![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
My company's clients mostly aren't enterprise environments. Regular small and medium businesses that have always done things a certain way, I don't see jumping on the new ARM Macs, because they're different--or, like I said, the corporate procurement system is "we buy Dells, period", like my company. (In my company's case, it's a moot point anyway, as the software we develop our applications in is Windows-only, but that's already been discussed endlessly. Imagine a situation with something like Java, only it doesn't run on MacOS.) Plus, little 50-person companies, I don't think the stereotypical middle-aged HR lady who's been using Windows for 20 years and knows just enough to get by, isn't going to suddenly switch, even to a cheaper iMac as someone suggested above. Now, the next generation of people, who're more familiar with iOS? Sure, some of them, as they age into the workforce.
Apple is a lifestyle product company, that is quite focused in execution. Additionally, they have been making steady progress on the perf/watt gpu segment for awhile now. Finally building out their own gpu solutions in a desktop product is the first step in creating a desktop gaming ecosystem. With that in place, they would actually have a reason to better integrate 'desktop' class gaming in their portfolio. It's a huge market, and not many know that better than. . .apple.
I am envisioning an AppleTV rocking an A17x or M2 chip a few years down the road would make a hell of a console. Apple has the money that if they wanted to start up some gaming studios I have no doubt they could make a serious go of it. Their unified architecture and graphics model would give them a very large install base.
What does that say about Apple and how they're handling the growing gamer market? If not that then what about the crypto mining market? It's not beneath Apple to support gamers and crypto miners since a sale is a sale. They just don't have the hardware that can do that.
Wait, $80k? Does Apple actually sell $80k computers? I mean they do sell overpriced monitor stands so I could see Apple doing that. Also I imagine Apple will trade a range of years for credit towards an M1 based machine.
Yea and that's what I said. Apple wants more people to jump on their ARM based Macs and this is meant to kick start that move. I just don't see people dumping their Intel Macs so easily for the new M1 based Macs.
Yes but the performance and compatibility will not be the same.
We can see that with Apple's competitors growing in sales faster.
I'm telling you what people will want/need when they're done trying to use an ARM based Mac. You wanna know what Mac users had to deal with when they weren't on x86?
Everyone wants a Tesla because gas prices are insane, but most people can't afford one. More than 50% of Americans can't afford the cheapest new car back in 2016, so imagine today post COVID economy? A car isn't the same as a PC as you usually don't need a loan to buy a PC. Though with graphic card prices....
Ever wonder why Dell and Lenovo are selling their machines by the butt load? Dell did have a 50% growth in market share 3rd quarter. Cause they don't charge as much as Apple does.
Stop selling your own, lots of kidneys out there.
Apple hasn't announced anything about the M2. The M1 Pro and Max are ultimately 'just' supersized M1s... but that's like saying a Bugatti Chiron's engine is just two V8s stuck together. Unofficially, many expect Apple to launch the M2 in early 2022 in a new standard MacBook (it might not be called the Air). The M1 Pro and Max will likely still be faster; it's just that the M2 will represent the start of Apple's next wave of Mac silicon.
They don't particularly care - and haven't, for a very long time. Hasn't stopped them from making massive margins and revenue.
They REALLY don't care.
And they don't particularly care. It's a concept called blue ocean vs red ocean - the gaming market is highly saturated and not worth particularly pursuing if you're not already in that market. Other people will potentially solve that problem, aim for other markets that folks aren't really competing in the same way (or redefine the market). I don't use my Mac laptop for gaming - I've got a lot of other systems for that.
They do sell massively overpriced bits - the maxed out Mac Pros are pretty competitive now price-wise to actual apples-to-apples comparisons, although you do pay a premium. But the stands and shit? LOL.
Of the Intel mac folks I know, all but two have either ordered an M1 based one or are planning on it next year. I'm not because mine is a brand new maxed out 16" that work provided (free > not free, even if I'd rather have an M1 Max based system), and the other guy is doing x86 coding - he uses it really as FreeBSD on a laptop.
For most things, that doesn't matter :-/
A big part of that has been the push over the last 18 months by corporate sales to finish the WFH migrations. Apple does not have enterprise-scale MDM solutions - they just don't. And the ones that exist kinda suck except at small to medium scale. Dell/Lenovo/etc, in the meantime, will sell you 5000 or 10000 or 20000 laptops all with the MDM software pre-installed, SCOM ready to go, and once delivered directly to the end user, it'll effectively image itself (or Dell/Lenovo/etc will fix it if something goes wrong) to the corporate image. Can't do that with Apple, which limits Macbook sales to more niche solutions in the large enterprise (even if those niches are often quite large). I used to sell for one of the OEMs in question - no one compared dell to Apple or Lenovo to Apple at that scale - you went with the random x86 vendor you picked and did 20000 of them with whatever MDM solution preinstalled, and they were all identical. But the execs and sales folks on the other side often had Apple laptops. At the same time, ARM isn't really a concern for those folks either - the bigger issue is the latest release of MacOS, which isn't fully supported by Airwatch/etc yet.
