13-inch MacBook Pro with Apple Silicon M1 review: Unprecedented power and battery for the ...

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 91
    charlesn said:

    charlesn said:
    Great review for one of the most baffling MacBook Pro upgrades I've ever seen from Apple. Love the new chip and how could you not--apparently there is a "free lunch" where you get amazing processing power with much less heat and much longer battery life, and it's called the M1. But this seems like an especially lazy upgrade otherwise. 

    What better time than with the introduction of the M1 to address some other long-in-the-tooth issues for the MacBook Pro? I'm not talking a complete redesign--just updates with tech that Apple already has on the shelf:

    14" screen in the same case with narrower bezels
    1080p camera. HELLO? Even post-pandemic, Zoom meetings for business will be essential--honestly, how do you stick a 720p camera in a new 'Pro" laptop that you're essentially rolling out in 2021? Sure, the image processing may make it look "good for 720p," but the added cost to Apple for a better camera would have been miniscule. 
    Fast WiFi 6. I'm not even talking about 6E, although that level of future-proofing would have been fabulous. But this new Pro doesn't even have the antenna array needed to support the fastest data transfer rates of which WiFi 6 is capable. 
    5G Mobile Connectivity. How hard could this be to implement when even the most basic iPad offers cellular?
    Touch Bar: Really? Still? Stick a fork in it, Apple... it's done! This is one of those technologies, like 3-D Press on iPhone, that might have been a good idea, but was never widely implemented by the developer community. 

    Again, none of these suggestions involves a new case design or some yet-to-be-introduced tech like mini-LED. This is off-the-shelf tech that Apple has implemented in other products and has been requested for the MacBook Pro for years in some cases. 
    The MBP's WiFi 6 (ax) listed max is 1.2Gbps and Intel Macs with WiFi 5 (ac) have a max of 1.3Gbps. Throughput isn't the only advantage, as WiFi 6 has other protocol benefits. But there are also constraints related to size and antenna design (where they can be placed in a unit). 

    Overall, when you make one change you know where the issues are. If Apple were to introduce a ton of changes without the time to complete the engineering (a 14 inch display and a whole new case design, and "5G" etc, are not ingredients you sprinkle on) its products would not be good. 

    Also, have you noticed this year there's a pandemic raging and Apple and its suppliers are constrained in what they can do? Despite this, it launched 5G iPhones across four new model types, introduced new watches and iPads and debuted HomePod mini. To suggest that it could also radically change the entire definition of its MacBooks is not really realistic. 

    The people who hate Touch Bar are the same who think Macs need touch screens. They constantly talk about how great Surface is. They're PC people; they should buy PCs. If Touch Bar wasn't helping to sell Macs, the most data-driven marketing in the world would have figured that out by now. What Touch Bar does is differentiate Apple's machines from basic PCs. And if you haven't yet noticed, Surface isn't exactly selling on the same level as MacBooks. 
    "...If Apple were to introduce a ton of changes without the time to complete the engineering (a 14 inch display and a whole new case design, and "5G" etc, are not ingredients you sprinkle on) its products would not be good."

    Really? Then let me introduce you to my iPhone 12 Pro Max: all new case design, new screen size, new processor, new 5G connectivity, new Lidar hardware, WiFi 6, new camera system, new Dolby Vision capable video system, new glass tech for the screen, etc., etc. So it seems Apple is quite capable, as one would expect. Apple is a TRILLION dollar company with hundreds of billions in cash, and you think it's not realistic that they could have released a truly updated version of a key product line that has been coasting on lazy upgrades for years?


    The clue is in the names - iPhone 12, M1 chip. One has matured over several generations and the other is on its first generation.

    No matter what anyone says, Apple has to prove that the M1 chip is the future. How better to do that than to change nothing but the chip on a machine and send it out into the wild?

