Hoping they have success, but to say that their laptop chips are truly mainstream, at least in the same sense that Apple gives, is a bit generous I feel.
Obviously the X series has a decent shot at changing that, which I really hope it does.
I heard they were pretty good, on par and better than M3s.
I only saw that claim in an article where they explained that those chips (Snapdragon) aren’t anything special. Apparently yet another case that a company uses misleading benchmarks.
I would love something like that in a super small form factor, like a minipc (NUC, minisforum) or SBC (like RockPro64 size) so I could build a small home NAS with lots of power for home lab stuff.
Advances in Arm chips make the journey of porting software look better for devs, once a project starts porting it gets easier for other architectures (like riscv).
That and silicon competition is good. Keeps them forced to produce better or cheaper products to compete.
Everything since the M1. Mind blowing hype, graphs that seem shocking at announcement. Data that comes in below these graphs, then owing to the extremely high walls of the garden, a sigh and shoulder shrug at what you can do with the technology, because although cool and seemingly very powerful, you just can’t do much with it because of apples buisness philosophy.
Then buy similar hardware from a competitor that meets your needs. I mean, Apple was never innovative, so you surely can get something better somewhere else?
Does any one care?
There was so much hype on this generation of silicon and the landing has seemed extremely flat to me, largely because Apple.
I like keeping tabs on it, as they’re really the only ones pushing mainstream high end ARM chips at the moment.
Don’t forget about the new Snapdragon X series. I heard they were pretty good, on par and better than M3s.
Hoping they have success, but to say that their laptop chips are truly mainstream, at least in the same sense that Apple gives, is a bit generous I feel.
Obviously the X series has a decent shot at changing that, which I really hope it does.
I only saw that claim in an article where they explained that those chips (Snapdragon) aren’t anything special. Apparently yet another case that a company uses misleading benchmarks.
I would love something like that in a super small form factor, like a minipc (NUC, minisforum) or SBC (like RockPro64 size) so I could build a small home NAS with lots of power for home lab stuff.
Advances in Arm chips make the journey of porting software look better for devs, once a project starts porting it gets easier for other architectures (like riscv).
That and silicon competition is good. Keeps them forced to produce better or cheaper products to compete.
Do you just mean M4? Or all Apple Silicon?
Everything since the M1. Mind blowing hype, graphs that seem shocking at announcement. Data that comes in below these graphs, then owing to the extremely high walls of the garden, a sigh and shoulder shrug at what you can do with the technology, because although cool and seemingly very powerful, you just can’t do much with it because of apples buisness philosophy.
Then buy similar hardware from a competitor that meets your needs. I mean, Apple was never innovative, so you surely can get something better somewhere else?
That wasn’t stated by this person, no? It is a common fallacy to disprove a claim that wasn’t made.
The user only stated they can’t think of a use-case for the hardware, and therefore innovation is useless. They don’t even have to use it.