Partially right - they don't charge what apple does because most end-users (esp. at the corporate level) don't need a lot of power. Thanks to Intel/AMD, you can be running just fine on a 5 year old level of processor performance and not even notice - Apple doesn't play in that space or price range, by choice (note: margins at that level are tiny). On top of that, my prior response (all the mdm imaging/etc) boosts corporate sales through the roof.
Oh yes, come a LONG way, but have a VERY long way to go. I can effectively update the corporate image in 50,000 Dell laptops in a couple of days, assuming they connect to the internet. I can do the same with iPads, but... not MacOS yet (at least not last year). Nor do I have the same level of control. Yet. Nor the flexibility ot define optional apps and corporate policies for licensing and distribution, limits, automation, etc. And those developers aren't standing still either - especially with Covid - this is big business right now.
Yeah not fully there yet, I’m having my Jamf migrated from on-site to the cloud right now and updating it a few versions. I’m looking forward to playing with the new features.
Seems like Apple doesn't care. In any case then Apple doesn't care about losing market share then.
Windows applications don't matter? As a Linux guy that's the #1 reason why I haven't completely abandoned Windows because performance and compatibility do matter.
Random you say? Who has the biggest year over year growth so far?
We'll find out in time won't we?
I use PowerPC, RISC, and x86 all the time and so did most of us. What's your point?
You know what the problem is with your analogy besides being a bad one? Apple is the one making the comparison to a RTX 3080 and not me. Apple, APPLE, APPLE is the one. You don't compare your product to a gaming GPU without gaming being involved. So yes, Ford would compare the F250 to a Porsche and claim to be as fast, if this analogy were to actually make sense.
Like I said, Apple is the one comparing their GPU performance to that of a RTX 3080, which is a gaming GPU. Fact is Apple's GPU isn't what matters but the video encoder they put on the GPU, which is less to do with the GPU and more to do with the encoder. People tend to think the GPU does this work, which it does but to a lesser extent. Intel has Quick Sync which is similar to what you see on Apple's GPU's.
Linus Tech Tips does show the 16 inch one isn't different.
They also didn't when they used Intel chips which can reach over 100C. They can feel free to spin those fans to win to prevent long term damage to those chips.
We making excuses for Apple again? I'm not even sure how the M16 sounds vs the Apple, but I'd rather have a cooler running laptop than a hotter one, just to avoid it damaging itself over time. Also avoid burning my lap. It is called a LAPtop for a reason after all.
Apple has had a bigger sales grown in 2020 and 2021 than Acer has but your chart is only PC makers so they will not be on that list
It's market share they didn't have. They are aiming at a different market - one arguably with higher margins, as their revenue and profit numbers show.
Not to Apple users, apparently. I don't have bootcamp on either of my Intel based macs, and I dropped fusion off long ago. They're productivity machines, not gaming boxes. I've yet to find a windows app that I need that doesn't have a native MacOS version, outside of games - and that's not what it's for. They're productivity machines - not gaming boxes.
You misunderstood me - "you pick a random x86 vendor" meant you as in the business buying a crap ton of laptops, not you as in DukenukemX. The corporate side buys Lenovo/Dell/HP/Asus/whatever. Individuals tend to buy Apple on the higher end (corporate does too, but in far smaller amounts than the other vendors) or x86 if they're gamers or cost-conscious. A large portion of that growth is in the enterprise space, which is mostly MDM and cost focused.
I'm pointing out that Apple has ALWAYS had "not-for-gaming" attached - it wasn't a priority with x86 and MacOS either! Are you bothered that your RISC and PowerPC systems can't run games or windows apps?
GPUs are used for a lot more than just games. Especially in laptops, where there are rarely any form of prosumer or professional GPUs (Asus latest release aside).
Look. It's clear that the M1 series is not aimed at your use cases. That's fine. It's not particularly aimed at mine either, but at the moment, laptops in ~general~ aren't aimed at my use cases right now - COVID sucks after all, and why use a laptop when I have both an Intel Extreme Edition and Threadripper sitting right here? But it IS aimed at a huge number of people that are buying them like hot cakes, and the M1 series of chips is incredibly powerful at the tasks it was designed for - video and photo work. Gaming never came into their equation - it's not a particular priority for Apple on laptops or desktops, just on their mobile devices because it drives app store revenue. If you want an x86 laptop for games and other uses - cool, buy one. I don't personally know what I'd get if I was back on the road and needed a system that could do everything, but that's me. For productivity? I'd take an M1 system in an instant - but I don't particularly need a laptop either.
As well as basic low-cost $500-700 laptops for office folk. A %@#%@# ton of those were sold to big business these last two years.
I've got a Zephyrus G14, the one with the 4900HS and RTX 2060, and while the fans spin up, they're not obnoxious for a gaming laptop. Sure, you can hear them, but the sound has been tuned, for one thing, so it's not the obnoxious whine you sometimes get, and, like I said, it's not all that loud. A lot of it clearly depends on how much effort the designer puts into it.
My Dell G5 with a 9750H and an RTX 2060 sounds like a god damned jet engine unless I have it on a cooling pad. But it does everything I've needed it to and most of the things I've wanted it to.
