Hacker News Reader

Comment by haswell | Hacker News Reader

I see a myriad of comments that boil down to “duh”, but I think these comments are missing the point.

Consider an alternate possibility: “sales of Apple’s new ARM macs outpaced by older models”.

Had Apple not knocked M1 out of the park, this was a real possibility. Is it surprising that a well executed architecture change is now selling well? Not really.

But the more interesting point is that the rest of the market agrees with us early adopters and tech nerds.

This would be a very different headline if devs were struggling to port their software, or if Rosetta 2 didn’t live up to its promise.

View on HN

I wonder how many of those who got an M1 mac recently are aware of what exactly that means, besides that it's new and fast. I could imagine a large part of those sales to fall into the "I need a new computer, I'll get another Macbook Air" category. Those buyers wouldn't have much reason to care anyway; I guess you'd have to do pretty specialized work to really notice a big difference besides "cool" and "fast".

I'm using an M1 MacBook Air right now. It's more nuanced than speed. That thing's responses are insane. It's an insanely fast computer which wakes up like an iPhone and has an endurance like a vintage, entry level Nokia phone.

It's ready to work before I finish opening up the screen and, they forgot to tell the battery that it needs to deplete after some time.

It doesn't matter for ordinary people to know all the cool tech and architectural stuff running below that keyboard, because at the end of the day, your ordinary applications are running, using way less power and it responds so fast that you can't even think.

This matters way more for end users than for us, developers. Because we the devs & admins know the nature of the beast, and the ordinary users have unmoored expectations (and it's not a bad thing TBH).

I have a personal intel Mac and office gave me an M1 one. I reach for M1 without even knowing.

I've had top of the line Intel/Windows laptops since the dawn of time, and the latency and responsiveness of my Air destroys them all. Simply navigating through the OS is crisp as is dealing with apps.

My XPS always had tiny bits of lag here and there, enough so that I hated using it. I hated doing any intensive work with it because the fans were annoying. My Air completely stomps it in speed and is silent while doing it.

Surfing with Safari is noticeably faster than on any other computer I have, even my much more powerful Ryzen 3700. Even my Ipad Air 4 is much faster than any browser on my Ryzen machine.

Rosetta 2 just works.

Compare the M1 Air to the new ARM Surface (which is 50% more expensive), and you see how far behind MS is. Their ARM cpu is 5 years out of date, and their x86>ARM translation software is flat out broken. Keep in mind MS has been fiddling with ARM devices, so they have zero excuse for being so far behind.

I'm not a platform evangelist, but Apple is firing on all cylinders and nailing execution across the board. MS seems disinterested in software, and Intel is lost at sea.

> Because we the devs & admins know the nature of the beast,

I would not lump all devs under 1 group. While the technological aspects of M1 are impressive, the compatibility issues and Apple "being Apple" for lack of a better word are significant enough for some of us to steer clear away. My work issued MBP just doesn't recognize the external display 80% of the time without me having to plug and replug it or usbc hub back in, and the fact that its an issue is simply unnacceptable when my 5 year old Dell, running Linux, has no issues.

Especially for the devs that use desktops on a regular basis, as the speed that you talk of is something that we have had for the past 3-4 years.

> I would not lump all devs under 1 group.

Of course.

> ...the compatibility issues

Honestly, I've seen only one application crash on me due to using an M1 Mac. TBH, didn't try to port my scientific applications on M1 though (most of the time, they run on Linux servers, so no rush).

> Especially for the devs that use desktops on a regular basis...

In fact, I'm a desktop first user. Using M1 daily, since we're WFH. Maybe you can be this responsive on a desktop, but I'm talking on the mobile space. If we take out form factor considerations, I can get the same speed and responsiveness from 6-7 year old servers we use at the office.

I watch youtube before I sleep (I know, bad habit :P) and sometimes I forget to put it on charge before I start watching, and when I fall asleep, youtube autoplay continues to play random crap over and over (usually ends up with https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKAblynZYhI somewhere in the chain)

OK the point is, more often than not I've woken up in the morning with youtube still playing. Absolutely insane.

In January, I switched completely to Mac from PC, and I did it with an M1 mini. It was time to upgrade my ancient Dell XPS (bought it in 2012 or something), and decided what the heck. I'll give it a go. For only $700, I got probably the best computing experience of my life. Rosetta has been amazing, and a lot of the Mac software I used to use on my top-of-the-line 2019 Intel MBA just fly.

