Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Product Lineup now is a joke?!
- Thread starter phl92
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I am keeping my 2020 intel MBP as I need to be able to run windows 10 in VMWare and develop / test code using the x64 architecture for my school assignments (since that's what the TA's and professors are using). That said I'm buying an M1 Air 16 Gig / 512 to play around with.
Better Apple SoC's coming. This is only the low performance 13" laptops, Mac mini that used Intel built in GPU. Good test of marketplace acceptance for a 2 year transition.
Last edited:
I was just asking an "Apple Specialist" about this in their support chat (since I have that exact Intel Mac Mini model). I always take customer support about technical issues with a grain of salt, but he said the Intel Mac Mini SSD was higher end due to being PCIe, and that the Intel chipset supports more memory. I asked about CPU power, he basically said that the M1 could get similar power using less electricity / heat.
I also asked if the M1 version supported external GPUs through the Thunderbolt port similar to the 2018 model, he said it was compatible with most eGPUs over either Thunderbolt or USB 3.1 gen 2 ports.
I also asked if the M1 version supported external GPUs through the Thunderbolt port similar to the 2018 model, he said it was compatible with most eGPUs over either Thunderbolt or USB 3.1 gen 2 ports.
There are many reasons the Intel models are likely sold side by side. As others have noted:
And I am willing to bet that if Apple axed both the Intel MacBook Pro 13 and Intel MacBook Air simultaneously that there would probably be some very unhappy threads.
- You cannot virtualize Windows with AS
- You cannot dual boot Windows with AS
- You cannot (apparently) run more than one external display with the current AS laptop offers
- You are only getting two TB3/USB ports with the current AS laptops
- Some pro or niche apps may be years away from full software support for AS
- Some may have expensive and/or proprietary legacy software only capable of running on Intel
- Some apps may perform vastly better on Intel Macs, at least for the time being
- Education institutions or businesses may still have x86/64 purchasing requirements
- Some (myself included) may not wish to purchase a first generation product given they can sometimes have growing pains and issues
- Apple may wish to have a fallback for those not wanting to move to AS for other various reasons - they have done this before (the 2012 MacBook Pro and 2012 Retina MacBook Pro, for example.)
And I am willing to bet that if Apple axed both the Intel MacBook Pro 13 and Intel MacBook Air simultaneously that there would probably be some very unhappy threads.
Apple's website notes the two 4K displays for the Intel version but not for the Apple Silicon version.
Some of us work for large companies where we are lucky to have Macs available for standard procurement laptops. We just got an email saying not to upgrade to Big Sur since the company was not ready for it. I doubt we'll see the new ASi machines available for people to get anytime soon unless someone has a very special reason to get one (like development).
Weird. You're right, for the MacBook at least. The Mac Mini supports two (one of them connected through HDMI):
I don't know why is there such a limitation. Two 4K displays use less bandwith than a single 6K display.
It is strange. It might actually drive two but just an oversight in the listing data?
Is the single external display limit confirmed? That would be a deal-breaker for many people, especially on the Mac Mini.
it is the first step to what Apple said is a 2 year transition.
It's their first computer M-class chip, those don't get developed overnight.
Apple even said they will continue updating Macs with new Intel CPUs
I think what Apple is offering right now makes total sense
Have you ever dealt with corporate IT departments? Do you have any idea how much inertia they have? They will continue ordering Intel machines because that’s what they’ve ordered in the past, and there’s no reason for Apple to cut their margins as long as the companies are willing to pay.
The only joke here is the keynote presentation where Apple pushed discriminatory diversity instead of the best people for the job. Well it's not a joke, it's more a disappointment.
Secondly this is only the portable line up of Macs. The Mini is in reality just a screen less portable Mac.
We are yet to see the real workhorses shown off. As in the iMac and Mac Pro.
This makes sense as the software that many iMac and Mac Pro users need is not there yet. For many of these users, no software equals no hardware switch. Next year once the software is developed, then they will want to buy an ASi Mac.
Secondly this is only the portable line up of Macs. The Mini is in reality just a screen less portable Mac.
We are yet to see the real workhorses shown off. As in the iMac and Mac Pro.