    As for the iPhone, the 12 is a very rare release that seems to have rolled in the S and non-S iterations into 1, with an updated design, new hardware (LiDAR), new technology (5G), new software features like Dolby Vision recording, etc. It is basically has something for everyone who wanted something new on an iPhone (except for those hoping for a smaller Mini size).
    edited November 2020 watto_cobrah4y3s
  • Reply 42 of 91
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    charlesn said:

    charlesn said:
    Great review for one of the most baffling MacBook Pro upgrades I've ever seen from Apple. Love the new chip and how could you not--apparently there is a "free lunch" where you get amazing processing power with much less heat and much longer battery life, and it's called the M1. But this seems like an especially lazy upgrade otherwise. 

    What better time than with the introduction of the M1 to address some other long-in-the-tooth issues for the MacBook Pro? I'm not talking a complete redesign--just updates with tech that Apple already has on the shelf:

    14" screen in the same case with narrower bezels
    1080p camera. HELLO? Even post-pandemic, Zoom meetings for business will be essential--honestly, how do you stick a 720p camera in a new 'Pro" laptop that you're essentially rolling out in 2021? Sure, the image processing may make it look "good for 720p," but the added cost to Apple for a better camera would have been miniscule. 
    Fast WiFi 6. I'm not even talking about 6E, although that level of future-proofing would have been fabulous. But this new Pro doesn't even have the antenna array needed to support the fastest data transfer rates of which WiFi 6 is capable. 
    5G Mobile Connectivity. How hard could this be to implement when even the most basic iPad offers cellular?
    Touch Bar: Really? Still? Stick a fork in it, Apple... it's done! This is one of those technologies, like 3-D Press on iPhone, that might have been a good idea, but was never widely implemented by the developer community. 

    Again, none of these suggestions involves a new case design or some yet-to-be-introduced tech like mini-LED. This is off-the-shelf tech that Apple has implemented in other products and has been requested for the MacBook Pro for years in some cases. 
    The MBP's WiFi 6 (ax) listed max is 1.2Gbps and Intel Macs with WiFi 5 (ac) have a max of 1.3Gbps. Throughput isn't the only advantage, as WiFi 6 has other protocol benefits. But there are also constraints related to size and antenna design (where they can be placed in a unit). 

    Overall, when you make one change you know where the issues are. If Apple were to introduce a ton of changes without the time to complete the engineering (a 14 inch display and a whole new case design, and "5G" etc, are not ingredients you sprinkle on) its products would not be good. 

    Also, have you noticed this year there's a pandemic raging and Apple and its suppliers are constrained in what they can do? Despite this, it launched 5G iPhones across four new model types, introduced new watches and iPads and debuted HomePod mini. To suggest that it could also radically change the entire definition of its MacBooks is not really realistic. 

    The people who hate Touch Bar are the same who think Macs need touch screens. They constantly talk about how great Surface is. They're PC people; they should buy PCs. If Touch Bar wasn't helping to sell Macs, the most data-driven marketing in the world would have figured that out by now. What Touch Bar does is differentiate Apple's machines from basic PCs. And if you haven't yet noticed, Surface isn't exactly selling on the same level as MacBooks. 
    "...If Apple were to introduce a ton of changes without the time to complete the engineering (a 14 inch display and a whole new case design, and "5G" etc, are not ingredients you sprinkle on) its products would not be good."

    Really? Then let me introduce you to my iPhone 12 Pro Max: all new case design, new screen size, new processor, new 5G connectivity, new Lidar hardware, WiFi 6, new camera system, new Dolby Vision capable video system, new glass tech for the screen, etc., etc. So it seems Apple is quite capable, as one would expect. Apple is a TRILLION dollar company with hundreds of billions in cash, and you think it's not realistic that they could have released a truly updated version of a key product line that has been coasting on lazy upgrades for years?

    Suggest you re-read what I said about Touch Bar... nothing about hating it. (Although, if you worked in Mac-driven video post-production, you'd find plenty of haters.) But nearly five years after being introduced, it's still not widely supported by developers. We'll see what happens going forward, but Touch Bar seems destined to find its way into the Apple Tech Retiree Home alongside 3-D Press for iPhone. 

    I think this might be what they call a 'false equivalence'.