When I first started using it there were some glaring issues that have all disappeared as software has been updated/optimized for the M1 architecture.

Notably back in February I attempted to write a .net core console app, and it would never enter Main() {}. A week later there was an update to .net, and that went away.

I still use my Intel MBA for Parallels. A client of mine is Windows only, and I have to VPN in, then RDP into the development machine, but I'm hoping that Parallels has released the new ARM version officially, it might just work (there were issues regarding connectivity while I was beta testing it).

You can use Microsoft Remote Desktop Beta to skip the VM/Intel MBA.

I'd still have to VPN in to it though which blocks my internet except RDP.

Does your VPN have to block all internet access due to security reasons, or it just blocks just because it can?

They do a lot of government contracts, so I'm fairly certain it has to for some contractual obligation to some government entity.

I’ve a tax return waiting for whatever M2 or M1X pro laptop they come out with.

I simply can not wait.

Just assume that M1 doesn't exist. It'll be much easier.

It'll worth the wait. :)

Exactly. It is sooner than you think.

You won't be the M1 early adopters in 2020 that had their software break in front of them this time when getting an M1X or M2 device this year.

Not only it will be a lot faster thanks to it being possibly going down to 4nm, the software ecosystem will be much improved and supported by it from day 0.

You will thank me later.

Do we know if the silicon shortages will affect the M2 or what comes after? I wonder if they booked enough volume with TSMC to get to 4nm or whatever the next process shrink is or if they will be trying to shove M1s into everything.

AFAIK the silicon shortages (of high end nodes) are partly because Apple has all the capacity (which they have because they're swimming in cash and have high margins and thus have been able to outbid everyone else).

Good for us in the Apple ecosystem with money to spend. Bad for everyone else. Hmm.

Could someone comment why the response times are faster? Is it entirely a question of which CPU is used or does it have to do with something else?

Apple fused a high performance core to a platform which used to run a latency critical platform, the iPhone. Actually it happened over the years.

- They learned to design a phone platform.

- Then, shoehorned a modified version of macOS on top of it.

- Then, they started to iterate on performance. Added iPad. They increased the performance while keeping latency criticality of iOS platform. Trying to have performing CPU/GPU and trying to keep power consumption low paved the way, year over year.

This iteration over and over resulted in M1. A descendant of iPhone and iPad, but with unbelievable performance. They kept the best parts of every platform since they can design from the processor to the latest bit of the software.

At the end of the day, M1 is greater than sum of its parts. An M1 Air behaves a lot of like an iOS device in some parts. Connect to power, screen comes on, a big battery appears with "XY% charged" message and you hear iOS charging chime. It's funny, yet hints on the heritage.

Apple fused everything together. A unified ARM platform. Variety of OSes with the same roots. One optimization for all. With a big blow, they theoretically reduced the software work they have to do dramatically, so they can build magical software again with last effort and can transfer technologies from one to another virtually with no effort.

See: iPad Pro with M1. iMac with M1, MacBook Air and MacBook Pro with M1. They are the same device. Same performance. A slightly different OS on iPad. That's just it.

Apple is now able to codesign the software and hardware top to bottom. I have no inside knowledge but using one of these things it's basically obvious what's going on. They only have to write drivers for their own hardware, and for their own GUI library. So I think they've been really aggressive about making the interactions low friction.

It's not just that the hardware is fast. It's that the sort of hitches, pauses, etc that we're used to are just gone. They've made the way the software and hardware interact a nearly perfectly smooth racetrack. They've done this to such a degree that it must have been a very overt high level goal.

> They only have to write drivers for their own hardware, and for their own GUI library.

They’ve always had limited processor and GPU options though (relative to MS where Windows had to support an insane amount of options), so wouldn’t they have optimized for what they knew would be in the case?

They'd still be constrained by Intel/nVidia's expected API design and almost certainly some key code from them as well. With apple controlling the hardware too, they can make the interface work however they want. That introduces the possibility of making some radical simplifications or optimizations.

ARM Windows laptops have been around for a while, and have not taken off.

