Pool: How many customers will loose Apple because M1 migration

[victor.espina]

The original post starts from the false premise, that "A LOT" of people switched to Intel Macs to run Windows. ...

I didn't say that. What I said was lot of us switched to mac because the new possibility of running Windows on those Macs. Buying a Mac just to install Windows on it, ts absurd. But being able to enjoy all the benefits of Apple's hardware and their MacOS, AND still being able to run you favourite game or use the tools you need for your daily work on a virtualized Windows its a non-brainer.

Or it was, until now.

 

[leman]

I didn't say that. What I said was lot of us switched to mac because the new possibility of running Windows on those Macs. Buying a Mac just to install Windows on it, ts absurd. But being able to enjoy all the benefits of Apple's hardware and their MacOS, AND still being able to run you favourite game or use the tools you need for your daily work on a virtualized Windows its a non-brainer.

Or it was, until now.

All the Windows tools I occasionally have to use for work run perfectly fine on my M1 Macs via Windows 10 virtualization. Games are a hit and miss. For some older titles, no problems. Newer stuff probably won't start.

Anyway, what I am trying to say is that the ability to virtualize Windows is not going anywhere. It is clear that Windows on ARM won't be sufficient for all the users, and obviously, those who absolutely need an Intel-based Windows installation will have to look for a different solution, but it's not as big as a disaster to the overall user base as you make it sound.

 

[victor.espina]

I know absolutely nothing about what type of work you do so maybe this doesn’t apply, but what I do know about audio and UX design is that you have to adapt to new tech -

If you work with Audio, Photography, Video, UX, iOS or MacOS development, then the move to M1 means only good and exiting things. This post was not meat for that kind of users that, I am fully aware, is Apple's main market and what drives their decisions.

But the fact that those are the main target for Apple's computers doesn't change the fact that there are a LOT of people out there, like me, that never buyed a Mac before because the spend could not be justified because you wasn't able to run your windows programs there, that suddenly were enabled to do so and DID buy Mac computers and kept using them for more than a decade... and we are a lot more than you all think.

 

[robco74]

Right, but Apple has done their part. They've added support for virtualization. It's up to MS to license Windows and provide a better emulation layer. It's up to companies like VMWare or Parallels to provide VM software. I'm sure at some point someone will provide an emulation layer - it happened back in the PPC days. We're not even a year into the transition. I would argue that most people who need VMs would also be better served by more powerful chips than M1.

It also depends on your needs. If you don't need blazing fast speeds, you can pick up something like a NUC to run x64 natively. There are solutions out there, and there are likely more in the pipeline. We're not quite a year from the announcement of the transition, and just six months after M1 launch. It's going to take a while to sort out every individual use case. In the meantime, Intel Macs will continue to be sold supported. There's no need to run out and buy M1 if you don't need it right away.

 

[MevetS]

I didn't say that. What I said was lot of us switched to mac because the new possibility of running Windows on those Macs. Buying a Mac just to install Windows on it, ts absurd. But being able to enjoy all the benefits of Apple's hardware and their MacOS, AND still being able to run you favourite game or use the tools you need for your daily work on a virtualized Windows its a non-brainer.

Or it was, until now.

And I quote: "It's old news that Apples earned a lot (A LOT) of new users when they made the transition from PowerPC to Intel, because the possibility of running Windows on Apple hardware, either via BootCamp or virtualization."

You literally said people bought Macs because they could run Windows. Yes, in addition to macOS. But they bought them to run Windows. I never said that they only bought them to run Windows. Although some people did, and if I recall correctly, there was even a PC magazine that said Macs were the best Windows computers.

And in post # 128 you write, "... the fact that there are a LOT of people out there, like me, that never buyed a Mac before because the spend could not be justified because you wasn't able to run your windows programs there, that suddenly were enabled to do so and DID buy Mac computers ..." again implying that they bought a Mac because they could run Windows. And by implication, as they did not by a Mac before this, not because they wanted to run macOS.

Please provide actual numbers to show that this was true. I've never seen these numbers. And I stand by my comment that it is a false premise. Please show that by " a LOT" that this number was/is a significant portion of the macOS user base.

I do not believe that it is, but I'd accept it if it could be shown otherwise.

Cheers.

 

[Jorbanead]

But the fact that those are the main target for Apple's computers doesn't change the fact that there are a LOT of people out there, like me, that never buyed a Mac before because the spend could not be justified because you wasn't able to run your windows programs there, that suddenly were enabled to do so and DID buy Mac computers and kept using them for more than a decade... and we are a lot more than you all think.

Curious if you have any research or info to back that up? I know people bought macs because of windows being an option, I’m not denying that, but without any sort of demographic numbers we’re all just making assumptions based off of our own experiences.

