4 ms·

It’s very impressive. It seems like the open computing platforms where you have control of your hardware/ os are in real trouble. I use Mac at work, but Linux

It’s very impressive. It seems like the open computing platforms where you have control of your hardware/ os are in real trouble. I use Mac at work, but Linux at home, if the hardware isn’t competitive....

michaelmrose 6y ago
- Mac has ~10% of the global market for end user machines. It doesn't now, never has, and never will own the market nor does it desire to sell cheap enough machines to do so. - Given that you can't add ram after the fact and 256GB is anemic the cheapest laptop that is a reasonable choice is $1400. - The cheapest desktop option is $6000 with an 8 core cpu or 8000 with a 16 core. - The average end user spends $700 on a computer - We literally have marketing numbers and a worthless synthetic benchmark. I think it entirely fair to say that the new macs are liable to be fantastic machines but there is no reason to believe that the advent of apple cpu macs marks the end of open hardware. Were you expecting them to sell their cpus to the makers of the cheap computers most people actually buy?
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  > Mac has ~10% of the global market for end user machines. It doesn't now, never has, and never will own the market nor does it desire to sell cheap enough machines to do so. This includes a massive number of corporate desktops which often Apple doesn't really compete with. > The cheapest desktop option is $6000 with an 8 core cpu or 8000 with a 16 core. ?? The Mac mini is $600 with an M1 which is likely a far faster computer than most $600 Windows desktop computers. Likely significantly faster. I don't think Apple is going to eat Windows alive, too many businesses have massive piles of Windows apps. I do see the potential Apple to increase market share significantly though.
- acomjean 6y ago
  Thanks for putting it into perspective. 3D graphic performance is another variable I didn’t think of. I wouldn’t expect them to sell their cpus to others. It’s weird though that they’re so vertically integrated and able to push performance as high as they have. I really enjoy my Linux system so I’m going to keep on doing that.
- mirekrusin 6y ago
  The average user was spending peanuts on phone before iPhone. They also had 0% market for phones.
  - dingaling 6y ago
    > The average user was spending peanuts on phone before iPhone. The iPhone was mid-range at launch, $499 versus $730 for a contemporary smartphone like the N95
    - bredren 6y ago
      This was not what it felt like when it debuted. Blackberry was the competing “smart” phone [1] and the newest releases were we under half the price of iPhone w the same 2-year discount. I had the blackberry curve myself at that time and iPhone seemed way high-priced. [1] https://techcrunch.com/2007/07/25/iphone-v-blackberry-side-by-side-two-week-comparison/ https://techcrunch.com/2007/07/25/iphone-v-blackberry-side-b...
      - Nullabillity 6y ago
        Guess it depends on the region. Here in Sweden I saw a few N95s and of Sony Ericsson and Nokia feature phones. Not a single Blackberry in sight, before or after.
    - lmm 6y ago
      The way I remember it the iphone-with-2-year-contract price was very similar to the buy-outright price for other phones. Are you definitely comparing the same contracts?
    - theptip 6y ago
      But most users were on feature phones at the time. The iPhone 1 was expensive.
  - michaelmrose 6y ago
    The average user was spending a very modest amount to be able to call and send text messages. Little portable multi function computers already cost hundreds of dollars. Iphone helped clarify what a good interface looked like while prices came down and performance went up positioning themselves well as a product category that was already a thing became mainstream. Laptops aren't a new category and the majority will continue to buy something other than apple in large part because of the price.
- dheera 6y ago
  > The cheapest desktop option is $6000 with an 8 core cpu or 8000 with a 16 core. And also with RAM and SSD idiotically soldered in so 2 years later you need to spend another $6000, while a couple weeks ago I spent a grand total of $400 to upgrade my 2TB SSD to 4TB.
  - karlshea 6y ago
    The RAM and SSD are not soldered in on the Mac Pro, which is the machine I assume they're talking about given the price.
    - dheera 6y ago
      Okay, point taken, but I believe the RAM and SSD are not user-replaceable on the MacBook Pro, MacBook Air, and iMac, whereas both are user-serviceable on almost every other brand of laptop and all-in-one PC on the market.
  - iforgotaboutit 6y ago
    fyi, RAM is not soldered (https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210103 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210103) and there are unoccupied PCI slots to install SSDs in (https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210408 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210408)
- kayoone 6y ago
  > The cheapest desktop option is $6000 with an 8 core cpu or 8000 with a 16 core. No, it is $600 with an 8 core M1 chip, the new mac mini. Also the iMac is arguably a desktop option, even if not really upgradeable.