Some of that could be that these computers don't represent a shift in the wind - x86 remains the primary architecture for Windows. But I think that another big part of it is that every review of a Windows ARM laptop is full of caveats. Some programs will run slower, some programs won't run at all. Knowing which is which requires technical knowledge that a lot of people don't have, such as the ability to distinguish native executables from Java or .NET apps, or the ability to distinguish 32-bit programs from 64-bit ones.

Apple, on the other hand, really outdid themselves here. The story for most consumers is just, "It will run all your old apps, no problem." The worst-case-scenario story for a certain niche is, "Docker may be flaky until later this year."

IOW, the fact that "those buyers wouldn't have much reason to care anyway" represents an enormous accomplishment on Apple's part.

Microsoft don't control the whole ecosystem unfortunately. They have a much harder time making that architectural shift than Apple does (although they could have done it better). There's all sorts of backwards compatibility guarantees with Windows that Apple doesn't have to care about.

Rosetta is the key piece here to 'fill in the gaps'. IMO, Rosetta only really works because of Apple's silicon and so how insanely fast the machine is compared to the Intel equivalent. The M1 has such a performance advantage over Intel that you can use it up in translation and your options become "x86 version of program running at roughly the speed it always used to" or "ARM version that is lightning quick".

Whereas the Windows ARM machines weren't a performance leap over Intel so even if you had translation it would be "x86 version that is very sluggish" or "ARM version that is just about OK".

Unfortunately, Windows ARM laptops were and are poorly executed.

Apple is carrot and stick, where the carrot is performance and the stick is obsolescence.

With Windows, there's neither carrot or stick. ARM isn't that much more performant, the battery life isn't that much better, and they're certainly not abandoning Intel.

OTOH, Microsoft could invest a huge amount of their money on making ARM attractive, but the Wintel ties clearly run deep.

> and the stick is obsolescence

Does this really apply?

My gf and I each earn FANG salaries and could upgrade a,couple of times a year if we were so inclined but haven’t bothered until the M1 arrived. IPhone 6s & 7, watch 0 & 3, 2016 Macbook + 2017 MacBook Air (TBF she has a big 2019 Intel MBP from work though)...upgrading that old gear didn’t seem worth it. Patches and upgrades continued to arrive (except for the watch 0).

But we finally upgraded everything and now I’ll upgrade my 2014 ipad that I’m typing on now.

I doubt most people upgrade simply because something new has arrived. Apple doesn’t really drive you to it.

I think the "stick" the GP was referring to is applied to developers, not consumers. Developers who don't get on board with Windows ARM get... to save themselves some effort. Developers who don't get on board with M1 will have their apps running slower than their competitors' apps across the entire ecosystem within another year or two, period.

As @brundolf said.

Whilst you can run Intel code via Rosetta indefinitely(), Apple's strategic position is no more Intel hardware.

I'm typing this on a 2013 MBP. I'm personally waiting for an M2 chip, which I expect will follow Moore's law, albeit for ARM. Which backs up your point.

() indefinitely as defined by Apple is until they change their mind.

Depends on who you’re asking. My 2012 Thinkpad is on the latest Windows 10. It works very well with its SSD and it is really quiet (new thermal paste). Meanwhile, my 2011 MBA cannot even get GarageBand from the App Store because its OS won’t upgrade. Otherwise it’s fine...

Well sure it depends on who you ask, but though it’s just anecdotal, both you are examples that “obsolescence” may not be that big a driver.

The decade of hand wringing about Tim Cook’s deficiencies as CEO compared to Steve Jobs have got to be put to rest by even the biggest skeptics. The timing, execution, and scale of this transition has been so well done.

Jobs was focused on vision and product design. Cook is on operations and execution -- it also shows in his presentations. He follows the relatively safe "Apple-formula" that was put in place in the 2000s. Even the transition to Apple Silicon mirrors that of PowerPC to Intel.

Looking at the products it is hard to see where Cook has made his impression. It feels like it is about refinement and improvements year after year. That isn't a bad thing, because over time those things add up, and Apple is probably a much more well-oil and stable machine behind the facade today than 10 years ago. This is what Cook does (even before he became CEO).

I suspect Cook also knows that this is his strength, and that's where he should focus, but I would like to see something more risky and exciting come out from Apple.

I'd argue that the fundamental worry of the skeptics is correct. Apple hasn't been innovative in the same way. Apple's not brought out any products that created or disrupted an entire market niche since Cook took over, and it's arguably taken fewer risks. Instead, Apple's big wins over the past decade have been things like this: Really impressive operational successes.