My point was basically what you summarized: if you use apple hardware and software things are great. If you rely on older legacy methods of development or niche software use case, you always run the risk of being left behind.

I guess I’m not sure what your point is? What would you like Apple to do about this?

 

[victor.espina]

Curious if you have any research or info to back that up? I know people bought macs because of windows being an option, I’m not denying that, but without any sort of demographic numbers we’re all just making assumptions based off of our own experiences.

My point was basically what you summarized: if you use apple hardware and software things are great. If you rely on older legacy methods of development or niche software use case, you always run the risk of being left behind.

I guess I’m not sure what your point is? What would you like Apple to do about this?

I guess you are right and its a silly question with no point at all. I guess I liked the era when anyone (that could afford it) could choose to use a Mac instead of a PC... but that is beside the point. Regarding numbers that support my claim that "a lot" of people are in my situation, I don't have any nor I could find any stats on how many people virtualize windows on mac or even how many licenses Parallels or VMWare had sold, so no.. I don't have any numbers to backup my empiric assertion.

 

[snorkelman]

@snorkelman And the ARM version of Windows does not work for you?

Yes and no

Yes, provided MS were to license it then I could use it for relatively up-to date systems without losing too much sleep at night

its just the reliance on rapidly moving dev builds with potential for the wheels to fall off something or other

eg 21370 would intermittently stall start up of the client app of one particular package, but thankfully 21374 has restored the status quo

When ARM is always going to be a non starter for us would be where there's an ancient back-away-slowly 'Apoca-box' hidden in a comms room or under a receptionists desk, that's been left to do its own thing for years

The 'not on *our* network? not *our* problem' one that the head IT druids cheerfully re-bury under a pile of Dell keyboard boxes and old patch cables each summer solstice, so that they can pretend they've never seen it

Can't usually make much of a start on those under Windows 10

 

[ericwn]

Nope, did not lose me - actually gained me back again.

Biggest mistake by Apple in 2006: dropping PPC in favor of Intel.

Now in 2020 M1 is replacing Intel and that's good for me.

If I want a PC, I'd get a Windows machine.

Not sure Apple had many options back in 2005/6. When the first Macs with intel chips launched they were way faster than what the PPC chips had on offer at the time.

 

[bobcomer]

I would argue that most people who need VMs would also be better served by more powerful chips than M1.

I think you'd be right about that for anything over 1 VM at a time. Cores are at a premium with the M1 and it slows down fast the more you push those 4 cores. My M1 really can only do 1 VM at a time with decent performance. You'd need more RAM too.

On my i9-10900 machine, I have 10 cores with hyperthreading and 64G of RAM, it can run a lot of VM's. Even my Intel Mac Mini can run multiple VMs well. (it also has 64G of RAM and a 6 core i7 w/hyper)

It also depends on your needs. If you don't need blazing fast speeds, you can pick up something like a NUC to run x64 natively. There are solutions out there, and there are likely more in the pipeline. We're not quite a year from the announcement of the transition, and just six months after M1 launch. It's going to take a while to sort out every individual use case. In the meantime, Intel Macs will continue to be sold supported. There's no need to run out and buy M1 if you don't need it right away.

I have the machines to do that at home, but not while I'm traveling. I bought my M1 Mac because I wanted it for traveling, but it really doesn't do enough of the job that I need to do that, so it basically just sits there, a waste of money.

I run VM's on Mac's over VM's on Windows because it works well and video works better than on a native Windows machine. I can do *anything* in a Windows VM on MacOS that I do on a Windows machine with regards to my job. There's no difference except I only have to have 1 machine, not 2. Which is both cheaper, lighter, and more efficient.

 

[robco74]

Well then you'll be screwed if or when Apple stops making macOS for x64 and you'll either need to keep your Intel Macs running or switch to another OS. I'm sure the same will happen when the Babbage Machine running your essential software finally breaks down.

 

[bobcomer]

Well then you'll be screwed if or when Apple stops making macOS for x64 and you'll either need to keep your Intel Macs running or switch to another OS. I'm sure the same will happen when the Babbage Machine running your essential software finally breaks down.

Nah, I wont be screwed, I'm keeping my Mac Mini for a long time, I just bought it last year, and I fully expect emulation to be available on the M1 (and later) chips eventually. I'll be able to run what I want, when I want/need it.

Babbage machine, ha, even I don't have one of those. I do have a slide rule though.

 

[snorkelman]

Well then you'll be screwed if or when Apple stops making macOS for x64 and you'll either need to keep your Intel Macs running or switch to another OS. I'm sure the same will happen when the Babbage Machine running your essential software finally breaks down.

well by time I run out of intel Macs we'll hopefully be on M8 or M9 ..by which point i'll be able to software emulate the Babbage Machine rather than virtualize it (and the x86) faster than real time..