  - michaelmrose 6y ago
    You mean a non portable laptop?
    - read_if_gay_ 6y ago
      What is your point even? The Mac mini isn’t really a desktop because it shares its chip with some of their mobile devices? When and where has that ever been the criterion for desktop PCs?
- qz2 6y ago
  Completely nailed it. I need something with more grunt than the base prices here and apple don’t have a hold on that market because of expense. And they don’t hold the lower end market. This is still a niche.
bawolff 6y ago
If that was to pass, wouldn't linux just port itself to the new platform? After all linux supports powerpc and Motorola 68k.
- 411111111111111 6y ago
  They're locked down. You can install anything on it without apples permission. Like secure boot, just without an off switch
  - imhoguy 6y ago
    I hear "hold my beer" moments now. I give it a year max for luser usable jailbreak.
  - xenadu02 6y ago
    Your comment is not accurate.
    - 411111111111111 6y ago
      I cannot speak with authority on the topic and based my statement on the statements of several YouTube tech news Channels. It's entirely possible that they're missinformed and it wouldn't be for the first time. I however cannot find anything that says differently from apple or a source showing how non signed systems can be booted on this chip. The only thing I could find was apples statement that your system is even more secure now because non signed code won't be run. Do you have any resources I can read so we can clear up this misunderstanding? Or are you referencing my auto-correct error which replaced cant with can? If that is the case... I'm sorry for that but it's too late to fix and my intent is (I think) quiet clear considering I said that they're both locked and this lock is without an off switch.
      - xenadu02 6y ago
        From recovery OS you can personalize any blob. The local SEP will sign it for you and iBoot will happily load and jump to it. That blob may be a Darwin kernel or it may be something else.
josteink 6y ago
> It’s very impressive. It seems like the open computing platforms where you have control of your hardware/ os are in real trouble. Not really. The M1 may objectively and factually be a very good CPU, but it comes bundled with the cost of being locked into a machine with a locked bootloader and not being able to boot any other OS than MacOS. And many people will find such a cost unacceptable.
- brailsafe 6y ago
  I have a hard time believing that the amount of people that care so deeply about loading other OSs as to switch their computing platform of choice is significant. Perhaps more significant for those who are already doing that with either a mac or something else and choose not to switch, likewise for virtualization, but I sure as hell wouldn't switch away from mac for the ostensible benefit of multibooting Windows or Linux, and I'm at least in the subset of people who might.
  - feanaro 6y ago
    There are gargantuan unseen costs for giving up computing freedom that will not readily apparent at the moment you abandon it. The benefit will be shown as much more than "ostensible". I do hope for both of our sakes that most people are not so fickle to abandon it at first opportunity just because it is not an immediate cost.
    - read_if_gay_ 6y ago
      > I do hope for both of our sakes that most people are not so fickle to abandon it at first opportunity just because it is not an immediate cost. Generally, people are absolutely terrible at taking long term effects into account. I don't think many people are going to think twice about giving up their computing freedom. But I think Apple's positioning as premium brand is going to ensure that open hardware keeps existing. And maybe we can even look forward to RISC-V to shake the CPU market up again.
    - brailsafe 6y ago
      I absolutely agree, but the problem is that there does need to be a compelling immediate term benefit or alternative. While I'd agree with the sibling reply that people often don't consider long terms effects, it's worth considering that immediate effects are more definite. Any mac user could have seen this transition coming many years ago, and given up their platform of choice then on that prospect, but what good would that have done them? They wouldn't have got to enjoy anything. Lastly, I do simply see it as a bit of a false dichotomy (or whichever fallacy is more accurate) to suggest that by using a mac that can't run other operating systems, you're giving up computing freedom. If I found it necessary to have a Windows or Linux machine, I'd simply just go get something that probably has better hardware support anyway. Yes conceivably Apple is setting some precedent that other manufacturers could follow, but in the previous example Apple is also just pushing you to buy their products instead.
randmsie 6y ago
With the prices these machines are going at (1600 for a basic mac air with 500gb and 26 gb ram), i dont see how these macs will be able to push an increase in apples market share.
- Schiendelman 6y ago
  I don’t think that’s the expectation they have from this release. This release is about cutting their costs. The next release will be about offering new features to capture more market.