Personally, I'm OK with that. But I've never really stayed abreast of the latest trends, anyway. I can also see where people who enjoyed the excitement of those famous "one more thing" moments might feel like some of the magic has been lost.

The Watch, or AirPods? I give Cook a lot of crap for being a bean counter, but AirPods are amazing and dominate the market.

I agree but the criticism of Tim Cook has never been about execution - he is clearly world class on that - but about quantum leap innovation.

We will need a new product category to put that to rest.

An old app in Apple's ecosystem isn't the same as an old app in Windows.

You can still run executables compiled under Windows2000 today. Meanwhile, programs as old simply won't work in MacOS (at the time, Apple was shipping OS9).

I have no doubt that a Windows release with legacy components removed can run fast on ARM (it was already demonstrated with Windows 10 mobile).

But that's just the tip of the iceberg: Nobody is shipping a chip comparable to the M1. All the ARM vendors are focused on phone chips, with completely different power optimization goals.

Friend of mine just got a new M1 13-inch MBP.

He "likes" it, as opposed to "loves" it; because he doesn't actually care that much (he's not a tech nerd). He likes his iPad a lot more.

He would probably feel the same way about a new Dell or Lenovo. It's just not that important to him. Computers are a "necessary evil." He's a musician, and he asked my advice, so he got a Mac.

For myself, I am waiting on the M1X/M2, later this year. I have a couple of big external monitors, and I know the M1 has issues with those. I've already weaned myself off of my BlackMagic eGPU Pro, in anticipation.

> He would probably feel the same way about a new Dell or Lenovo.

Not sure if this was ever true for someone who used a Mac before. Going to a Dell or Lenovo feels like a huge downgrade. Everything about these laptops feels cheap in comparison to a Mac. They are bigger, thicker, heavier, more plastic, hotter, and less elegant. Also the track pad and other screen on the Mac is so much better. Even if some Windows laptops come with a crazy high resolution, the OS looks shit on it and the user has to go into the Windows menu and play around with all the UX controls until the proportions of the start bar, windows and other UI elements somehow make sense on the high resolution again. Of course there is a million Windows apps still out there which don't scale at all. I cannot imagine that a user who was on Mac for more than a year could go back to Dell or Lenovo and feel excited about it. Now with the M1 the contrast is even worse. I have an M1 and Intel MBP and even going back to the Intel MBP feels really crappy because I need to charge my device when working for a full day. I got so used to the M1 not needed a single charge during the day that it's really odd to think about how other laptops still do. I treat my M1 like my iPhone. I plug it in over night, that's all it needs.

> Everything about these laptops feels cheap in comparison to a Mac. They are bigger, thicker, heavier, more plastic, hotter, and less elegant.

This is completely wrong. For example, a Lenovo X1 Carbon is 2.5 pounds, which is lighter than a MacBook Air at 2.8 pounds. It also offers 32GB of ram, does not have a glued-in battery, does not use glass and the keyboard is much less likely to fail. I am tempted by the M1, but from my experience Apple machines are heavier, fragile, less reliable and less user-serviceable. I also don't understand the aversion to plastics. Aluminium makes MacBooks heavy and can attenuate radio signals.

> For example, a Lenovo X1 Carbon is 2.5 pounds, which is lighter than a MacBook Air at 2.8 pounds. It also offers 32GB of ram, does not have a glued-in battery

.. and yet if feels heavier, looks shittier, is less durable, full of Lenovo spyware and overall still much worse quality. I have had so many Lenovo laptops in my life that I can say for sure that there is nothing good that comes out of this company.

It's like buying a Wilkinson razor with 5 blades, plastic covering and which weights only a few grams in total. Yes, on paper it's lighter, has more blades and has super easily replaceable parts and is also much cheaper, but if you buy a thiers issard carbon steal cut-throat straight razor you will only have one blade, it will be much heavier and more expensive but you will still have the best shave in your life with zero irritation and not look like a cheap red faced pig afterwards. That's the difference between Lenovo and Apple in computer hardware.

>feels heavier

How is that possible? It's lighter.

>is less durable

Citation needed. I've heard MacBook keyboards tend to self-destruct when encountering small specks of dust though?

>full of Lenovo spyware

This is FUD. The ThinkPad line comes with stock Windows, which you can replace with Linux.