 

[Hexley]

It's old news that Apples earned a lot (A LOT) of new users when they made the transition from PowerPC to Intel, because the possibility of running Windows on Apple hardware, either via BootCamp or virtualization.

All those customers face now the situation where Apple may decide to stop building Intel-based computers in the near future to focus on their own chips... Do you think this situation may cause Apple to loose many of those customers that still need to run windows-based apps in their workflows?

Apple will have a better profit margin with Apple Silicon. At the end of the day that's what is important to Apple.

Apple will have more than 15 years of Intel Macs for people who are Intel-dependent to transition to Universal 2 binaries. If these end users still need Intel Macs then buy the 2020 models.

 

[leman]

Apple will have a better profit margin with Apple Silicon. At the end of the day that's what is important to Apple.

Not to mention that Apple Silicon is a better value proposition to a vast majority of users.

 

[Hexley]

Not to mention that Apple Silicon is a better value proposition to a vast majority of users.

I strongly agree.

Performance per watt & absolute performance is superior per $ spent.

Only reason I still have my personnel on PCs is

• that there are no Macs selling below $699
• repairing Macs are expensive when user-caused damage occurs
• not all business apps have macOS binaries
• retraining cost
• management & maintenance for enterprise isn't that widespread
• Mac-specific IT people are difficult to find

 

[fivenotrump]

Nah, I wont be screwed, I'm keeping my Mac Mini for a long time, I just bought it last year, and I fully expect emulation to be available on the M1 (and later) chips eventually. I'll be able to run what I want, when I want/need it.

Babbage machine, ha, even I don't have one of those. I do have a slide rule though.

I have several slide-rules: they are still the best for some uses [refusing to use the ghastly phrase 'use cases']

 

[Krevnik]

I run VM's on Mac's over VM's on Windows because it works well and video works better than on a native Windows machine. I can do *anything* in a Windows VM on MacOS that I do on a Windows machine with regards to my job. There's no difference except I only have to have 1 machine, not 2. Which is both cheaper, lighter, and more efficient.

I definitely feel this remark. Some of it is because I’m more familiar with macOS, but I did try setting up a VM server using ESXi and Proxmox VE recently on a “spare parts PC” I cobbled together. Neither was as nice as I’d like for the “low maintainence home server” case. Mostly because since you are on your own for support while trying to maintain something meant for larger scale operations on specific hardware. I ran into an issue early on with my Proxmox VE instance hanging in the kernel after only 12 days uptime, and no logs to investigate are troublesome. Having to DIY system monitoring of thermals (network closet) versus being able to pick and choose from a few good options for macOS for under 10$.

Honestly, turning my Mac Pro into a VM server with a fresh OS install took about as much time as setting up Proxmox or ESXi on the PC.

 

[ericwn]

Meanwhile in the real world, Apple notebook shipments grew 91% as per the front page news.

 

[dmccloud]

I guess you are right and its a silly question with no point at all. I guess I liked the era when anyone (that could afford it) could choose to use a Mac instead of a PC... but that is beside the point. Regarding numbers that support my claim that "a lot" of people are in my situation, I don't have any nor I could find any stats on how many people virtualize windows on mac or even how many licenses Parallels or VMWare had sold, so no.. I don't have any numbers to backup my empiric assertion.

During last year's WWDC, it was revealed that a very small percentage of the Mac user base (well under 10%) actually used Boot Camp to run Windows on a Mac. While similar numbers aren't readily available for alternative methods such as Parallels or VMWare and other VM applications, it stands to reason that those numbers are also a relatively small percentage of the overall user base. Where Apple could lose customers is those organizations and (in some cases) individuals who require compatibility with either the x86 platform in general or Windows specifically because of some legacy/proprietary software that can't be updated for Apple Silicon. Even in that case, the number of new Mac users is increasing at a rate that surpasses the rate of those who may be switching back to Windows. Look at the immediately preceding post where notebook shipments increased by 91% - that means people are buying these machines and using them even though they do not run x86 software natively or support Boot Camp or other means of running an x86 build of Windows.

 

[fakestrawberryflavor]

I actually came back to apple because of the M1 and am on a new mini right now. My last Mac was a 2015 MBP (the one with ports) and left that eco system a while ago. Glad to be back, its blazin fast!

 

[Serban55]

So it seems Apple gain customers thanks to the M1 and not lost.
Or better put...at every 1 customer leaving the apple because M1, apple is gaining 3 more
SoC it is the big thing, and the biggest thing at Apple since they brought Johny Srouji from Intel over 10 years ago
No wonder Intel is for a decade falling and Apple is rising on this. They lost their chip guy
Apple, please don't let this brain leave, its one of your best ace

​

 

[Serban55]

Its strange and i think now only at Apple it applies..."cutting the costs" and "apple profit margins" is great for its customers...I dont recall any other brand in any industry segment to be this true as well