    Yes, the iPhone has a new case, new screen, new whatever … But what it doesn't have is a completely new internal architecture. If Apple had replaced the ARM chips with something else that required emulations built for existing software, new frameworks and ten years of fresh development then I can guarantee that they wouldn't make life even harder for themselves by building this into a phone with new screen, new case, new cameras, new whatever.

    That's why your argument doesn't hold any water.
    williamlondonwatto_cobraroundaboutnowjony0
  • Reply 43 of 91
    iqatedoiqatedo Posts: 1,733member
    davidgg said:
    charlesn said:

    1080p camera. HELLO? Even post-pandemic, Zoom meetings for business will be essential--honestly, how do you stick a 720p camera in a new 'Pro" laptop that you're essentially rolling out in 2021? Sure, the image processing may make it look "good for 720p," but the added cost to Apple for a better camera would have been miniscule. 
    It’s 2020, not 2021. That being said, I’ve been working on a large federal contract where all of the staff is remote. Do you know how often we use video conferencing the past 5 years? No times. Not a single one. We use tools like Jabber and Webex and Teams and conduct meetings all the time, but they’re teleconference, as that’s all that’s needed to talk. We don’t need crummy video conference where everyone is looking slightly off-camera; there’s nothing gained when it comes to discussing projects and work to be done. Normals think Zoom is omg important, but it isn’t. It’s been teleconference for the past decade on our other contracts too. 
    Your experience is not universal. Zoom has basically taken over the financial industry and others. What happened to WebexX ? Cisco dropped the ball. 
    Look at Zoom share price ; most of the big push here is from business
    I had resisted for as long as I could until obliged to host a meeting which would also be my first Zoom session. I was very, very pleasantly surprised at the quality and utility of the process. A much better experience than Webex, which I had used previously quite a bit. (I didn't need to share workspaces or desktops but can happily recommend.)
    dewme
  • Reply 44 of 91
    many gaming benchmarks/real tests here
    https://www.youtube.com/user/TonyIsGaming/videos 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 45 of 91
    The whole ARM Windows on Mac thing is pretty irrelevant - I believe that Apple's made changes to Apple Silicon with would make it more of a headache than something worthwhile.

    First off, Apple has eliminated ARMv7, the 32 bit ARM instruction set - and Windows ARM I believe only runs 32 bit.

    Secondly, IIRC Apple has altered some standard ARM things like parameter lists to vector instructions to more closely mirror that of Intel.

    More interesting may be what Parallels is working on which they've been keeping very mum about.

    My wild-ass guess is a hypervisor for x64 Windows which would initiate the OS load process and front-end Windows or Linux segment loaders and read Windows or Linux binaries and through magic similar to Rosetta 2 translate x64 (and possibly x86) code into Apple Silicon code and load that translated code into memory. Of course this would kill signed code and that would have to be handled as well. Original code segments could have CRCs and lengths recorded and used as a key for an Apple Silicon translated code cache whose entries could be appropriately aged and deleted if unused.
    Dan_Dilgerwatto_cobra
  • Reply 46 of 91

    The people who hate Touch Bar are the same who think Macs need touch screens. They constantly talk about how great Surface is. They're PC people; they should buy PCs. If Touch Bar wasn't helping to sell Macs, the most data-driven marketing in the world would have figured that out by now. What Touch Bar does is differentiate Apple's machines from basic PCs. And if you haven't yet noticed, Surface isn't exactly selling on the same level as MacBooks. 
    I have to agree that the Mac will eventually need a touch screen, if only to overcome the UI deficit of the iOS/iPadOS app on Mac experience. I've read the current UI is less than optimal.

    Apple may eventually want to a a studio type PC also which would allow pen input and that would also require touch input.