> How is that possible? It's lighter.

If the same screen sized laptop has bigger bezels, the grip is bulkier, less sleek overall form factor makes it feel heaver in your hand even if it's a few grams lighter. That's why it's called "feel" and not "is".

> I've heard MacBook keyboards tend to self-destruct when encountering small specks of dust though?

Citation needed. My MBPs haven't self destructed yet despite being daily in use for years.

> >full of Lenovo spyware > This is FUD.

Google Lenovo Superfish

I agree with you, but one thing that I have learned, is that non-nerds tend to hate "computers."

By "computers," they mean things with screens, mice and keyboards that don't have a simple, fixed user interface. I know that some of the iPad Pros are starting to look a lot like "computers."

Me? I love "computers." But I'm a nerd. We're supposed to love them.

I am really looking forward to getting my grubby little mitts on a new laptop, when they come out.

I have a Pro Display XDR hooked up to a MacBook Air and the only glitches I have had would be unplugging and plugging in the display while in sleep mode which just requires me to unplug the XDR and plug it back in.

That's interesting, how big are those monitors exactly? Regular 4k or something more?

I have a 49-inch LG Ultrawide (Split into 3440 X 1440, 1680 X 1440), and a 4K monitor that I use for presentations and classes (so it is not on all the time).

I have become addicted to the vast real estate of this big honker. I did have it set up, once, using the whole screen width (5120 X 1440), but that was too wide for me (also, Apple does not yet natively support that resolution. I had to use a third-party screen res tool).

I wouldn't overlook the impact of battery life.

I've never squeezed more than 4 or 5 hours out of my two year old Macbook Pro. A 20 hour battery life in addition to the speed gains make upgrading a tempting prospect.

I spent the whole day on zoom on battery yesterday and still had 35% left to play with.

MBP 2019 with a sub-100 cycles battery burns almost half the battery over one hour Zoom call.

My wife has an ~year-old Intel MBA. I have an M1 MBA.

Her battery's dead after 2 hours on Zoom or Discord or any of those battery-hungry web tech multimedia apps.

I've not tried taking it that far, but judging from where the battery on my M1 MBA gets to after a couple hours, I could probably do 6ish hours under that load (it's very dumb that some of these "productivity" programs are high-load and eat battery like crazy, but that's where we are).

If I avoid the webshit (Slack's unavoidable, for me, but I can ditch most of the rest, at least temporarily) I can work a whole day plus another half a workday on battery, no problem.

[EDIT] oh, and it feels faster than my hex-core AMD desktop with the badass graphics card and 64GB of memory does, under Win10 or Linux. Jank, jitter, and pauses galore, when doing basically nothing. Not so on the M1, unless I really abuse it. Granted that's largely the software's doing, but it doesn't really matter why it's better, in the end.

I would imagine opinion from early adopters (and tech media in general) have non-trivial influence over even said buyers' decisions.

My parents got an M1 mba a few days ago. When they asked my advice about getting a new laptop they got an earful, and then the favour was returned when I listened to my flabbergasted dad explain to me how his bank website now renders instantly compared to 15 seconds on his old mba.

It’s hard to quantify what portion of the so called tech-illiterate have a tech literate person in their lives who they go to for purchasing advice, but anecdotally I must provide decisive “wait until September” or “nows a good time to buy and here’s why!” advice to at least a dozen or relatives and friends.

It’s also why the butterfly keyboards or the mdns debacle can end up being a drag on sales. I’m very bullish on Mac market share in the next couple of years due to pent up demand from family members being advised to hold on to older machines.

Right, even if it's distilled down to "I've heard great things about these new Macs" that's still reflective of an incredible technical and marketing accomplishment.

It's a testament to how well it was done that these people can buy the computers and not have to know anything except that it's new and fast.

Definitely. That's absolutely huge.

You can't really buy an equivalent since Apple focused on price, performance, absolute silence and battery life with virtually no deck flex due to the aluminum unibody.

You can get laptops that can almost match it on price and performance but the responsiveness and battery life is going to be extremely hard (including the MacBook Pro and reviews have stated that you can get it to above 18 hours with light use. Also, the MacBook Air is totally silent with great performance and I can't find many silent laptops at all. The biggest downside to the new M1 Macs are probably that they rely on swapping from RAM to disk but we have to see when those parts will wear out.

