3 ms·

I see it this way: Apple played the part of trailblazer, demonstrating that it was possible to run circles around Intel with modern RISC designs. We'll be seein

I see it this way: Apple played the part of trailblazer, demonstrating that it was possible to run circles around Intel with modern RISC designs. We'll be seeing many more entries into the marketplace over the next few years, and MUCH greater diversity and consumer choice as a result. Sure, Apple did it for selfish reasons and they'll keep their platforms locked up as much as they can get away with, but the end result is a benefit for all as powerful and open RISC systems proliferate.

dmitriid 5y ago
> e'll be seeing many more entries into the marketplace over the next few years No, not in the next few years. In 10 years? Maybe. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26917136 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26917136
- kstenerud 5y ago
  This isn't a question of capability (which is already there), but rather of mindset. Now that the other companies know that it's possible to sell a $1000 ARM computer that's not a phone or a toy, they'll be falling all over themselves to join in on the gold rush. Lots of absolute crap will ensue as they mindlessly bumble their way through shitty designs, and then in a few years we'll see the first decent non-apple ARM desktop and laptop computers. And by that time, Microsoft will have dusted off their ARM code, major Linux distros will be giving real love to their ARM packacing.
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    It took Apple more than 10 years to get a CPU that performs same or better as Intel's CPUs and can be put into a laptop or a desktop computer. To produce a "decent non-apple ARM desktop and laptop computers" other companies need to have started developing such a CPU 5 years ago.
jorvi 5y ago
If that was true, Snapdragon, Kirin or Exynos designs would have caught up by now. The fact is that because Apple sells the iPhone for high profit margin and earns from the services and software sold on each iPhone, they can afford to stick a big, expensive chip in there. In contrast, profit margins on most Android phones are razor thin. Qualcomm has to design a chip that performs relatively well for as 'expensive' as the market can bear, as when their top chip is too expensive, OEMs will just build their phone with one of the lower tier Snapdragons. Once you adjust for transistor count, Snapdragons et al are much closer to Apple's A-series than you'd think at first glance. As for the M1, what shouldn't be discounted is the fact that Apple controls the entire stack, which means they could build in special features into it that together with Rosetta 2 make running X86 relatively performant.

dmitriid 5y ago

> e'll be seeing many more entries into the marketplace over the next few years No, not in the next few years. In 10 years? Maybe. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26917136 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26917136

kstenerud 5y ago
This isn't a question of capability (which is already there), but rather of mindset. Now that the other companies know that it's possible to sell a $1000 ARM computer that's not a phone or a toy, they'll be falling all over themselves to join in on the gold rush. Lots of absolute crap will ensue as they mindlessly bumble their way through shitty designs, and then in a few years we'll see the first decent non-apple ARM desktop and laptop computers. And by that time, Microsoft will have dusted off their ARM code, major Linux distros will be giving real love to their ARM packacing.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  It took Apple more than 10 years to get a CPU that performs same or better as Intel's CPUs and can be put into a laptop or a desktop computer. To produce a "decent non-apple ARM desktop and laptop computers" other companies need to have started developing such a CPU 5 years ago.

jorvi 5y ago

If that was true, Snapdragon, Kirin or Exynos designs would have caught up by now. The fact is that because Apple sells the iPhone for high profit margin and earns from the services and software sold on each iPhone, they can afford to stick a big, expensive chip in there. In contrast, profit margins on most Android phones are razor thin. Qualcomm has to design a chip that performs relatively well for as 'expensive' as the market can bear, as when their top chip is too expensive, OEMs will just build their phone with one of the lower tier Snapdragons. Once you adjust for transistor count, Snapdragons et al are much closer to Apple's A-series than you'd think at first glance. As for the M1, what shouldn't be discounted is the fact that Apple controls the entire stack, which means they could build in special features into it that together with Rosetta 2 make running X86 relatively performant.