3 ms·

That's super awesome to hear. I am continuously surprised by how long it takes companies to pivot to compete effectively with Apple. The M1 came out in 2020? AR

That's super awesome to hear. I am continuously surprised by how long it takes companies to pivot to compete effectively with Apple. The M1 came out in 2020? ARM support is part of the puzzle but the architecture lags so badly. And it's not just Qualcomm. Intel, Samsung, Google, Marvel, you get the picture.

wyldfire 3y ago
Interestingly, Qualcomm was shipping its ARM-based/Windows laptop chips prior to Apple's intro of the M1 Macbook. But they have failed to make a dent in the market. I think having something that amounts to ~parity in performance is not good enough to help lure customers to a new ISA. Like the M1, you have to give customers a really great story about switching.
- ComputerGuru 3y ago
  ARM devices running Windows didn’t even focus on or reach performance parity before; it was mostly a winning-on-price strategy (but the savings were not quite worth it).
  - greesil 3y ago
    These companies think in terms of evolution and BOM cost, not revolution.
- bee_rider 3y ago
  Apple is pretty unique there, right? They are the only ones selling macOS devices, so if you want macOS, you are eventually going to go to M-series. And they have enough control over the stack that, when they say it’ll go smoothly compatibility-wise, most people treat that as at least… plausible, for most use cases.
  - kube-system 3y ago
    Not only does Apple move their existing users to the new chip eventually, but M series launches have usually resulted in upticks in market share.
- Dalewyn 3y ago
  >I think having something that amounts to ~parity in performance is not good enough to help lure customers to a new ISA. Most people use computers to Get Stuff Done(tm). Windows RT can't run Win32 and ARM can't run x86, at least not without significant caveats; people can't use Windows computers like that to Get Stuff Done(tm). M* Apple on the other hand can run most x86 era MacOS software; people who were using Intel Macs to Get Stuff Done(tm) can use newer M* Apple Macs to Get Stuff Done(tm). Computers are tools, their sole purpose is to enable their users to Get Stuff Done(tm). It is the natural order of the universe that Windows ARM computers, unable to Get Stuff Done(tm), completely and properly failed to capture market share.
  - diffeomorphism 3y ago
    I thought that info is outdated by multiple years? Windows on ARM can run x86 (since windows 10) and also x64 (since windows 11) just fine. The problem is that the devices you can buy are somewhat underpowered for the price, e.g. a surface pro with ARM is more expensive and less performant than the intel-based one (and they still don't offer an amd-based one) https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/arm/apps-on-arm-x86-emulation https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/arm/apps-on-arm-x8... > M* Apple on the other hand can run most x86 era MacOS software; Except for dropping 32bit libraries and all that? > people who were using Intel Macs to Get Stuff Done(tm) can use newer M* Apple Macs to Get Stuff Done(tm). Nope. Quite a few of those people needed bootcamp to get some software to run. Bootcamp is dead now and you are encouraged to run virtualized windows on arm; does x86/x64 emulation work properly inside such a VM?
    - tuetuopay 3y ago
      I cannot say for windows, but apple provides rosetta 2 for linux, to be run in a vm [1]. However, some would argue that if you need windows software, then you should not buy a mac in the first place. And I would argue it's microsoft's job to get windows running on M*, not apple's. 1: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/virtualization/running_intel_binaries_in_linux_vms_with_rosetta https://developer.apple.com/documentation/virtualization/run...
    - 3y ago
nottorp 3y ago
> The M1 came out in 2020? ... but i bet it had been in development for 5+ years before that. Not to mention it's an iteration of the earlier Apple phone chips. > ARM support is part of the puzzle but the architecture lags so badly. One thing to note about this laptop is the storage is eMMC. Even whatever's in the latest and greatest Raspberry Pi only has one pcie lane, and they didn't bother including a M.2 nvme slot for storage? They're all still in the phone with crap storage mindset. It's not so relevant how fast your CPU is (and it's probably reasonably fast) if the software runs off storage that's slower and has more latency than sata...

wyldfire 3y ago

Interestingly, Qualcomm was shipping its ARM-based/Windows laptop chips prior to Apple's intro of the M1 Macbook. But they have failed to make a dent in the market. I think having something that amounts to ~parity in performance is not good enough to help lure customers to a new ISA. Like the M1, you have to give customers a really great story about switching.

ComputerGuru 3y ago
ARM devices running Windows didn’t even focus on or reach performance parity before; it was mostly a winning-on-price strategy (but the savings were not quite worth it).
- greesil 3y ago
  These companies think in terms of evolution and BOM cost, not revolution.
bee_rider 3y ago
Apple is pretty unique there, right? They are the only ones selling macOS devices, so if you want macOS, you are eventually going to go to M-series. And they have enough control over the stack that, when they say it’ll go smoothly compatibility-wise, most people treat that as at least… plausible, for most use cases.
- kube-system 3y ago
  Not only does Apple move their existing users to the new chip eventually, but M series launches have usually resulted in upticks in market share.
Dalewyn 3y ago
>I think having something that amounts to ~parity in performance is not good enough to help lure customers to a new ISA. Most people use computers to Get Stuff Done(tm). Windows RT can't run Win32 and ARM can't run x86, at least not without significant caveats; people can't use Windows computers like that to Get Stuff Done(tm). M* Apple on the other hand can run most x86 era MacOS software; people who were using Intel Macs to Get Stuff Done(tm) can use newer M* Apple Macs to Get Stuff Done(tm). Computers are tools, their sole purpose is to enable their users to Get Stuff Done(tm). It is the natural order of the universe that Windows ARM computers, unable to Get Stuff Done(tm), completely and properly failed to capture market share.
- diffeomorphism 3y ago
  I thought that info is outdated by multiple years? Windows on ARM can run x86 (since windows 10) and also x64 (since windows 11) just fine. The problem is that the devices you can buy are somewhat underpowered for the price, e.g. a surface pro with ARM is more expensive and less performant than the intel-based one (and they still don't offer an amd-based one) https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/arm/apps-on-arm-x86-emulation https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/arm/apps-on-arm-x8... > M* Apple on the other hand can run most x86 era MacOS software; Except for dropping 32bit libraries and all that? > people who were using Intel Macs to Get Stuff Done(tm) can use newer M* Apple Macs to Get Stuff Done(tm). Nope. Quite a few of those people needed bootcamp to get some software to run. Bootcamp is dead now and you are encouraged to run virtualized windows on arm; does x86/x64 emulation work properly inside such a VM?
  - tuetuopay 3y ago
    I cannot say for windows, but apple provides rosetta 2 for linux, to be run in a vm [1]. However, some would argue that if you need windows software, then you should not buy a mac in the first place. And I would argue it's microsoft's job to get windows running on M*, not apple's. 1: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/virtualization/running_intel_binaries_in_linux_vms_with_rosetta https://developer.apple.com/documentation/virtualization/run...
  - 3y ago

nottorp 3y ago

> The M1 came out in 2020? ... but i bet it had been in development for 5+ years before that. Not to mention it's an iteration of the earlier Apple phone chips. > ARM support is part of the puzzle but the architecture lags so badly. One thing to note about this laptop is the storage is eMMC. Even whatever's in the latest and greatest Raspberry Pi only has one pcie lane, and they didn't bother including a M.2 nvme slot for storage? They're all still in the phone with crap storage mindset. It's not so relevant how fast your CPU is (and it's probably reasonably fast) if the software runs off storage that's slower and has more latency than sata...