10 ms·

Agreed. Apple could be lying, but they (top executives) have stated multiple times that the mac is not an iDevice. They have also stated they have no plans to o

Agreed. Apple could be lying, but they (top executives) have stated multiple times that the mac is not an iDevice. They have also stated they have no plans to only allow installs from app store, and they understand the value of tools like brew etc...They are what makes the mac popular with developers. This could all change, but until it does articles like this feel a lot like FUD. Additionally, completely dismissing the M1 as a 'marginal improvement' shows a level of anti-Apple that is clearly clouding the authors judgement.

mfer 6y ago
If Apple changed on this the press and customer sentiment would be terrible. Oh so terrible. I'm sure they are aware of that. Word of mouth is the best form of advertising. If you're most vocal work of mouth folks turn than this would be bad for sales.
- addicted 6y ago
  Apple is aware that they constantly change their story mid steam and the majority of the media simply buys it.
  - neura 6y ago
    Sure, but the main point here is switching the MacOS platform to "app store only", which they could have already done. Using their own hardware vs Intel hasn't prevented that. Do you think there's something else that has prevented them, related to their hardware? If they limited it a year ago, people would have the option to just use their macbook for Windows or Linux? Now they won't? I'm just genuinely confused as to why people seem to think that [a] Apple is planning to switch to a locked down ecosystem on their notebooks and [b] Apple has been somehow limited in doing this until they had their own "silicon".
oarsinsync 6y ago
Apple have a history of denying anything until it's ready, and then they flip the script. While the article is clearly biased, it would be foolish to believe that Apple is a company that doesn't change course, going as far as total U-turns on public statements, as long as it's in their interests to do so. > They are what makes the mac popular with developers Developers believe that they're Apple's priority when it comes to hardware, especially the Mac, in large part due to the perfect intersect that was the MBP for many years. That tide already turned in 2016 with the new keyboard, followed by the touch bar. Like the joke that the 'S' in IoT stands for security (the joke being there is no S, and there is no security), there is no 'D' for developer in MBP. Apple have been consistently clear that 'professional developers' are not the primary target of their 'Pro' lineup across the board. Someone else made a comment on this forum that got my attention recently, that we're all so used to being courted as customers by (mostly free) services that we've forgotten that we're not always the target customer. Similarly, developers are only welcome in Apple's ecosystem if they play by Apple's rules. Like we've seen with the App Store, Apple will frequently alter the terms of the deal. All you can do is pray they do not alter them any further. None of this should diminish the extraordinary results that can be delivered by the M1. That is amazing.
- pvg 6y ago
  What are some relevant, analogous examples from this history?
  - JKCalhoun 6y ago
    The first example I could think of actually counters the OP: when the iPhone launched and developers were told their only option on the platform would be via Web-apps. Of course Apple did a 180 soon after and introduced the iOS SDK. Not so sure if that was flipping the script when they were ready or that Apple had hoped to not have to open the OS but bent to the developer outcry (or saw that there might be some merit for growing the platform in opening it up).
    - iSnow 6y ago
      IIRC, some guys reverse-engineered the application packaging format and the APIs and were happily hacking away at installing their own apps. This awoke Apple and they created the AppStore. Other examples of Apple reversing course would be "No stylus on iDevices", no use of intel chips, no switch back to scissor-type keyboards.
    - matwood 6y ago
      Not sure if OP means me, but if so there is a big difference. Going from web app only to a full SDK is opening up the platform, and a big step forward. Going from macOS today, to only allowing apps installed from the app store would be closing the platform and stepping backwards in a huge way.
      - kilburn 6y ago
        > Going from web app only to a full SDK is opening up the platform How is that so? The initial promise with "web apps only" was that they would add the necessary APIs for people to develop web-apps that could do almost anything. Nowadays Apple (intentionally or not) is crippling the entire web-app ecosystem by not supporting the APIs that everyone else does (no notifications, non-standard manifest, etc.).
AnthonyMouse 6y ago
> Additionally, completely dismissing the M1 as a 'marginal improvement' shows a level of anti-Apple that is clearly clouding the authors judgement. Is there somewhere I can find some evidence that it isn't a marginal improvement? Apple timed the release perfectly to create the impression that it was more, because its obvious competition will be Zen 3 laptops, which are right around the corner but not actually out yet. So then you get benchmarks comparing it to 14nm Intel processors based on 5-year-old technology, and 10nm Intel processors with half as many cores as the M1 because Intel's 10nm yields are so bad they can't make high core count processors, and Zen 2 laptops when the Zen 3 ones it will actually be competing with in a couple months are expected to be 20% faster. And Zen 3 desktops, which the M1 loses to badly on multi-threaded tests, but is competitive with on single threaded tests -- as expected, since modern mobile processors actually have single-thread performance which is competitive with desktops in general, but manages to amaze anyone who doesn't know that. Which isn't to say they've done a bad job. Making something which is even competitive with modern x86-64 processors is no small feat. But the fanboys are making it out to be some kind of coup when it does, in practice, appear to be a marginal improvement. And we still don't even have many real-world benchmarks because most of the real-world applications haven't actually been ported yet.
- mixmastamyk 6y ago
  It's not marginal at all at the same price point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxSI45eeAts https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxSI45eeAts Not to mention the ergonomic factor of being cooler and quieter.
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    > It's not marginal at all at the same price point This review appears to be comparing a dual core Intel i3 to the 4+4 core M1, which are only the same price because Apple doesn't sell any laptops for less than $999 even when they're a dual core Intel i3.
    - mixmastamyk 6y ago
      The i5 model costs more than the M1 and still doesn't perform as well. So that the i3 should be cheaper is somewhat moot.