I bought a Macbook Air M1 a few months ago. It does not take specialized work to notice the difference between this laptop and every other intel based laptop.

The Tinkpad X1 Carbon which I bought multiple time over the years would run hot, make noise and the battery would deplete fast when watching youtube videos. Before M1 this was just normal laptop behavior and the X1 is a great laptop. With the M1 though, it's now been 2 hours of watching youtube and you're at 95% in a perfect silence and the laptop is cool to the touch.

Also I don't find a Macbook Air to be "cool". To me it feels mainstream just because it's an obvious choice.

In some ways, it reminds me of the Intel transition in that regular consumers might not have been aware that this move was coming until they saw it in front of their eyes.

I often see that transition dated to 2006 at MacWorld, but the reality is that it was previewed at WWDC the previous year and there was only a minor spec bump to - I think - one model before the iMacs appeared to kick things off.

On a related note, I was not surprised - but definitely disappointed - to hear them describe the iMac changes as "making the computer disappear." Such 'appliances' have always seemed cheap and purposefully limited (not in a good way), yet this is what the market seems to want.

Regular people continue to not understand how computers work and they probably never will.

Regular people also don't really understand much about how cars work, and they love that modern ones start with the push of a button and that they don't have to fiddle with the carburetor or the choke to get it going.

Yes, however...

The problem space is much smaller and with each big shift in hardware and software, we've missed the opportunity to do this well.

A rough timeline: Desktops, the Internet, Laptops, and - for probably the last decade - Mobile. Is "Ambient" next?, I'm not sure, that seems like it carries other baggage along with it.

It may look like an appliance, but it certainly doesn't work like one, and if users had just a bit more knowledge about it, I wouldn't feel like we're going back to square one with each step forward in technology.

I understand how both work and I LOVE both push button starting modern cars and computing appliances. I'd rather have an iPad and all the extra time it saves me to learn new things than fuddle with a desktop PC. Just like owning a Tesla will save me time vs owning/repairing an older car.

More than that, I always assumed that the base models were the most popular. Since they are all M1 now, it would make sense.

6502 -> 680x0 -> PPC601 -> x86_64 -> ARMv8.5 (Apple M1)

Apple has a long, long history of pulling off well executed architecture changes. If you are a Apple computer shopper then you would know by now that by the time they release a new architecture, internally, that platform has long been retired for their internal users.

It would have been an even bigger headline if Apple released the M1 and it didn't live up to expectations.

I'm actually more surprised about the iPad Pro going from the A-series to the M-series. And now, the new iMac looks very iPad-like.

6502 -> 680x0 -> PPC601 -> x86 -> x86_64 -> ARMv8.5 (Apple M1)

The original Intel Mac's ran the 32-bit Core Duo, although a mid-season refresh took them to the (64-bit) Core 2 Duo. That generation of purely-32-bit hardware being out in the wild had some real impact on moving the OS forward, later down the road.

I completely forgot about the Core Duo Mac Mini!

We had purchased one, when 10.5 released. And it died shortly after to be replaced by the Core 2 Duo Mac Mini. The x86 era was so short I barely remembered it.

Hey don't forget the poor old Apple ///, Apple //e, and Apple //GS! ;)

6502 -> 6502B -> 65C02 -> 65C816 -> 680x0 -> PPC601 -> x86 -> x86_64 -> ARMv8.5 (Apple M1)

Beat me to it!

Also probably worth dividing PPC into the 32-bit architectures (601, 603, G3, G4) and 64-bit architectures (G5), although the PowerPC architecture did that transition in such a civilized manner that it wasn't really traumatic. In some ways the jump from the 601 (Power-ish) to 603 (true PowerPC) was bigger than the jump from the G4 to the G5.

They also never fully went 64-bit on PPC, so there was never really a transition there, just some 64-bit machines that could do some slightly different things and I don't think there was ever a full 64-bit version of OS X for PPC. So there weren't any huge painful breaks.

Good points. Worth noting that PPC -> x86 was a 64 bit to 32 bit transition.

I assume we will soon see ARMv8 -> ARMv9, but that will hardly be noticeable.

I owned the first MacBook Pro but it died before the architecture became an issue :(

Overall Apple should be good at architecture transitions by now as they've done enough of them!