This makes sense as the software that many iMac and Mac Pro users need is not there yet. For many of these users, no software equals no hardware switch. Next year once the software is developed, then they will want to buy an ASi Mac.
Seems yesterday was the last day for the Intel setup in some product lineups
www.theverge.com
bye bye Intel
Apple is no longer selling Intel-based MacBook Airs or two-port Intel MacBook Pros
But you can’t buy an Intel-based MacBook Air anymore.
bye bye Intel
How do you know these were not the best for the job? Lol at “discriminatory diversity” that’s just absurd.
The line-up doesn't make sense because it's in transition from Intel to Apple Silicon.
They've done the easy bit first - ultraportables that (should) thrash the low-power offerings from Intel. The Mini (I suspect) because of a lot of interest in the developers' toolkit.
If we haven't seen what they're going to do with the higher-end machined by next summer then there may be a problem.
I was also confused why they keep offering the 2 Intel MBP options (which are way more expensive) alongside the 2 M1 MBPs when the M1 is supposed to be so good. I understand that there are certain benefits when using an Intel based machine and there's also more RAM + 2 more Thunderbolt 3 ports but it's still strange that these cost so much more when the M1 chip is so good.
My question would be how the M1 chip compares to the 2 Intel MBPs. I don't think that the 3x, 5x etc. claims were made in comparison to the Intel MBPs that are in the current lineup and instead to some inferior chip, right?
My question would be how the M1 chip compares to the 2 Intel MBPs. I don't think that the 3x, 5x etc. claims were made in comparison to the Intel MBPs that are in the current lineup and instead to some inferior chip, right?
Explanations is quite simple. Intel is still king of chipsets or integrated solutions in environment where CPU sits. It's not all about CPU and it will never be all about CPU. Take a look at the AMD with it's newest CPUs, Threadripper 2 is great value for prosumers compared to anything Intel but chipset is where it takes a dip into ****. No onboard RAID, mix and match of IOs including Intel's technology that are stuck on the board which might work and might not work depending on the day you turn on the computer. AMD chipsets are still inferior to Intel, it's like a Frankenstein compared to Intel integration. Same thing with new M1 chip, it's downgraded chipset compared to what Intel offers and it's a lot less flexible.
I guess it’s time for you you use hp laptops and Samsung phones. Then you will really have something to whine about.
Based on repeated and persistent rumors for the last 6 months about re-designed machines in the pipeline in combination with what we saw released yesterday. It fits perfectly. They just replaced all of their low end machines right now, including their most popular, top selling models. All of which share a common limitation in i/o - namely the single TB controller on the SoC.
In order to replace the next tier of products - the top end 13” MBP, the 16” MBP, the top end Mac mini, and the 21” iMac - they will provide the mid-tier chip, which I simply dub the “M1X” as a placeholder, which will mostly likely have the following features over the normal M1:
- 2 TB controllers on board for a total of 4 TB/USB4 ports.
- 2 configurations of RAM - 16GB and 32GB
- 2x the performance cores (possibly binned out to 6P cores for the 14” MBP and entry level 16” MBP)
- 12 GPU cores
Not that I disagree at all - but clearly Apple doesn’t have to be as flexible as Intel or AMD in their chipsets. These SoC’s are only going in to Macs, nothing else. So they will be purpose built. TB4 is probably not coming to the Mac, and Apple will stick with USB4 until the next generation. Remeber that they only have introduced the worst ever Apple Silicon Mac SoC that there will ever be - their 1st generation entry level offering. It doesn’t really surprise me that they went with only one TB controller for the M1.
From a performance perspective though, I daresay the new M1 MBA’s and entry level 13” MBP’s will actually clown the top end Intel 13” MBP once we see some real world performance comparisons, and probably rival what the current 16” MBP has to offer as well.
This only works in Apple’s favor. In addition to all the reasons @ght56 listed above, I suspect they have a purchase order level commitment left to burn off on the Intel processor contract, and they simply needed more time to get manufacturing up and running on the SoC and hardware re-designs coming as well. We should return to this in 6 months and see what has developed.
I was actually disappointed as well with the Mac mini i/o - I am still going to get one to see how it stacks up against my BTO 2017 27” 5K iMac though.