These are the Mac features exclusive to Apple Silicon

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited December 2021
A Mac with Apple Silicon inside isn't just noticeably faster than their Intel counterparts; it's capable of a few other exclusive features too. Here is what an Apple Silicon-based Mac can do that the Intel Macs can't.

The M1 24-inch iMac
The 24-inch iMac with Apple's M1 processor

Intel machines still exist

At the moment, Apple sells a mix of Intel-based machines and an ever-increasing number of Apple Silicon-based Macs. Apple is amid a two-year transition to run its Mac lines entirely on Apple Silicon, but until then, there are existing machines available in the current lineup, on the second-hand market, and on sale as last-gen devices that use Intel chips.

This inevitably brings up the question of what are the differences -- other than pure performance -- between an Apple processor and an Intel one.





At the time of publication, there are currently three Apple processors on the market. There is the M1, the M1 Pro, and the M1 Max. Over time, this list will undoubtedly expand.

Apple's processors have plenty of benefits in terms of performance, but as Apple can control every facet of these chips, there is currently a subset of Mac features exclusive only to Apple's chipsets.

Sets Apple Silicon apart

As Apple has integrated its image signal processor into M1 series processors, it has afforded improved performance of the built-in FaceTime camera. Notably, users can enable Portrait Mode on a Mac running Apple Silicon.

Portrait mode
Portrait Mode on FaceTime


Users can create an artificial bokeh over their background by going to Control Center and clicking video effects while on a FaceTime call. This elevated look helps give a more high-end appearance to video calls and can take away from perhaps otherwise untidy rooms.

Maps on Apple Silicon
Some cities in Apple Maps have more details on Apple Silicon


In Maps, an interactive glove view is only available on Apple Silicon, in which users can spin the globe and seamlessly zoom in and out. Some cities -- i.e., San Fransisco, Los Angeles, New York, and London -- have much more detail as well, with trees, roads, crosswalks, landmarks, and more viewable when zoomed in.

Apple's Neural Engine aids a few speech features too. Apple Silicon machines have on-device dictation, which doesn't require uploading the audio to the cloud for analysis and therefore doesn't need an internet connection.

There is also text-to-speech support for additional languages -- Danish, Finnish, Norwegian, and Swedish.

With Apple Silicon, Apple no longer needed the T2 chip found in its Intel machines. Apple baked all of the T2 security and performance features directly into the processor and then some.

This is what enabled Apple Silicon machines to work with Apple's wireless Magic Keyboard with Touch ID.

Magic Keyboard with Touch ID
Magic Keyboard with Touch ID


The Magic Keyboard with Touch ID can be used on Intel Macs, but only as a keyboard. The Touch ID authentication won't work.

Finally, since the M1-series processors are based on the same framework as Apple's A-series processors primarily used in iPhone and iPad, iOS and iPadOS apps run are able to run natively on Macs with Apple Silicon.

Eve Home for Mac
Eve Home for Mac


Apps for iOS and iPadOS can run on Intel Macs when packaged via Catalyst, but this isn't necessary for Apple Silicon. This means more iOS and iPadOS apps are available on Apple Silicon Macs than on Intel, such as Eve's Home app.

This is just the beginning

Apple isn't shunning Intel chips in a shameless ploy to push its chips, but by having such tight control over the processor, it can do some cool things.

Some of these features may be small and inconsequential, but the list will only continue to grow as new Macs launch and Apple hits its stride with Mac-specific chips.

Read on AppleInsider
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 21
    "A Mac with Apple Silicon inside isn't just noticeably faster than their Intel counterparts; it's capable of a few other exclusive features too. Here is what an Apple Silicon-based Mac can do that the Intel Macs can't."

    "but as Apple can control every facet of these chips, there is currently a subset of Mac features exclusive only to Apple's chipsets."

    Let's not kid ourselves. All features listed (even running iOS/iPadOS apps) are well within the realms of the computing power available on Intel-based Macs. Hell, Dragon NaturallySpeaking did on-device dictation what, over 20 years ago? Surely not as well as Siri today, but then again, you can't compare a few-hundred-MHz Pentium Pro or Pentium II to current chips (and even older ones).

    It's not a technical issue, but merely a marketing strategy of differentiation to move new product. And Apple is (or at least should be, you never know with governments these days) well within their rights to do so. But don't pretend there's some magical Apple Silicon fairy dust that enables this. It's just good old marketing.
    appleinsideruserwilliamlondonshareef777darkvaderelijahg
  • Reply 2 of 21
    swineone said:
    "A Mac with Apple Silicon inside isn't just noticeably faster than their Intel counterparts; it's capable of a few other exclusive features too. Here is what an Apple Silicon-based Mac can do that the Intel Macs can't."