    There's really no telling where Apple Silicon can go now with high power and efficient SoCs, and a device like the Surface Studio is not unthinkable. I could easily see Apple taking a stab at something like that for their creatives, and just because Apple has said in the past they wouldn't do something pretty much is only for the conditions at the time (which have drastically changed).
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 47 of 91

    auxio said:
    charlesn said:
    1080p camera. HELLO? Even post-pandemic, Zoom meetings for business will be essential--honestly, how do you stick a 720p camera in a new 'Pro" laptop that you're essentially rolling out in 2021?
    Because not all pros (in fact not many I know) choose to plaster their face everywhere.  They're using their machine to produce things other than pictures and videos of themselves.  And pro photographers/videographers certainly aren't filming with a laptop.
    I have a 2020 iMac 5K with a 1080p camera, and ironically now that I'm retired I do less videoconferencing than I ever did.

    The 1080p camera is nice, and I have the option to turn it off if an image of me in my skivvies would be objectionable 😄. Of course if you don't have it the option to turn it on is absent. Really nowadays 1080p is everywhere, from my doorbell to my spotlight cam in the back yard. My wife is still working and by common consensus she and her colleagues normally keep 720p cameras off.

    More than 1080p and you get into the other side can't handle it territory. I have a 4K Brio laying around here that I tried on my 2017 5K gathering dust - which I ordered and had to wait three months to get - and found that no one on the other side, including medical professionals doing professional virtual vists could handle.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 48 of 91
    ednlednl Posts: 61member
    ednl said:
    The USB 4 name is misleading. It's technically correct because the new specification doesn't mandate supporting the fastest speed (40 Gbps). The actual supported USB speed is 10 Gbps on the new Macbooks, just like on the old ones. It's exactly the same "USB 3.2 gen 2".
    This is incorrect, according to Apple. As I have said before, and have elaborated upon with Apple, the controllers are full USB 4 controllers, with USB-4 speeds. Just because the spec sheet below it says compatible with USB 3.2 gen 2 does not mean that it is not USB 4, with all that entails.

    What it certainly is not is Thunderbolt 4, which we'd have preferred to have been more clear and not had to hunt down Apple PR folks to confirm.

    We'll be testing more as we see more native USB4 (not TB3) peripherals.
    Yes it *is* compliant with the USB 4 standard, because USB 4 doesn't say that 40 Gbps *has* to be supported. But I am 99% sure that it doesn't do 40 Gbps over USB, because why wouldn't they say that in the spec sheet instead of "only" 10 Gbps? (They are calling it USB 3.1 gen 2, which was the same as what is now called USB 3.2 gen 2.) We'll see.
  • Reply 49 of 91
    loopless said:
    You should all go to the dark side for a bit  to hear all the gnashing of teeth in the "PC" world. Quite amusing....
      
    The rant from PCWorld's Gordon Mah Ung was glorious in its nerd rage:

    https://www.pcworld.com/article/3596814/new-macbook-air-is-not-faster-than-98-percent-of-pc-laptops.html

    The definition of butt hurt.
    foregoneconclusionfocherwatto_cobra
  • Reply 50 of 91

    wood1208 said:
    No big deal but why stingy on ports when Apple now controlling most what goes inside out in M1 Macbook ? Give at-least 3 ports. Two on left like now but one on right side. Convenient to charge or use one side port when other side port connected to charger.
    These are low end SoCs meant to be a starting point. They clearly have limits on IO and RAM. I would expect that to be fixed in the 2nd quarter 2021. I bought a M1 MacBook Air knowing full well that I would probably be replacing it in 6 months with a higher end Apple Silicon notebook. Transitions are like that.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 51 of 91
    The whole ARM Windows on Mac thing is pretty irrelevant - I believe that Apple's made changes to Apple Silicon with would make it more of a headache than something worthwhile.

    First off, Apple has eliminated ARMv7, the 32 bit ARM instruction set - and Windows ARM I believe only runs 32 bit.

    Secondly, IIRC Apple has altered some standard ARM things like parameter lists to vector instructions to more closely mirror that of Intel.
    Not according to what I've read. Windows on Arm is mostly 64-bit AArch64. Supposedly even Microsofts 32-bit Win32 emulator is written in 64-bit code. I can't confirm this but the information seems legitimate. It really sounds like this comes down to Microsoft wanting to support Windows on Arm in a Apple Silicon VM. They have to license it in a new way.

