeling that M1X was supposed to land in time for WWDC.
That should be mitigated once we have a few generations of M-family SoCs under Apple's belt. At that point we should have an idea how the release cadence works for each model in the family so we will be able to know the "shelf life" of each product as it is released.
I agree. It appears MiniLED supply has been a major impactor on the 14" and 16" MacBook Pro release date, with today's rumors stating that they should enter production any day now, but Apple might need to stockpile a couple of month's supply before announcing it (likely in October per many previous Mac events).
In theory, an October event could also support the release of the next version of the MacBook Air which is supposed to be on the next version of Apple Silicon ("M2") which could be ready per rumors.
And honestly, this might be a solid plan to release both Jade C ("M1X") in the new MacBook Pro and the next generation of the M SoC ("M2") in the new MacBook Air at the same time. This would allow Apple to do all their "marketing" right then and there, showing how "M2" is great for long battery life in a MacBook Air where "M1X" is great for chewing through "pro workflows" in a MacBook Pro. That way, the general consumer can see first-hand how the two chips compare and contrast and there will be no confusion when they visit the physical or virtual Apple Stores.
That's a really obnoxious way to admit that you're wrong, but I don't expect any better.
You can use all of your daily downvotes on all of my comments if you like, it still does not change what Apple does all the time with their chip architectures, and what they will continue to do.
Did the general public fall apart when the 2020 iPad Pro launched with the A12Z, a chip based on the microarchitecture that first appeared 2 years earlier? No. Life continued. Markets did not implode.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Just leave it at that.
Haha. I can see you are still not feeling well. Maybe sit down and take a breather. We’re all worried about you here.
iPads are not MacBooks (as you well know) but despite your myopia, you’ve nevertheless chosen an interesting and quite perfect scenario.
The iPP came out with A12Z in spring 2020. Then the iPad Air came along with the A14 in fall 2020.
Was it confusing which was better/faster for us, here at MR? Maybe not. Would it be confusing for the general public upon superficially reading specs of both the iPP ‘20 and the iPad Air, seeing that one has A12Z and one has A14? You bet.
That’s why all those articles/blogs/vlogs suggested many should just buy the new iPad Air.
So you can see, despite your desperate attempt to be right, that you are wrong again.
Last edited:
It isn't confusing to anyone. Your derangement is beyond help at this point.
The MacBooks Pro will ship with the M1X because that's the chip they've been building for it, for over a year. It will sell fine, and it won't confuse a single soul, and only you will be left with a perception of the world that has no meaning or value.
There is really nothing to discuss with you. You're more concerned with letters and numbers than you are actual microarchitecture that determine the letters and numbers, and it is so obvious (even to you) how wrong you are, that your posts have become frightened and defensive. It is ok. I assure you. No one cares.
The end.
As I recall, all those folks suggesting a 2021 iPad Air over a 2020 11" iPad Pro noted that the Air could now use the Apple Pencil 2 and Smart Keyboard (previously only available for the Pro models) and at $599, it was $200 cheaper than the iPad Pro. So if folks were buying the 11" to get the AP2 and/or the SK, they could save $200.
And yet they all noted that the iPad Pro was still more powerful thanks to the A12Z SoC compared to the A14 in the iPad Air so for those who needed the most performance, the iPP was the better choice.
We will see the same with the MacBook Air with "M2" and the MacBook Pro with "M1X" - everyone will point out that the Air is cheaper and has better battery life, but if you do "pro workflows", the MBP will be the one you want due to the (much) greater performance of "M1X" in multi-core and graphics workflows.
The fact that the Pro Macs have taken much longer to ship than anyone outside of Apple hoped for, does not mean anything. It doesn't mean they're delayed. It doesn't mean a problem with the schedule. Apple is releasing precisely what they mean to release, when they mean to release it.I knew this would start to become the case as soon as Apple Silicon for Mac was announced. I knew people would suddenly forget how infrequently Macs are updated, and start demanding/whining/complaining about the release schedule of "new" Macs. This constant complaint that it is using x chip when y chip is only n months away is ridiculous. Apple doesn't think this way. Only whiny blog followers.
Haha. Project much?
Everyone on here knows you’ve been completely irrational on this topic without providing any supporting examples for your “opinion.”
I’m having fun here, debating with you. And I provide explanations and substantive arguments. If you can’t handle it or just want to be “right,” maybe this isn’t your venue. I suggest Twitter.
Hope you feel better.
Kudos to you for chiming in with an intelligent debate analysis and a good point.
I agree that the naming nomenclature issues can be overcome for the general public and really won’t be that much of a big deal in the end because Apple will evangelize the differences in products as will the “technorati.”
My only point (which I’ve made ad nauseum now, I know) is that upon superficial review, the naming of the chips and differentiation will be somewhat confusing for the general public. Once it’s explained to them, however, it won’t be a big deal.
I admit, I was confused by the A14/A12Z at first, too, until I dig into the benchmarks a bit.
It won’t be a big deal in the end for Apple nor am I suggesting they do anything different, simply that it will be a bit unclear to the public at first why the M1X would be better.
Either way, thanks for continuing the discussion!
Fair enough, but we have had that through pretty much the entire Intel Era, with all the various generations, microarchitectures and production processes of the "Core i" series being a mess of core counts, clock speeds and capabilities (Hyperthreading, etc.).
Compared to that, just keeping track of one or two "M" and "Mx" SoCs will be a breeze!
That’s true!Fair enough, but we have had that through pretty much the entire Intel Era, with all the various generations, microarchitectures and production processes of the "Core i" series being a mess of core counts, clock speeds and capabilities (Hyperthreading, etc.).
Compared to that, just keeping track of one or two "M" and "Mx" SoCs will be a breeze!
You're literally talking about the problem of letters and numbers bothering people.Haha. Project much?
Everyone on here knows you’ve been completely irrational on this topic without providing any supporting examples for your “opinion.”
I’m having fun here, debating with you. And I provide explanations and substantive arguments. If you can’t handle it or just want to be “right,” maybe this isn’t your venue. I suggest Twitter.
Hope you feel better.
You have yet to actually talk about anything even remotely interesting or coherent at all.
FYI - there is no "debate on here on". Just a bunch of nonsense delusion you have conjured and continue to inject into the conversation as if it matters at all.
You’re literally just saying I’m wrong without bothering to even make an argument or debating, which is the very definition of an incoherent argument.Other people on here have made fair points and I’ve responded in kind. But they actually have a viewpoint and an analysis to discuss (see my convo with CWallace).
You’re just trying to shut down conversation because you have nothing interesting to say and because you must be frustrated somewhere else in your life.
All the best, I hope everything works out for you.
well, I’ll have to defer to your clear mastery of the obnoxious attitude…
Neither of us are “right” or “wrong” until we see what happens. I may be wrong and am prepared to admit the possibility. This is a rumors site, and we are trying to put our hypotheses forward in a reasoned and cordial manner.
You seem to think it is some kind of ego-affirming channel for your personal beliefs. That does not give you the right to express your Dunning-Krugerism so vociferously.
This is clearly not the forum for you. <Jedi wave>
Last edited:
I'm sorry that you want this to be a forum where people who have no knowledge on a subject can throw around uninformed opinions and get congratulations for them. People who pay attention correct the inaccuracies and impossibilities, and then get shouted at about MUH OPINION. As much as you may want the internet to be a place where all ridiculous opinions are given equal standing, it isn't. Just like, you know, the real world.