Also the jump from 68000 and 68010 to 68020-030-040 had a similar transition (if anyone remembers having to worry about wether your software/system was 32 bit clean)

6502 was only used in the Apple II and MacOS never ran Apple II software on its 68k processor, so it doesn't really belong in that list.

Indeed . You could run Apple II software on an add in card though.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_IIe_Card

I thought about mentioning it but that doesn't really count as a transition like the others. You could not even run the card and MacOS simultaneously:

> When emulating the Apple IIe, only a full-screen mode is available and all native Macintosh functions are suspended while running (a proprietary graphical control panel, running outside MacOS, is available for configuring the virtual Apple II slots and peripherals; however, both native and emulated computer function are suspended during this activity). Macintosh functions and control resume only once emulation is completely shut down and exited.

Arguably, the transition from MacOS to Mac OS X does belong in the list. Apple did a ton of work to provide the Carbon compatibility layer to make it easier for developers to port to Mac OS X. And there was also the ability to run MacOS 9 under Mac OS X using Classic.

Agreed. It is sort of helping users to make the move though.

It's almost like a reverse transition: instead of getting a new cpu and making it work with the old ecosystem and software you take an old cpu and software and and get it to work with the new hardware (I know the analogy isn't perfect!)

No fair. But it FUNDED the start of that list! ;)

> I'm actually more surprised about the iPad Pro going from the A-series to the M-series

M1 is more or less a "A14X" so that doesn't really surprise me that the iPad Pro would get an -X tier chip.

Almost!

6502 -> 680x0 -> PPC601 -> x86 -> x86_64 -> ARMv8.5 (Apple M1)

First Intel Macs (MacBook Pro) had a Core Duo which was 32 bit. I think Core 2 Duo was delayed and Apple weren't particularly happy about it.

There was a Core Solo mini as well at the bottom end of the line.

Indeed: Core Duo with one core not working / disabled.

And to add to the growing list of CPU transitions, don’t forget the NeXT heritage which included its own support of Motorola, Intel, PA-RISC and SPARC

See Surface Pro X as an example of that alternate possibility.

I hated my Surface Pro when I had, granted this was 3 years ago. It had terrible battery life, windows was horrible with the touchscreen, very few apps responded to touch events at all let alone correctly. All together one of the worst laptops/tablets I've ever used. I have an M1 macbook air and it's the best laptop I've ever used, same with my iPad Pro. Apple has really nailed the Arm device/os combo IMO.

Perhaps a bit ironically the M1 Macs arguably offer the best Windows on ARM experience.

The thing is, even if M1 would have been middling, Apple would have still migrated everyone forcefully :-)

Eventually, at some point, begrudgingly.

People held on to their 2015 15" MBPs for as long as they could because they didn't like the upgrade paths. The 16" was well received and helped fix that. The M1 laptops were incredibly well received and people are excitedly jumping on them instead of feeling forced.

*are holding onto

My 2015 MBP is still going strong and Apple support were even pretty great at helping when I did have one issue, even though they classify it as Vintage. But you're totally right, I'm really impressed by the M1 and am just holding out for the M1X to upgrade.

Another 2015MBP stalwart here. I wasn't planning on upgrading to an ARM Mac.

I use BootCamp (daily lately, since we're in lockdown and it's snowing) for gaming on Windows with an eGPU. Neither of which are supported on the M1.

I'm considering selling my eGPU and just building a gaming PC (the M3 will likely be out by the time I pull trig though :/), but it was nice to have 1 machine do it all (work + play), especially since I didn't need the eGPU to play some couch co-op games (Cuphead, Castle Crashers, very cottage-friendly!)

I looked into the eGPU for the same reason, to have a single machine to do it all. In the end I got a separate machine as it was cheaper to do so (!!) and saw people having lots of issues with eGPU support. I couldn't believe the price on those eGPU enclosures.

How was your experience? I bet it was nice just plugging in and getting all that extra power.

Good point, but really it's more about usability than anything else.

Imagine that the M1 wasn't actually faster than just about everything out there. But also imagine that the new design decisions, the improved memory allocation methods, the significantly better power usage, and the materially lower price meant that it was faster, took less memory and less power for lots of things, or even for most things.

Would it be compelling for people who already have Intel to move? No. But would it be preferable to choosing Intel for a new machine? Certainly, at least for low-end models and applications.

