thehnguy · HackerTrans

5 tahun yang laludiscuss

I'm excited for the 27 (or maybe it will be 29") variant

5 tahun yang laludiscuss

Fascinating. It's amazing the 3D chess these companies have to play effectively.

5 tahun yang laludiscuss

We're in a brave new world. The early prognosticators thought the M1 was more a proof of concept (shove it into existing designs to get it out there).

But now we know that it was always intended to be a real player (it's in the iMac and iPad Pro).

So this news is interesting to me because now it seems to cut back the other way that maybe the M1 was designed for a short shelf life.

In a world where Apple is controlling so much of its silo, "normal" design and building deadlines will be upended.

thehnguy

5 tahun yang laludiscuss

Not a good look Google; especially when you've got a great, big target on your back from the antitrust/anticompetitive hawks.

thehnguy

5 tahun yang laludiscuss

I was bit surprised to see M1 in the iMacs. I thought the M1 was going to be a very capable proof of concept. But now we've got it in iMacs, iPads, and Macbooks. So I wouldn't be shocked if they spread it far and wide.

thehnguy

5 tahun yang laludiscuss

This is perhaps the real genius of the M1. It's a great chip and all. But when you make it the only choice, people are finding the only choice is more than sufficient. And now Apple only has to produce one piece of silicon for their iMacs, iPad Pro, and Laptops. What a boon for logistics.

thehnguy

5 tahun yang laludiscuss

I think that's a bit dramatic. I'm using a 16GB M1 Macbook Pro as my daily driver doing standard, boring professional work (lots of email, tabs open, PDF manipulation, Word, Excel, etc). It performs as well if not better than the 2018 Macbook Pro it replaced with 32 GB of RAM and an i7. And it cost less than that one.

The iMac will perform comparably (probably a bit better due to better thermals). My point is that these are not bad machines and I don't see why you'd steer someone away from them. However, the price is still quite high compared to other manufacturers and options. But that's always been the case.

thehnguy

5 tahun yang laludiscuss

Only on the pro's. The base iPhones still start at 64GB. But that's a heck of an improvement from a couple years back when the entry was 16 GB!

thehnguy

5 tahun yang laludiscuss

The M1 isn't what kills x86 (if it ever does completely). ARM kills x86.

Microsoft is working on the ARM transition. ARM has good control of mobile hardware. And Apple will be only selling ARM hardware (in the form of Apple Silicon) in another 12-18 months.

M1 and Apple Silicon are just part of the trend.

thehnguy

5 tahun yang laludiscuss

Right. People are comparing Apples to Oranges.

The salient question is: how long does each machine take to execute the processes I use on a daily basis?

thehnguy

5 tahun yang laludiscuss

Exactly. It's not an apples-to-apples comparison. 8GB of M1 RAM is very different than 32GB of standard DIMM-like RAM.

Sort of like when people compare nm of processes on the chips. You can't just say "oh, their number is smaller, it must be better."

To be sure a device with 16GB of M1 RAM should be more competent than 8GB of M1 RAM, but now that's apples to apples.

thehnguy

5 tahun yang laludiscuss

This was a situation I ran into a lot when buying simple Intel-based nuc's for family. It got more complex when the difference between and i5 and i7 got really close due to thermal constraints.

thehnguy

5 tahun yang laludiscuss

I think the issue with the comment is that it comes off as biased or distracting (regardless of the intent). The conversation is about Apple Silicon vs Intel, and then it veers off topic with discussion of Ryzen.

Also, saying that people are "lapping up" the Apple marketing suggests that it's more sizzle than steak. But it's completely undeniable that the A chips, and by extension, the M1 is a beast.

comments