    "but as Apple can control every facet of these chips, there is currently a subset of Mac features exclusive only to Apple's chipsets."

    Let's not kid ourselves. All features listed (even running iOS/iPadOS apps) are well within the realms of the computing power available on Intel-based Macs. Hell, Dragon NaturallySpeaking did on-device dictation what, over 20 years ago? Surely not as well as Siri today, but then again, you can't compare a few-hundred-MHz Pentium Pro or Pentium II to current chips (and even older ones).

    It's not a technical issue, but merely a marketing strategy of differentiation to move new product. And Apple is (or at least should be, you never know with governments these days) well within their rights to do so. But don't pretend there's some magical Apple Silicon fairy dust that enables this. It's just good old marketing.
    Did they say it was a technical issue or apple silicon "fairy dust"? Nope.  I don't even know why I read comments anymore...it's exhausting.
    twokatmewF_Kent_Djas99williamlondonfreeassociate2watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 21
    Not a big deal but just in case you wanted to fix a typo, at the beginning of the maps segment you typed glove instead of globe.
    twokatmewDogpersonAniMillwatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 21
    robabarobaba Posts: 216member
    Brandonw said:
    swineone said:
    "A Mac with Apple Silicon inside isn't just noticeably faster than their Intel counterparts; it's capable of a few other exclusive features too. Here is what an Apple Silicon-based Mac can do that the Intel Macs can't."

    "but as Apple can control every facet of these chips, there is currently a subset of Mac features exclusive only to Apple's chipsets."

    Let's not kid ourselves. All features listed (even running iOS/iPadOS apps) are well within the realms of the computing power available on Intel-based Macs. Hell, Dragon NaturallySpeaking did on-device dictation what, over 20 years ago? Surely not as well as Siri today, but then again, you can't compare a few-hundred-MHz Pentium Pro or Pentium II to current chips (and even older ones).

    It's not a technical issue, but merely a marketing strategy of differentiation to move new product. And Apple is (or at least should be, you never know with governments these days) well within their rights to do so. But don't pretend there's some magical Apple Silicon fairy dust that enables this. It's just good old marketing.
    Did they say it was a technical issue or apple silicon "fairy dust"? Nope.  I don't even know why I read comments anymore...it's exhausting.
    Ignore is a very good friend of mine.  You should get to know Ignore,  Ignore make the comments much nicer.
    AniMilldewmeMplsPjas99williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 21
    The photo in FaceTime appears to be in landscape mode rather than portrait mode. Just sayin. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 21
    danoxdanox Posts: 722member
    swineone said:
    "A Mac with Apple Silicon inside isn't just noticeably faster than their Intel counterparts; it's capable of a few other exclusive features too. Here is what an Apple Silicon-based Mac can do that the Intel Macs can't."

    "but as Apple can control every facet of these chips, there is currently a subset of Mac features exclusive only to Apple's chipsets."

    Let's not kid ourselves. All features listed (even running iOS/iPadOS apps) are well within the realms of the computing power available on Intel-based Macs. Hell, Dragon NaturallySpeaking did on-device dictation what, over 20 years ago? Surely not as well as Siri today, but then again, you can't compare a few-hundred-MHz Pentium Pro or Pentium II to current chips (and even older ones).

    It's not a technical issue, but merely a marketing strategy of differentiation to move new product. And Apple is (or at least should be, you never know with governments these days) well within their rights to do so. But don't pretend there's some magical Apple Silicon fairy dust that enables this. It's just good old marketing.
    Well Swine you be wrong Intel is now dead men walking….
    jas99williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 21
    Apple isn't shunning Intel chips in a shameless ploy to push its chips


    Actually, in most of these cases they clearly are. As an owner of a top of the range 2020 Intel iMac, I'm annoyed. It's far more powerful than the M1 based computers that gets these features, and they still sell it.

    1. Facetime calls - blurring the background. This feature is available on older, low end machines on other software like Teams, Zoom, etc. Claiming that only their Apple Silicon chips are able to do this is clearly untrue. If anything, this feature should have been released a long time ago on all machines. That said, while it is annoying and clearly an example of Apple being bad, I don't really care that much: While I do plenty of Teams calls every day - mostly from that iMac - and a couple of Zoom calls a week, I can't remember the last time I used Facetime video.