And look at what Apple has done - the M1 is in the mini, the Air, the smaller (usually lower end) MacBook Pro, and now the 24" iMac (which is the lower end iMac). So, even though the M1 kicks Intel's ass, Apple is still playing it safe.

There'd be plenty of reason to choose ARM over Intel even if performance wasn't clearly better :)

It's also worth observing that a lot of IT departments aren't necessarily rushing into the M1, especially to the degree that there isn't a full range of laptops with the new architecture yet.

I think such departments were never a target for this iteration of hardware. That’ll be whenever a Mac Pro model comes out or similar.

IT departments do often offer a small/light and a non-travel-optimized model but I imagine many companies are waiting until they can have a common architecture on new systems and any software teething pains are worked out (which seems to be happening but probably not quite there yet).

Do IT department ever rush? I think their ambition is to be slow, but steady. If you don’t want to change course often, you can’t react immediately to every thing that happens.

When they have to. Like when everyone went remote a year ago. But, to put it mildly, providing people with access to the newest Apple laptop does not constitute an emergency.

Even w/o the perf of the M1 I think sales had been overwhelming, part because yes it's the "entry level" models but mainly because nobody wants to be left with a machine that won't get supported by the OS (even if I think low-mem M1 machines will be phased out of OS updates at some point)

I think you vastly overestimate how much the average consumer thinks about or cares about OS updates.

What you say is something that could affect the decision making process for highly technical people, but even then... we have no firm commitments from Apple on which platforms will get the longest support, so it's a gut-feeling decision, which isn't very technical.

As you hint, the M1 could be treated as a pathfinder platform and deprecated much sooner than subsequent platforms, kind of like the original iPad.

The M1 is not ARMv9 and lacks SVE2... ARMv9 is coming soon, and that may become the long-term supported standard for Apple's Mac-on-ARM platform.

The original iPad was, in terms of compute specifications, a minimum viable product. The M1 Macs are not—they are the combination of a mature platform with a mature silicon chip. Given the sheer volume of M1 sales there’s no chance they’re going to be so prematurely deprecated as the original iPad was.

At the very least I’d put money on the M1 not being deprecated before all Intel-powered Macs (present and future) are deprecated.

I think the M1 will easily last for a few years - but we don't know what they have left in stock. Was the original iPad regarded as MVP when it came out?

The original iPad was a first generation product; its status as a minimum viable product was only clear after subsequent product cycles.

>But the more interesting point is that the rest of the market agrees with us early adopters and tech nerds.

No one outside of early adopters and tech nerds cares one wink about the components of their laptop. The days of normal people caring about specs are long gone.

“Duh” comments come from all the wins they’ve had in the mobile space. They have been and likely will continue to be 2 or more generations ahead in performance per watt on mobile. So when they were talking about doing a desktop and laptop chip it wouldn’t be a stretch to think they’d “knock it out of the park”.

> This would be a very different headline if devs were struggling to port their software, or if Rosetta 2 didn’t live up to its promise.

Yeah, imagine if Surface Pro X outsold Intel-based ones.

BS, there is no reality where the M1 failed with a company like Apple. They have too much loyalty for people to even consider other options. So much in fact that no one can be convinced of its flaws it’s all “Apple knocked it out of the park, most things work!”

We all know “most things” is subjective to how you use your PC.

Tell me a world where that wouldn’t ever happen and I’ll consider your Intel leading model scenario.

>Consider an alternate possibility: “sales of Apple’s new ARM macs outpaced by older models”.

This story would be "man bites dog", the linked story is "dog bites man", that's why people are reacting this way.

Seems to me that the statistic is designed to hide other possible stories. Consider that those unhappy with the M1 move wouldn't buy older Macbooks, they would leave the Apple ecosystem all together.

I can't speak to the quality of the M1 since I haven't used one yet, but I don't think the sales numbers mean that much. Basically just new shiny model outsells old standard model. Just look at the website. What would you rather buy, a standard model, or the one "supercharged by the Apple M1 chip?"

The low end new shiny model of just 2 variants are out selling all of the older and more expensive models combined. That’s big.

I assume Apple sells vastly more Airs and 13” Pros than they do any other machine they make. The lower price is a huge contributor. If the M1 were only on the top end machines, this thread wouldn’t exist.

That’s a lot of assumptions to make. Based on what?

OTOH, people who might have otherwise upgraded to one of those older and more expensive models are holding off on purchasing until new higher-end models are available.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com