    Even if Apple has added instructions, their license requires them to pass compatibility tests for standard AArch64 instructions. Apple's additions are just that, additions not substitutions. An issue could arise if Qualcomm also added non-standard opcodes and Microsoft used them, then it could be hard to reconcile but I haven't heard of QC nor Microsoft doing that.
    edited November 2020 watto_cobra
  • Reply 52 of 91

    ednl said:
    ednl said:
    The USB 4 name is misleading. It's technically correct because the new specification doesn't mandate supporting the fastest speed (40 Gbps). The actual supported USB speed is 10 Gbps on the new Macbooks, just like on the old ones. It's exactly the same "USB 3.2 gen 2".
    This is incorrect, according to Apple. As I have said before, and have elaborated upon with Apple, the controllers are full USB 4 controllers, with USB-4 speeds. Just because the spec sheet below it says compatible with USB 3.2 gen 2 does not mean that it is not USB 4, with all that entails.

    What it certainly is not is Thunderbolt 4, which we'd have preferred to have been more clear and not had to hunt down Apple PR folks to confirm.

    We'll be testing more as we see more native USB4 (not TB3) peripherals.
    Yes it *is* compliant with the USB 4 standard, because USB 4 doesn't say that 40 Gbps *has* to be supported. But I am 99% sure that it doesn't do 40 Gbps over USB, because why wouldn't they say that in the spec sheet instead of "only" 10 Gbps? (They are calling it USB 3.1 gen 2, which was the same as what is now called USB 3.2 gen 2.) We'll see.
    Why would they support 40 GB/s over TB3 and not USB4 which is mostly the same specification? Doesn't seem likely. If they have the bandwidth for 40 GB/s over TB3 they have enough for USB4 as well.
    chiawatto_cobra
  • Reply 53 of 91
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 2,580member
    With M1 MAC, Apple giving higher performance/features per $ price when compare to equivalent Intel inside. It also helps vertical tigher integration. Since Apple controls the CPU/GPU chip design,schedule and cost; further down in cycle, Apple can easily drop the price creating value for average as well business, enterprise customers. This also helps Apple continue making more $ per MAC which fuels with Apple coming out with better MAC's on a regular basis and keep dropping price for current/older MACs faster on a regular basis. The whole strategy is WIN for all.
    If M1 Macbooks were available at the end of 2018; the pandemic demand would have put Apple M1 MAC in severe short supply.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 54 of 91
    jdb8167 said: The rant from PCWorld's Gordon Mah Ung was glorious in its nerd rage:
    It's definitely funny that he both brags about the gargantuan number of Windows laptops sold, then doesn't seem to understand that 2% of that gargantuan number would include those high-end Zephyrus G14 and Area 51M laptops that he references.
    urashidwatto_cobra
  • Reply 55 of 91
    ednlednl Posts: 61member
    jdb8167 said:
    Why would they support 40 GB/s over TB3 and not USB4 which is mostly the same specification? Doesn't seem likely. If they have the bandwidth for 40 GB/s over TB3 they have enough for USB4 as well.
    Because they probably use an existing Intel TB3 + USB chip, which doesn't do USB speeds greater than 10 Gbps.
  • Reply 56 of 91
    dewmedewme Posts: 3,946member
    jdb8167 said: The rant from PCWorld's Gordon Mah Ung was glorious in its nerd rage:
    It's definitely funny that he both brags about the gargantuan number of Windows laptops sold, then doesn't seem to understand that 2% of that gargantuan number would include those high-end Zephyrus G14 and Area 51M laptops that he references.
    Look up the definition of "rant" and you'll see that there's really nothing more say. The part about "the 93 out of 100 people who prefer to buy Windows laptops over MacOS laptops every year" is especially precious. Yeah, I'm driving a Honda instead of a Lexus because I prefer Honda over Lexus. Yeah...