    2. Globe and improved maps. This was available more than a decade ago, on Google Earth. It's not taxing, and it's not special. Granted, the globe feature is just useless and the maps are only for a very, very limited areas (so a non-feature in Norway). And who uses Apple Maps on a computer anyway, rather than on a mobile device? Still, this is also just Apple being mean towards some of their best customers - iMacs, Mac Pros etc.

    3. on-device dictation. This could maybe be legitimate. Still, the latest Intel machines have significant ML capabilities - especially those with discrete GPUs - so it sounds kind of fishy that none of them can do it.

    4. text-to-speech support for additional languages -- Danish, Finnish, Norwegian, and SwedishThere's no way that the other languages can be done without Apple Silicon, and these need it. Again, just Apple being petty with their current customers.

    5. Apple baked all of the T2 security and performance features directly into the processor and then some. This is what enabled Apple Silicon machines to work with Apple's wireless Magic Keyboard with Touch ID. This is different, in that it requires special hardware. Could Apple have supported this on Intel machines prior to Apple Silicon? Absolutely. They supported TouchID on Intel laptops, and could have added wireless protocols to the T2 and keyboards if they wanted to. Not adding it to iMac / Mac Pro for so many years was probably more caused by neglect of these product lines than wanting to push Apple Silicon, though.


    So to sum it up: Apple is clearly holding back features that would work just as well on Intel computers.

    dewmewilliamlondonshareef777muthuk_vanalingamuraharadarkvaderelijahgCheeseFreeze
  • Reply 8 of 21
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,497member
    xyzzy01 said:
    Apple isn't shunning Intel chips in a shameless ploy to push its chips


    Actually, in most of these cases they clearly are. As an owner of a top of the range 2020 Intel iMac, I'm annoyed. It's far more powerful than the M1 based computers that gets these features, and they still sell it.

    1. Facetime calls - blurring the background. This feature is available on older, low end machines on other software like Teams, Zoom, etc. Claiming that only their Apple Silicon chips are able to do this is clearly untrue. If anything, this feature should have been released a long time ago on all machines. That said, while it is annoying and clearly an example of Apple being bad, I don't really care that much: While I do plenty of Teams calls every day - mostly from that iMac - and a couple of Zoom calls a week, I can't remember the last time I used Facetime video.

    2. Globe and improved maps. This was available more than a decade ago, on Google Earth. It's not taxing, and it's not special. Granted, the globe feature is just useless and the maps are only for a very, very limited areas (so a non-feature in Norway). And who uses Apple Maps on a computer anyway, rather than on a mobile device? Still, this is also just Apple being mean towards some of their best customers - iMacs, Mac Pros etc.

    3. on-device dictation. This could maybe be legitimate. Still, the latest Intel machines have significant ML capabilities - especially those with discrete GPUs - so it sounds kind of fishy that none of them can do it.

    4. text-to-speech support for additional languages -- Danish, Finnish, Norwegian, and SwedishThere's no way that the other languages can be done without Apple Silicon, and these need it. Again, just Apple being petty with their current customers.

    5. Apple baked all of the T2 security and performance features directly into the processor and then some. This is what enabled Apple Silicon machines to work with Apple's wireless Magic Keyboard with Touch ID. This is different, in that it requires special hardware. Could Apple have supported this on Intel machines prior to Apple Silicon? Absolutely. They supported TouchID on Intel laptops, and could have added wireless protocols to the T2 and keyboards if they wanted to. Not adding it to iMac / Mac Pro for so many years was probably more caused by neglect of these product lines than wanting to push Apple Silicon, though.


    So to sum it up: Apple is clearly holding back features that would work just as well on Intel computers.

    I agree, the apparent premise of the article, that intel-based computers can’t do these things, is ultimately false. The one thing the M1 computers can do that the intel machines can’t is last more than an hour while doing them. Every time I have to use teams for a meeting try battery drops like a rock, the fans start blasting away and the surface of my MBP gets too hot to touch. Part of that is crappy Microsoft programming, but part of that is the intel processor. 
    williamlondonshareef777muthuk_vanalingamelijahg
  • Reply 9 of 21
    Splendid..
    edited December 2021 watto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 21
    Thanks to all the chip engineers that have worked on major projects that took the time to comment and explain how it's "all just marketing".

    Oh wait.

    There aren't any ... just Intel-'splainers that think they're smarter than the rest of us, and smarter than the engineers at a trillion dollar company. And yet somehow can't parse a very non-technical article that simply points out what's been introduced with new machines. No "you can't do this on Intel", not even a "this is easier on Apple Silicon." Just a "hey, Apple leveraged it's existing IP from other projects to enhance new Macs." Because, as everyone knows, new products never introduce new features. Or that features aren't implemented for lots of valid reasons: cost, encumbered IP, or the obvious ...the use-case isn't compelling enough. 