michaelmrose 6y ago

- Mac has ~10% of the global market for end user machines. It doesn't now, never has, and never will own the market nor does it desire to sell cheap enough machines to do so. - Given that you can't add ram after the fact and 256GB is anemic the cheapest laptop that is a reasonable choice is $1400. - The cheapest desktop option is $6000 with an 8 core cpu or 8000 with a 16 core. - The average end user spends $700 on a computer - We literally have marketing numbers and a worthless synthetic benchmark. I think it entirely fair to say that the new macs are liable to be fantastic machines but there is no reason to believe that the advent of apple cpu macs marks the end of open hardware. Were you expecting them to sell their cpus to the makers of the cheap computers most people actually buy?

ogre_codes 6y ago
> Mac has ~10% of the global market for end user machines. It doesn't now, never has, and never will own the market nor does it desire to sell cheap enough machines to do so. This includes a massive number of corporate desktops which often Apple doesn't really compete with. > The cheapest desktop option is $6000 with an 8 core cpu or 8000 with a 16 core. ?? The Mac mini is $600 with an M1 which is likely a far faster computer than most $600 Windows desktop computers. Likely significantly faster. I don't think Apple is going to eat Windows alive, too many businesses have massive piles of Windows apps. I do see the potential Apple to increase market share significantly though.
acomjean 6y ago
Thanks for putting it into perspective. 3D graphic performance is another variable I didn’t think of. I wouldn’t expect them to sell their cpus to others. It’s weird though that they’re so vertically integrated and able to push performance as high as they have. I really enjoy my Linux system so I’m going to keep on doing that.
mirekrusin 6y ago
The average user was spending peanuts on phone before iPhone. They also had 0% market for phones.
- dingaling 6y ago
  > The average user was spending peanuts on phone before iPhone. The iPhone was mid-range at launch, $499 versus $730 for a contemporary smartphone like the N95
  - bredren 6y ago
    This was not what it felt like when it debuted. Blackberry was the competing “smart” phone [1] and the newest releases were we under half the price of iPhone w the same 2-year discount. I had the blackberry curve myself at that time and iPhone seemed way high-priced. [1] https://techcrunch.com/2007/07/25/iphone-v-blackberry-side-by-side-two-week-comparison/ https://techcrunch.com/2007/07/25/iphone-v-blackberry-side-b...
    - Nullabillity 6y ago
      Guess it depends on the region. Here in Sweden I saw a few N95s and of Sony Ericsson and Nokia feature phones. Not a single Blackberry in sight, before or after.
  - lmm 6y ago
    The way I remember it the iphone-with-2-year-contract price was very similar to the buy-outright price for other phones. Are you definitely comparing the same contracts?
  - theptip 6y ago
    But most users were on feature phones at the time. The iPhone 1 was expensive.
- michaelmrose 6y ago
  The average user was spending a very modest amount to be able to call and send text messages. Little portable multi function computers already cost hundreds of dollars. Iphone helped clarify what a good interface looked like while prices came down and performance went up positioning themselves well as a product category that was already a thing became mainstream. Laptops aren't a new category and the majority will continue to buy something other than apple in large part because of the price.
dheera 6y ago
> The cheapest desktop option is $6000 with an 8 core cpu or 8000 with a 16 core. And also with RAM and SSD idiotically soldered in so 2 years later you need to spend another $6000, while a couple weeks ago I spent a grand total of $400 to upgrade my 2TB SSD to 4TB.
- karlshea 6y ago
  The RAM and SSD are not soldered in on the Mac Pro, which is the machine I assume they're talking about given the price.
  - dheera 6y ago
    Okay, point taken, but I believe the RAM and SSD are not user-replaceable on the MacBook Pro, MacBook Air, and iMac, whereas both are user-serviceable on almost every other brand of laptop and all-in-one PC on the market.
- iforgotaboutit 6y ago
  fyi, RAM is not soldered (https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210103 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210103) and there are unoccupied PCI slots to install SSDs in (https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210408 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210408)
kayoone 6y ago
> The cheapest desktop option is $6000 with an 8 core cpu or 8000 with a 16 core. No, it is $600 with an 8 core M1 chip, the new mac mini. Also the iMac is arguably a desktop option, even if not really upgradeable.
- michaelmrose 6y ago
  You mean a non portable laptop?
  - read_if_gay_ 6y ago
    What is your point even? The Mac mini isn’t really a desktop because it shares its chip with some of their mobile devices? When and where has that ever been the criterion for desktop PCs?
qz2 6y ago
Completely nailed it. I need something with more grunt than the base prices here and apple don’t have a hold on that market because of expense. And they don’t hold the lower end market. This is still a niche.