    This does, however, expose one of the mystical and magical powers of lies. The very best lies are the ones that provide solace for the lies that we've been telling ourselves, as in "all of my failures in life are due to somebody else, not myself." Somebody else made me buy that Honda and a Windows PC instead of a Lexus and a Mac, and I prefer it that way, I think, because I'm a total winner. More kool-aid please, and make it a double.
    urashidfocherwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 57 of 91
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,433member
    iqatedo said:
    davidgg said:
    charlesn said:

    1080p camera. HELLO? Even post-pandemic, Zoom meetings for business will be essential--honestly, how do you stick a 720p camera in a new 'Pro" laptop that you're essentially rolling out in 2021? Sure, the image processing may make it look "good for 720p," but the added cost to Apple for a better camera would have been miniscule. 
    It’s 2020, not 2021. That being said, I’ve been working on a large federal contract where all of the staff is remote. Do you know how often we use video conferencing the past 5 years? No times. Not a single one. We use tools like Jabber and Webex and Teams and conduct meetings all the time, but they’re teleconference, as that’s all that’s needed to talk. We don’t need crummy video conference where everyone is looking slightly off-camera; there’s nothing gained when it comes to discussing projects and work to be done. Normals think Zoom is omg important, but it isn’t. It’s been teleconference for the past decade on our other contracts too. 
    Your experience is not universal. Zoom has basically taken over the financial industry and others. What happened to WebexX ? Cisco dropped the ball. 
    Look at Zoom share price ; most of the big push here is from business
    I had resisted for as long as I could until obliged to host a meeting which would also be my first Zoom session. I was very, very pleasantly surprised at the quality and utility of the process. A much better experience than Webex, which I had used previously quite a bit. (I didn't need to share workspaces or desktops but can happily recommend.)
    The hospital I work at has a contract with century link for telecom service. Many administrative meetings have switched from the Century Link teleconference service to Zoom because it’s simply better. The video works better and the audio is better. The companies Strangedays works with may not use it, but it’s still a huge part of the telecom market. 
    iqatedo
  • Reply 58 of 91
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,433member


    The people who hate Touch Bar are the same who think Macs need touch screens. They constantly talk about how great Surface is. They're PC people; they should buy PCs. If Touch Bar wasn't helping to sell Macs, the most data-driven marketing in the world would have figured that out by now. What Touch Bar does is differentiate Apple's machines from basic PCs. And if you haven't yet noticed, Surface isn't exactly selling on the same level as MacBooks. 
    I have to agree that the Mac will eventually need a touch screen, if only to overcome the UI deficit of the iOS/iPadOS app on Mac experience. I've read the current UI is less than optimal.

    Apple may eventually want to a a studio type PC also which would allow pen input and that would also require touch input.

    There's really no telling where Apple Silicon can go now with high power and efficient SoCs, and a device like the Surface Studio is not unthinkable. I could easily see Apple taking a stab at something like that for their creatives, and just because Apple has said in the past they wouldn't do something pretty much is only for the conditions at the time (which have drastically changed).
    The screen on my MacBook Pro actually touches the keyboard when it closes so it constantly has fingerprints all over it. If I’m going to deal with a smudged screen I feel like I might as well have a touch screen!
    firelockwatto_cobra
  • Reply 59 of 91
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,127member
    I have a good guess about the latest universal memory architecture, that the next-level Macs don't really need 64 or 128GiB of RAM anymore.  In this case, it could be two LPDDR5 running at ~6400MT/s, 16GiB each.

    It'll simply do what's already done on the M1: two ultrafast LPDRAM chips on the same package, let the speed take over and make up for its size.  That can free up more space for other components - bigger speakers and larger fans, reduce complexity of the logic board and finally having software to take the advantage of the RAM speed.  They have done this on smartphones for a decade and now finally on personal computers.  This could be the future.
    watto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 60 of 91
    ednl said:
    jdb8167 said:
    Why would they support 40 GB/s over TB3 and not USB4 which is mostly the same specification? Doesn't seem likely. If they have the bandwidth for 40 GB/s over TB3 they have enough for USB4 as well.
    Because they probably use an existing Intel TB3 + USB chip, which doesn't do USB speeds greater than 10 Gbps.
    Not from what I understand. The TB3/USB4 controller is on the SoC die and it is an Apple design.
    focher
Sign In or Register to comment.