    Note that there's very few other OEM PCs that have fingerprint readers in separate keyboards. It's mostly just accessories you buy separately. Sure there's piecemeal integration using third-party chips for PC laptops. And an even smaller subset that uses Windows Hello for Business to leverage the Intel TPM 2.0 module. None of which are integrated into the CPU.  That hardly screams "critical feature."

    They also all ignore the one obvious item that Intel-based Macs can't do ... which is run iPad and iOS code natively. Sure it can be recompiled for Intel processors, thanks to Apple's work on it's development tools. That's still not running native code.

    Most of these comments repeat the same tired, irrelevant point. "Apple didn't invent this feature. It was available in 1912 on a Hollerith machine." or some such garbage. I have to wonder if they also comment on car reviews to point out that trains had wheels before automobiles did, or some justification that’s as equally idiotic. My guess is they don't.

    Please do better. For all our sakes.
    Alex_Vrobabawilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 21
    Brandonw said:
    swineone said:
    "A Mac with Apple Silicon inside isn't just noticeably faster than their Intel counterparts; it's capable of a few other exclusive features too. Here is what an Apple Silicon-based Mac can do that the Intel Macs can't."

    "but as Apple can control every facet of these chips, there is currently a subset of Mac features exclusive only to Apple's chipsets."

    Let's not kid ourselves. All features listed (even running iOS/iPadOS apps) are well within the realms of the computing power available on Intel-based Macs. Hell, Dragon NaturallySpeaking did on-device dictation what, over 20 years ago? Surely not as well as Siri today, but then again, you can't compare a few-hundred-MHz Pentium Pro or Pentium II to current chips (and even older ones).

    It's not a technical issue, but merely a marketing strategy of differentiation to move new product. And Apple is (or at least should be, you never know with governments these days) well within their rights to do so. But don't pretend there's some magical Apple Silicon fairy dust that enables this. It's just good old marketing.
    Did they say it was a technical issue or apple silicon "fairy dust"? Nope.  I don't even know why I read comments anymore...it's exhausting.
    The implication of the article is that the M1 macs are more capable then intel because of these features when EVERY ONE of those features is artificially limited by Apple.
    muthuk_vanalingamuraharaxyzzy01williamlondonelijahg
  • Reply 12 of 21

    Brandonw said:
    swineone said:
    "A Mac with Apple Silicon inside isn't just noticeably faster than their Intel counterparts; it's capable of a few other exclusive features too. Here is what an Apple Silicon-based Mac can do that the Intel Macs can't."

    "but as Apple can control every facet of these chips, there is currently a subset of Mac features exclusive only to Apple's chipsets."

    Let's not kid ourselves. All features listed (even running iOS/iPadOS apps) are well within the realms of the computing power available on Intel-based Macs. Hell, Dragon NaturallySpeaking did on-device dictation what, over 20 years ago? Surely not as well as Siri today, but then again, you can't compare a few-hundred-MHz Pentium Pro or Pentium II to current chips (and even older ones).

    It's not a technical issue, but merely a marketing strategy of differentiation to move new product. And Apple is (or at least should be, you never know with governments these days) well within their rights to do so. But don't pretend there's some magical Apple Silicon fairy dust that enables this. It's just good old marketing.
    Did they say it was a technical issue or apple silicon "fairy dust"? Nope.  I don't even know why I read comments anymore...it's exhausting.
    The implication of the article is that the M1 macs are more capable then intel because of these features when EVERY ONE of those features is artificially limited by Apple.
    So? They are still features that don’t exist on intel Macs. Limited by apple via software or technical reason, these features are only available on Apple Silicon which is what the article is about.  It’s literally just an article that lists features you can’t get on intel machines. Ya’ll are just whiny. Your computer does the same or more than it did when you bought it. If you want the new features buy an M1 mac. 
    edited December 2021 watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 21
    xyzzy01 said:
    Apple isn't shunning Intel chips in a shameless ploy to push its chips


    Actually, in most of these cases they clearly are. As an owner of a top of the range 2020 Intel iMac, I'm annoyed. It's far more powerful than the M1 based computers that gets these features, and they still sell it.

    1. Facetime calls - blurring the background. This feature is available on older, low end machines on other software like Teams, Zoom, etc. Claiming that only their Apple Silicon chips are able to do this is clearly untrue. If anything, this feature should have been released a long time ago on all machines. That said, while it is annoying and clearly an example of Apple being bad, I don't really care that much: While I do plenty of Teams calls every day - mostly from that iMac - and a couple of Zoom calls a week, I can't remember the last time I used Facetime video.