mfer 6y ago

If Apple changed on this the press and customer sentiment would be terrible. Oh so terrible. I'm sure they are aware of that. Word of mouth is the best form of advertising. If you're most vocal work of mouth folks turn than this would be bad for sales.

addicted 6y ago
Apple is aware that they constantly change their story mid steam and the majority of the media simply buys it.
- neura 6y ago
  Sure, but the main point here is switching the MacOS platform to "app store only", which they could have already done. Using their own hardware vs Intel hasn't prevented that. Do you think there's something else that has prevented them, related to their hardware? If they limited it a year ago, people would have the option to just use their macbook for Windows or Linux? Now they won't? I'm just genuinely confused as to why people seem to think that [a] Apple is planning to switch to a locked down ecosystem on their notebooks and [b] Apple has been somehow limited in doing this until they had their own "silicon".

oarsinsync 6y ago

Apple have a history of denying anything until it's ready, and then they flip the script. While the article is clearly biased, it would be foolish to believe that Apple is a company that doesn't change course, going as far as total U-turns on public statements, as long as it's in their interests to do so. > They are what makes the mac popular with developers Developers believe that they're Apple's priority when it comes to hardware, especially the Mac, in large part due to the perfect intersect that was the MBP for many years. That tide already turned in 2016 with the new keyboard, followed by the touch bar. Like the joke that the 'S' in IoT stands for security (the joke being there is no S, and there is no security), there is no 'D' for developer in MBP. Apple have been consistently clear that 'professional developers' are not the primary target of their 'Pro' lineup across the board. Someone else made a comment on this forum that got my attention recently, that we're all so used to being courted as customers by (mostly free) services that we've forgotten that we're not always the target customer. Similarly, developers are only welcome in Apple's ecosystem if they play by Apple's rules. Like we've seen with the App Store, Apple will frequently alter the terms of the deal. All you can do is pray they do not alter them any further. None of this should diminish the extraordinary results that can be delivered by the M1. That is amazing.

pvg 6y ago
What are some relevant, analogous examples from this history?
- JKCalhoun 6y ago
  The first example I could think of actually counters the OP: when the iPhone launched and developers were told their only option on the platform would be via Web-apps. Of course Apple did a 180 soon after and introduced the iOS SDK. Not so sure if that was flipping the script when they were ready or that Apple had hoped to not have to open the OS but bent to the developer outcry (or saw that there might be some merit for growing the platform in opening it up).
  - iSnow 6y ago
    IIRC, some guys reverse-engineered the application packaging format and the APIs and were happily hacking away at installing their own apps. This awoke Apple and they created the AppStore. Other examples of Apple reversing course would be "No stylus on iDevices", no use of intel chips, no switch back to scissor-type keyboards.
  - matwood 6y ago
    Not sure if OP means me, but if so there is a big difference. Going from web app only to a full SDK is opening up the platform, and a big step forward. Going from macOS today, to only allowing apps installed from the app store would be closing the platform and stepping backwards in a huge way.
    - kilburn 6y ago
      > Going from web app only to a full SDK is opening up the platform How is that so? The initial promise with "web apps only" was that they would add the necessary APIs for people to develop web-apps that could do almost anything. Nowadays Apple (intentionally or not) is crippling the entire web-app ecosystem by not supporting the APIs that everyone else does (no notifications, non-standard manifest, etc.).

AnthonyMouse 6y ago

> Additionally, completely dismissing the M1 as a 'marginal improvement' shows a level of anti-Apple that is clearly clouding the authors judgement. Is there somewhere I can find some evidence that it isn't a marginal improvement? Apple timed the release perfectly to create the impression that it was more, because its obvious competition will be Zen 3 laptops, which are right around the corner but not actually out yet. So then you get benchmarks comparing it to 14nm Intel processors based on 5-year-old technology, and 10nm Intel processors with half as many cores as the M1 because Intel's 10nm yields are so bad they can't make high core count processors, and Zen 2 laptops when the Zen 3 ones it will actually be competing with in a couple months are expected to be 20% faster. And Zen 3 desktops, which the M1 loses to badly on multi-threaded tests, but is competitive with on single threaded tests -- as expected, since modern mobile processors actually have single-thread performance which is competitive with desktops in general, but manages to amaze anyone who doesn't know that. Which isn't to say they've done a bad job. Making something which is even competitive with modern x86-64 processors is no small feat. But the fanboys are making it out to be some kind of coup when it does, in practice, appear to be a marginal improvement. And we still don't even have many real-world benchmarks because most of the real-world applications haven't actually been ported yet.

mixmastamyk 6y ago
It's not marginal at all at the same price point: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxSI45eeAts https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxSI45eeAts Not to mention the ergonomic factor of being cooler and quieter.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  > It's not marginal at all at the same price point This review appears to be comparing a dual core Intel i3 to the 4+4 core M1, which are only the same price because Apple doesn't sell any laptops for less than $999 even when they're a dual core Intel i3.
  - mixmastamyk 6y ago
    The i5 model costs more than the M1 and still doesn't perform as well. So that the i3 should be cheaper is somewhat moot.