Long live the Latitude 3xxx series
Yeah, Dell's exactly the people who don't seem to put a lot of design into stuff except "how can we lower our BOM cost by a nickel with stuff like replacing the 24-pin ATX connector with a smaller one, or cheaping out on the CPU fan?" I've got coworkers with Latitudes (and I owned one of the last model of single-core 17" gaming Inspirons), and the Zephyrus is just engineered better. If I could talk my company into getting one for my next PC I'd be in heaven, but they'd never not buy Dell.
Dell's billing and admin features make accounting and administrative stuff really easy and when things are in warranty their support and parts availability (under usual circumstances) is really good. Right now they can't get me replacement laptop screens to save my life, the new disinfectant spray destroyed a room of them when the cleaning crew wiped down a conference room..... placed the request in Oct, ETA early Feb 2022.
And a lot of those cards can be stuffed into a server box en-masse, and generate less heat / use less power than the Tesla cards, AND are the same price even at markup. Plus you often get MORE cores that way. I had a customer at my last place with 10 R730s all filled with 2080TIs for that use case - they tried an R740 with V100s - got more out of the 2080s than they did the V100s, as they could simply stuff a pile of them in there in comparison.
Gonna reiterate what others said. We know you think PC gaming is the center of the universe, but here's a fun fact: you can compare performance of mainstream GPUs for things other than gaming. It's a shocker, I know. While Apple is definitely cherry-picking its benchmarks, it's also under no pretense that you're buying a MacBook Pro with gaming as a major focus.
Here's the thing, though: while I'm not sure I'd want my CPU running at 90F for long stretches, it often doesn't... and importantly, it also doesn't cook your legs in the process. My guess is that Apple prioritized quietness and either believed the temperatures were viable or that there were diminishing returns for ramping the fans higher. It's hard to say if Apple made the right choice without long-term tests or knowing what was happening in the lab, but it's still quieter and more lap-friendly than the M16. And, as mentioned earlier, it doesn't significantly degrade performance while on battery.
Apple seems to be pushing for video editing as their niche, which is understandable since video editing is at an all time high with all the game streamers with Twitch and YouTube.
Nvidia doesn't agree with you. Nvidia isn't advertising their RTX cards for productivity. Can they be? Yes, but Nvidia is trying hard to prevent that from being a thing with all the limits they put into crypto mining.
Is Nvidia pushing RTX cards for mining or is Nvidia crippling their cards to prevent people for buying them for miners? Again, you're not wrong but we're going by that Nvidia is pushing RTX cards as gamer cards. Therefore Apple comparing their GPU performance to RTX is like comparing their products to gamer cards, not products for video editing.
Tell your company I hate them.
Gaming plays such a big role in computing that GPU's wouldn't exist today if it wasn't for gaming. Doom outsold Windows 95 to the point where Bill Gates had to dress up as the Doom guy to push for Windows 95. Microsoft now puts serious resources into Xbox, and has even named their search engine after Cortana from Halo.
I think that some people who do work on their computers probably also play games. The M1 is not going to make playing games easy or even possible.
Apple isn't the only one who chooses to let their laptops cook at 90C or higher, but I feel this is done as planned obsolescence. I will not buy a laptop that at any point will run their temperature to 90C or higher. I plan to use my hardware for a long time and don't want to deal with repairing expensive things when they break. Though that's just me.
You... missed the point, and proved ours.
I love the idea of VR and I can play beat saber for maybe up to an hour, but any title that has me sitting down is a one-way trip to Pukesville.
It's pretty easy: Apple's GPU performance for portable devices is very good, and it already has a strong mobile app ecosystem.
An M1 runs too hot for something to be strapped to your face, there isn't enough surface area to move that heat. The A15 would be more than enough at this stage. Let alone any future A variants, the A16 assuming no changes, made on the N4P node would be 11% faster while using 22% less energy while being 6% smaller than the existing A15.
And all the folks doing video for every damned news story / event / thing / tiktok / etc now. Oh yes, games matter - but there are other markets, and htat's what Apple aims at.
Oh certainly - that'd cut into the stupid high margin GRID licenses they sell (not the cards, mind you - the software, which is literally just a driver, but that they charge $30 a month sub for. Per SEAT. That's pure profit.
Mining is a bit different - other productivity uses (CUDA / etc) aren't crippled.
There's a LOT that can use those cards. They aimed at something most people would know - saying it's like an A16 would confuse most consumers, since they don't know tesla cards. Mine too then. But yep.
Oh no doubt. But computers were originally built to process transactions and do scientific work - Gaming wouldn't exist the same way without that. All things are cyclical - computers drove gaming drove GPUs drove ML work/etc. Vector processing is handy for a LOT of stuff - and general purpose processors aren't great at that. GPUs are.
A lot of those have gaming systems too. Don't get me wrong - lack of gaming, if I needed a laptop, would make me hesitate to buy Apple. But... I also have 4 monster machines at home. And if I just needed a productivity laptop, Apple might be near the top of the list.