    2. Globe and improved maps. This was available more than a decade ago, on Google Earth. It's not taxing, and it's not special. Granted, the globe feature is just useless and the maps are only for a very, very limited areas (so a non-feature in Norway). And who uses Apple Maps on a computer anyway, rather than on a mobile device? Still, this is also just Apple being mean towards some of their best customers - iMacs, Mac Pros etc.

    3. on-device dictation. This could maybe be legitimate. Still, the latest Intel machines have significant ML capabilities - especially those with discrete GPUs - so it sounds kind of fishy that none of them can do it.

    4. text-to-speech support for additional languages -- Danish, Finnish, Norwegian, and SwedishThere's no way that the other languages can be done without Apple Silicon, and these need it. Again, just Apple being petty with their current customers.

    5. Apple baked all of the T2 security and performance features directly into the processor and then some. This is what enabled Apple Silicon machines to work with Apple's wireless Magic Keyboard with Touch ID. This is different, in that it requires special hardware. Could Apple have supported this on Intel machines prior to Apple Silicon? Absolutely. They supported TouchID on Intel laptops, and could have added wireless protocols to the T2 and keyboards if they wanted to. Not adding it to iMac / Mac Pro for so many years was probably more caused by neglect of these product lines than wanting to push Apple Silicon, though.


    So to sum it up: Apple is clearly holding back features that would work just as well on Intel computers.


    On-device dictation in particular is absolutely illegitimate.  The 2012 MacBook Pro I'm using right now has it, because I never downgraded this machine to Mac OS 10.15 - I'm still running 10.14.  In System Preferences > Keyboard > Dictation, there's a checkbox for "Enhanced Dictation" which is on-device dictation.  "Allows offline use and continuous dictation with live feedback."

    Apple didn't add on-device dictation capability to M-chips.  Apple broke already working on-device dictation on Intel Macs.
    muthuk_vanalingamwilliamlondonelijahg
  • Reply 14 of 21
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,250member
    MplsP said:
    xyzzy01 said:
    Apple isn't shunning Intel chips in a shameless ploy to push its chips


    Actually, in most of these cases they clearly are. As an owner of a top of the range 2020 Intel iMac, I'm annoyed. It's far more powerful than the M1 based computers that gets these features, and they still sell it.

    1. Facetime calls - blurring the background. This feature is available on older, low end machines on other software like Teams, Zoom, etc. Claiming that only their Apple Silicon chips are able to do this is clearly untrue. If anything, this feature should have been released a long time ago on all machines. That said, while it is annoying and clearly an example of Apple being bad, I don't really care that much: While I do plenty of Teams calls every day - mostly from that iMac - and a couple of Zoom calls a week, I can't remember the last time I used Facetime video.

    2. Globe and improved maps. This was available more than a decade ago, on Google Earth. It's not taxing, and it's not special. Granted, the globe feature is just useless and the maps are only for a very, very limited areas (so a non-feature in Norway). And who uses Apple Maps on a computer anyway, rather than on a mobile device? Still, this is also just Apple being mean towards some of their best customers - iMacs, Mac Pros etc.

    3. on-device dictation. This could maybe be legitimate. Still, the latest Intel machines have significant ML capabilities - especially those with discrete GPUs - so it sounds kind of fishy that none of them can do it.

    4. text-to-speech support for additional languages -- Danish, Finnish, Norwegian, and SwedishThere's no way that the other languages can be done without Apple Silicon, and these need it. Again, just Apple being petty with their current customers.

    5. Apple baked all of the T2 security and performance features directly into the processor and then some. This is what enabled Apple Silicon machines to work with Apple's wireless Magic Keyboard with Touch ID. This is different, in that it requires special hardware. Could Apple have supported this on Intel machines prior to Apple Silicon? Absolutely. They supported TouchID on Intel laptops, and could have added wireless protocols to the T2 and keyboards if they wanted to. Not adding it to iMac / Mac Pro for so many years was probably more caused by neglect of these product lines than wanting to push Apple Silicon, though.


    So to sum it up: Apple is clearly holding back features that would work just as well on Intel computers.

    I agree, the apparent premise of the article, that intel-based computers can’t do these things, is ultimately false. The one thing the M1 computers can do that the intel machines can’t is last more than an hour while doing them. Every time I have to use teams for a meeting try battery drops like a rock, the fans start blasting away and the surface of my MBP gets too hot to touch. Part of that is crappy Microsoft programming, but part of that is the intel processor. 
    If only Cinebench r23 was optimized enough for both of you to see, that 8+2 is more powerful than your 10-core i9.