bawolff 6y ago

If that was to pass, wouldn't linux just port itself to the new platform? After all linux supports powerpc and Motorola 68k.

411111111111111 6y ago
They're locked down. You can install anything on it without apples permission. Like secure boot, just without an off switch
- imhoguy 6y ago
  I hear "hold my beer" moments now. I give it a year max for luser usable jailbreak.
- xenadu02 6y ago
  Your comment is not accurate.
  - 411111111111111 6y ago
    I cannot speak with authority on the topic and based my statement on the statements of several YouTube tech news Channels. It's entirely possible that they're missinformed and it wouldn't be for the first time. I however cannot find anything that says differently from apple or a source showing how non signed systems can be booted on this chip. The only thing I could find was apples statement that your system is even more secure now because non signed code won't be run. Do you have any resources I can read so we can clear up this misunderstanding? Or are you referencing my auto-correct error which replaced cant with can? If that is the case... I'm sorry for that but it's too late to fix and my intent is (I think) quiet clear considering I said that they're both locked and this lock is without an off switch.
    - xenadu02 6y ago
      From recovery OS you can personalize any blob. The local SEP will sign it for you and iBoot will happily load and jump to it. That blob may be a Darwin kernel or it may be something else.

josteink 6y ago

> It’s very impressive. It seems like the open computing platforms where you have control of your hardware/ os are in real trouble. Not really. The M1 may objectively and factually be a very good CPU, but it comes bundled with the cost of being locked into a machine with a locked bootloader and not being able to boot any other OS than MacOS. And many people will find such a cost unacceptable.

brailsafe 6y ago
I have a hard time believing that the amount of people that care so deeply about loading other OSs as to switch their computing platform of choice is significant. Perhaps more significant for those who are already doing that with either a mac or something else and choose not to switch, likewise for virtualization, but I sure as hell wouldn't switch away from mac for the ostensible benefit of multibooting Windows or Linux, and I'm at least in the subset of people who might.
- feanaro 6y ago
  There are gargantuan unseen costs for giving up computing freedom that will not readily apparent at the moment you abandon it. The benefit will be shown as much more than "ostensible". I do hope for both of our sakes that most people are not so fickle to abandon it at first opportunity just because it is not an immediate cost.
  - read_if_gay_ 6y ago
    > I do hope for both of our sakes that most people are not so fickle to abandon it at first opportunity just because it is not an immediate cost. Generally, people are absolutely terrible at taking long term effects into account. I don't think many people are going to think twice about giving up their computing freedom. But I think Apple's positioning as premium brand is going to ensure that open hardware keeps existing. And maybe we can even look forward to RISC-V to shake the CPU market up again.
  - brailsafe 6y ago
    I absolutely agree, but the problem is that there does need to be a compelling immediate term benefit or alternative. While I'd agree with the sibling reply that people often don't consider long terms effects, it's worth considering that immediate effects are more definite. Any mac user could have seen this transition coming many years ago, and given up their platform of choice then on that prospect, but what good would that have done them? They wouldn't have got to enjoy anything. Lastly, I do simply see it as a bit of a false dichotomy (or whichever fallacy is more accurate) to suggest that by using a mac that can't run other operating systems, you're giving up computing freedom. If I found it necessary to have a Windows or Linux machine, I'd simply just go get something that probably has better hardware support anyway. Yes conceivably Apple is setting some precedent that other manufacturers could follow, but in the previous example Apple is also just pushing you to buy their products instead.

randmsie 6y ago

With the prices these machines are going at (1600 for a basic mac air with 500gb and 26 gb ram), i dont see how these macs will be able to push an increase in apples market share.

Schiendelman 6y ago
I don’t think that’s the expectation they have from this release. This release is about cutting their costs. The next release will be about offering new features to capture more market.