    And I don't know their best customers must be a desktop user.
    edited December 2021 williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 21
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,250member
    robaba said:
    Brandonw said:
    swineone said:
    "A Mac with Apple Silicon inside isn't just noticeably faster than their Intel counterparts; it's capable of a few other exclusive features too. Here is what an Apple Silicon-based Mac can do that the Intel Macs can't."

    "but as Apple can control every facet of these chips, there is currently a subset of Mac features exclusive only to Apple's chipsets."

    Let's not kid ourselves. All features listed (even running iOS/iPadOS apps) are well within the realms of the computing power available on Intel-based Macs. Hell, Dragon NaturallySpeaking did on-device dictation what, over 20 years ago? Surely not as well as Siri today, but then again, you can't compare a few-hundred-MHz Pentium Pro or Pentium II to current chips (and even older ones).

    It's not a technical issue, but merely a marketing strategy of differentiation to move new product. And Apple is (or at least should be, you never know with governments these days) well within their rights to do so. But don't pretend there's some magical Apple Silicon fairy dust that enables this. It's just good old marketing.
    Did they say it was a technical issue or apple silicon "fairy dust"? Nope.  I don't even know why I read comments anymore...it's exhausting.
    Ignore is a very good friend of mine.  You should get to know Ignore,  Ignore make the comments much nicer.
    Makes you wonder why Apple community is a pool of dead water.  I don't see most of these things (or some like to make an issue) would drastically hurt user experiences when the chip itself is game-changing.  Do people care about globe or flat when the chip is pulling some 2-3x improvements?  Can Intel machines do these?  Maybe.  Does it matter?  Only if you believe everything Apple II can do better.

    The true difference lies in what the chip can & their potential.  Their SoC design, UMA, power consumption, etc...

    Really, the dumbest thing you can do is to ignore the biggest advantage, then nitpick some small to non-existence gimmicks just to say you're invincible, while let other schmucks to be just angry as you.
    edited December 2021 watto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 21
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,250member
    darkvader said:
    xyzzy01 said:
    Apple isn't shunning Intel chips in a shameless ploy to push its chips


    Actually, in most of these cases they clearly are. As an owner of a top of the range 2020 Intel iMac, I'm annoyed. It's far more powerful than the M1 based computers that gets these features, and they still sell it.

    1. Facetime calls - blurring the background. This feature is available on older, low end machines on other software like Teams, Zoom, etc. Claiming that only their Apple Silicon chips are able to do this is clearly untrue. If anything, this feature should have been released a long time ago on all machines. That said, while it is annoying and clearly an example of Apple being bad, I don't really care that much: While I do plenty of Teams calls every day - mostly from that iMac - and a couple of Zoom calls a week, I can't remember the last time I used Facetime video.

    2. Globe and improved maps. This was available more than a decade ago, on Google Earth. It's not taxing, and it's not special. Granted, the globe feature is just useless and the maps are only for a very, very limited areas (so a non-feature in Norway). And who uses Apple Maps on a computer anyway, rather than on a mobile device? Still, this is also just Apple being mean towards some of their best customers - iMacs, Mac Pros etc.

    3. on-device dictation. This could maybe be legitimate. Still, the latest Intel machines have significant ML capabilities - especially those with discrete GPUs - so it sounds kind of fishy that none of them can do it.

    4. text-to-speech support for additional languages -- Danish, Finnish, Norwegian, and SwedishThere's no way that the other languages can be done without Apple Silicon, and these need it. Again, just Apple being petty with their current customers.

    5. Apple baked all of the T2 security and performance features directly into the processor and then some. This is what enabled Apple Silicon machines to work with Apple's wireless Magic Keyboard with Touch ID. This is different, in that it requires special hardware. Could Apple have supported this on Intel machines prior to Apple Silicon? Absolutely. They supported TouchID on Intel laptops, and could have added wireless protocols to the T2 and keyboards if they wanted to. Not adding it to iMac / Mac Pro for so many years was probably more caused by neglect of these product lines than wanting to push Apple Silicon, though.


    So to sum it up: Apple is clearly holding back features that would work just as well on Intel computers.


    On-device dictation in particular is absolutely illegitimate.  The 2012 MacBook Pro I'm using right now has it, because I never downgraded this machine to Mac OS 10.15 - I'm still running 10.14.  In System Preferences > Keyboard > Dictation, there's a checkbox for "Enhanced Dictation" which is on-device dictation.  "Allows offline use and continuous dictation with live feedback."

    Apple didn't add on-device dictation capability to M-chips.  Apple broke already working on-device dictation on Intel Macs.

    Your Apple II boots in seconds, have the smallest latency and no potential data-leak -- no Internet, no leak, and Intel laptops before 12th-gen are faster than Apple Silicon.

    :) :)
    edited December 2021 watto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 21
     In Maps, an interactive glove view is only available on Apple Silicon”

    Great. Now, it will be easier to find my lost gloves.” 

    elijahgwatto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 21
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,497member
    DuhSesame said:
    MplsP said:
    xyzzy01 said:
    Apple isn't shunning Intel chips in a shameless ploy to push its chips


    Actually, in most of these cases they clearly are. As an owner of a top of the range 2020 Intel iMac, I'm annoyed. It's far more powerful than the M1 based computers that gets these features, and they still sell it.

    1. Facetime calls - blurring the background. This feature is available on older, low end machines on other software like Teams, Zoom, etc. Claiming that only their Apple Silicon chips are able to do this is clearly untrue. If anything, this feature should have been released a long time ago on all machines. That said, while it is annoying and clearly an example of Apple being bad, I don't really care that much: While I do plenty of Teams calls every day - mostly from that iMac - and a couple of Zoom calls a week, I can't remember the last time I used Facetime video.

    2. Globe and improved maps. This was available more than a decade ago, on Google Earth. It's not taxing, and it's not special. Granted, the globe feature is just useless and the maps are only for a very, very limited areas (so a non-feature in Norway). And who uses Apple Maps on a computer anyway, rather than on a mobile device? Still, this is also just Apple being mean towards some of their best customers - iMacs, Mac Pros etc.

    3. on-device dictation. This could maybe be legitimate. Still, the latest Intel machines have significant ML capabilities - especially those with discrete GPUs - so it sounds kind of fishy that none of them can do it.

    4. text-to-speech support for additional languages -- Danish, Finnish, Norwegian, and SwedishThere's no way that the other languages can be done without Apple Silicon, and these need it. Again, just Apple being petty with their current customers.

    5. Apple baked all of the T2 security and performance features directly into the processor and then some. This is what enabled Apple Silicon machines to work with Apple's wireless Magic Keyboard with Touch ID. This is different, in that it requires special hardware. Could Apple have supported this on Intel machines prior to Apple Silicon? Absolutely. They supported TouchID on Intel laptops, and could have added wireless protocols to the T2 and keyboards if they wanted to. Not adding it to iMac / Mac Pro for so many years was probably more caused by neglect of these product lines than wanting to push Apple Silicon, though.


    So to sum it up: Apple is clearly holding back features that would work just as well on Intel computers.

    I agree, the apparent premise of the article, that intel-based computers can’t do these things, is ultimately false. The one thing the M1 computers can do that the intel machines can’t is last more than an hour while doing them. Every time I have to use teams for a meeting try battery drops like a rock, the fans start blasting away and the surface of my MBP gets too hot to touch. Part of that is crappy Microsoft programming, but part of that is the intel processor. 
    If only Cinebench r23 was optimized enough for both of you to see, that 8+2 is more powerful than your 10-core i9.

    And I don't know their best customers must be a desktop user.
    That’s not the point. Everyone agrees the M1 is a better processor, but the article’s premise was that the M1 can do things that the intel processor can’t (and is therefore better.). What everyone is pointing out is that all of these supposed limitations of intel processors are artificial limitations imposed by Apple, not limitations intrinsic to the chip. 
    williamlondonmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 19 of 21
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,250member
    MplsP said:
    DuhSesame said:
    MplsP said:
    xyzzy01 said:
    Apple isn't shunning Intel chips in a shameless ploy to push its chips


    Actually, in most of these cases they clearly are. As an owner of a top of the range 2020 Intel iMac, I'm annoyed. It's far more powerful than the M1 based computers that gets these features, and they still sell it.

    1. Facetime calls - blurring the background. This feature is available on older, low end machines on other software like Teams, Zoom, etc. Claiming that only their Apple Silicon chips are able to do this is clearly untrue. If anything, this feature should have been released a long time ago on all machines. That said, while it is annoying and clearly an example of Apple being bad, I don't really care that much: While I do plenty of Teams calls every day - mostly from that iMac - and a couple of Zoom calls a week, I can't remember the last time I used Facetime video.

    2. Globe and improved maps. This was available more than a decade ago, on Google Earth. It's not taxing, and it's not special. Granted, the globe feature is just useless and the maps are only for a very, very limited areas (so a non-feature in Norway). And who uses Apple Maps on a computer anyway, rather than on a mobile device? Still, this is also just Apple being mean towards some of their best customers - iMacs, Mac Pros etc.

    3. on-device dictation. This could maybe be legitimate. Still, the latest Intel machines have significant ML capabilities - especially those with discrete GPUs - so it sounds kind of fishy that none of them can do it.

    4. text-to-speech support for additional languages -- Danish, Finnish, Norwegian, and SwedishThere's no way that the other languages can be done without Apple Silicon, and these need it. Again, just Apple being petty with their current customers.

    5. Apple baked all of the T2 security and performance features directly into the processor and then some. This is what enabled Apple Silicon machines to work with Apple's wireless Magic Keyboard with Touch ID. This is different, in that it requires special hardware. Could Apple have supported this on Intel machines prior to Apple Silicon? Absolutely. They supported TouchID on Intel laptops, and could have added wireless protocols to the T2 and keyboards if they wanted to. Not adding it to iMac / Mac Pro for so many years was probably more caused by neglect of these product lines than wanting to push Apple Silicon, though.


    So to sum it up: Apple is clearly holding back features that would work just as well on Intel computers.

    I agree, the apparent premise of the article, that intel-based computers can’t do these things, is ultimately false. The one thing the M1 computers can do that the intel machines can’t is last more than an hour while doing them. Every time I have to use teams for a meeting try battery drops like a rock, the fans start blasting away and the surface of my MBP gets too hot to touch. Part of that is crappy Microsoft programming, but part of that is the intel processor. 
    If only Cinebench r23 was optimized enough for both of you to see, that 8+2 is more powerful than your 10-core i9.

    And I don't know their best customers must be a desktop user.
    That’s not the point. Everyone agrees the M1 is a better processor, but the article’s premise was that the M1 can do things that the intel processor can’t (and is therefore better.). What everyone is pointing out is that all of these supposed limitations of intel processors are artificial limitations imposed by Apple, not limitations intrinsic to the chip. 
    Yeah that’s true, it missed out the actual differences that makes Apple Silicon Macs unique.  How about shared memory, or the NPU, or plain being an SoC.  Those are exclusive (by that I mean at least comparing to 99%).

    Yes, with decent amount of power, anything can do the same, but that will be a huge pain for the x86, certainly won’t be able to do under the same envelope.  
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 20 of 21
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 2,555member
    DuhSesame said:
    robaba said:
    Brandonw said:
    swineone said:
    "A Mac with Apple Silicon inside isn't just noticeably faster than their Intel counterparts; it's capable of a few other exclusive features too. Here is what an Apple Silicon-based Mac can do that the Intel Macs can't."

    "but as Apple can control every facet of these chips, there is currently a subset of Mac features exclusive only to Apple's chipsets."

    Let's not kid ourselves. All features listed (even running iOS/iPadOS apps) are well within the realms of the computing power available on Intel-based Macs. Hell, Dragon NaturallySpeaking did on-device dictation what, over 20 years ago? Surely not as well as Siri today, but then again, you can't compare a few-hundred-MHz Pentium Pro or Pentium II to current chips (and even older ones).

    It's not a technical issue, but merely a marketing strategy of differentiation to move new product. And Apple is (or at least should be, you never know with governments these days) well within their rights to do so. But don't pretend there's some magical Apple Silicon fairy dust that enables this. It's just good old marketing.
    Did they say it was a technical issue or apple silicon "fairy dust"? Nope.  I don't even know why I read comments anymore...it's exhausting.
    Ignore is a very good friend of mine.  You should get to know Ignore,  Ignore make the comments much nicer.
    Makes you wonder why Apple community is a pool of dead water.  I don't see most of these things (or some like to make an issue) would drastically hurt user experiences when the chip itself is game-changing.  Do people care about globe or flat when the chip is pulling some 2-3x improvements?  Can Intel machines do these?  Maybe.  Does it matter?  Only if you believe everything Apple II can do better.

    The true difference lies in what the chip can & their potential.  Their SoC design, UMA, power consumption, etc...

    Really, the dumbest thing you can do is to ignore the biggest advantage, then nitpick some small to non-existence gimmicks just to say you're invincible, while let other schmucks to be just angry as you.
    You really need to get over yourself. 

    If the M1 is so amazing it should - and can - stand by itself, so why does Apple feel the need to artificially limit software features to try and differentiate the M1 Macs? No one is going to upgrade just to get these features, they’d upgrade for the speed and efficiency of the M1. Therefore Apple’s just pissing off existing loyal users. This kind of artificial two tier experience is very Microsoft. Remember Windows basic/home/pro?
    edited December 2021 muthuk_vanalingam
Sign In or Register to comment.