I just re-read this section and was surprised by a critical omission — TSMC.
Apple has kept its edge partly by being first in line to every new process from TSMC. When the M1 came out it was on TSMC 5nm while Intel was stuck on something more akin to TSMC 10nm (Intel called it 14nm+++). That’s a hugely important process difference.
Now Apple is on TSMC 3nm while Intel is using a process that is finally competitive with the 5nm process of the M1. So still a big lead for Apple an TSMC.
But later this year — allegedly— Intel will leap ahead to their 20A process (maybe similar to TSMC 2nm). If Intel pulls this off it could put them back on top in the PC CPU space. So there could be some clouds on the horizon for the M series.
Intel doesn't have a in house OS no can do.....They have been disrupted by Apple.
I just re-read this section and was surprised by a critical omission — TSMC.
Apple has kept its edge partly by being first in line to every new process from TSMC. When the M1 came out it was on TSMC 5nm while Intel was stuck on something more akin to TSMC 10nm (Intel called it 14nm+++). That’s a hugely important process difference.
Now Apple is on TSMC 3nm while Intel is using a process that is finally competitive with the 5nm process of the M1. So still a big lead for Apple an TSMC.
But later this year — allegedly— Intel will leap ahead to their 20A process (maybe similar to TSMC 2nm). If Intel pulls this off it could put them back on top in the PC CPU space. So there could be some clouds on the horizon for the M series.
Intel doesn't have a in house OS no can do.....They have been disrupted by Apple.
Is that the same Intel that saved Apple's bacon when PPC hit the skids?
I just re-read this section and was surprised by a critical omission — TSMC.
Apple has kept its edge partly by being first in line to every new process from TSMC. When the M1 came out it was on TSMC 5nm while Intel was stuck on something more akin to TSMC 10nm (Intel called it 14nm+++). That’s a hugely important process difference.
Now Apple is on TSMC 3nm while Intel is using a process that is finally competitive with the 5nm process of the M1. So still a big lead for Apple an TSMC.
But later this year — allegedly— Intel will leap ahead to their 20A process (maybe similar to TSMC 2nm). If Intel pulls this off it could put them back on top in the PC CPU space. So there could be some clouds on the horizon for the M series.
Intel doesn't have a in house OS no can do.....They have been disrupted by Apple.
They were disrupted by Apple. But they’re still around and could make a comeback. Others have done it.
They might not have an OS but they do know how to write a compiler and they’re pretty friendly with some OS developers.
But the real issue is regaining the scale advantage, because without scale you can’t maintain a lead in process tech. The key there is likely AI. Intel needs to disrupt Nvidia— that’s their best hope
I just re-read this section and was surprised by a critical omission — TSMC.
Apple has kept its edge partly by being first in line to every new process from TSMC. When the M1 came out it was on TSMC 5nm while Intel was stuck on something more akin to TSMC 10nm (Intel called it 14nm+++). That’s a hugely important process difference.
Now Apple is on TSMC 3nm while Intel is using a process that is finally competitive with the 5nm process of the M1. So still a big lead for Apple an TSMC.
But later this year — allegedly— Intel will leap ahead to their 20A process (maybe similar to TSMC 2nm). If Intel pulls this off it could put them back on top in the PC CPU space. So there could be some clouds on the horizon for the M series.
Intel doesn't have a in house OS no can do.....They have been disrupted by Apple.
They were disrupted by Apple. But they’re still around and could make a comeback. Others have done it.
They might not have an OS but they do know how to write a compiler and they’re pretty friendly with some OS developers.
But the real issue is regaining the scale advantage, because without scale you can’t maintain a lead in process tech. The key there is likely AI. Intel needs to disrupt Nvidia— that’s their best hope
Where do you think Intel/AMD/Nvidia will be in a few years time? Google/Microsoft-Qualcomm/Meta are not bashful these days in pursuing solutions closer to the Apple business plan. Every year the A and M series advances forward thru iteration A20 M5, M6, and R3 coming up. Some of the competition are even having a rethink on what UMA memory design can do particularity for AI inference.
Intel and Qualcomm have made pronouncements in recent times about their mobile chips but so far its been typical hot air when compared to what Apple has actually done (sell) across all of their SOC chips and Intel/AMD/Qualcomm without a in house OS are up the creek with IBM/Xerox without a paddle long term. The Microsoft, Qualcomm (patent troll) is a marriage made in hell and will end like Apples with Intel/IBM
I just re-read this section and was surprised by a critical omission — TSMC.
Apple has kept its edge partly by being first in line to every new process from TSMC. When the M1 came out it was on TSMC 5nm while Intel was stuck on something more akin to TSMC 10nm (Intel called it 14nm+++). That’s a hugely important process difference.
Now Apple is on TSMC 3nm while Intel is using a process that is finally competitive with the 5nm process of the M1. So still a big lead for Apple an TSMC.
But later this year — allegedly— Intel will leap ahead to their 20A process (maybe similar to TSMC 2nm). If Intel pulls this off it could put them back on top in the PC CPU space. So there could be some clouds on the horizon for the M series.
Intel doesn't have a in house OS no can do.....They have been disrupted by Apple.
Is that the same Intel that saved Apple's bacon when PPC hit the skids?
Of course, Apple is nothing but a poorly organized and run company that tis constantly being "saved" by everyone else. It's not possible — in your mind — that Apple looked at all possibilities and simply choose the vendor that suited their needs best, There's no scenario where AMD was courted along with Intel which may be the reason why Macs were the only PCs built with Intel CPUs that didn't come with a shitload of stupid advertising stickers on them, why Apple got the pick of the litter when it came to chips with the lowest power draw for a set performance, and why Intel even had previously unreleased chips got into production for Apple. But Intel saved Apple and without only picking Intel as a vendor Apple wouldn't exist today. 🙄
I just re-read this section and was surprised by a critical omission — TSMC.
Apple has kept its edge partly by being first in line to every new process from TSMC. When the M1 came out it was on TSMC 5nm while Intel was stuck on something more akin to TSMC 10nm (Intel called it 14nm+++). That’s a hugely important process difference.
Now Apple is on TSMC 3nm while Intel is using a process that is finally competitive with the 5nm process of the M1. So still a big lead for Apple an TSMC.
But later this year — allegedly— Intel will leap ahead to their 20A process (maybe similar to TSMC 2nm). If Intel pulls this off it could put them back on top in the PC CPU space. So there could be some clouds on the horizon for the M series.
Intel doesn't have a in house OS no can do.....They have been disrupted by Apple.
Is that the same Intel that saved Apple's bacon when PPC hit the skids?
Of course, Apple is nothing but a poorly organized and run company that tis constantly being "saved" by everyone else. It's not possible — in your mind — that Apple looked at all possibilities and simply choose the vendor that suited their needs best, There's no scenario where AMD was courted along with Intel which may be the reason why Macs were the only PCs built with Intel CPUs that didn't come with a shitload of stupid advertising stickers on them, why Apple got the pick of the litter when it came to chips with the lowest power draw for a set performance, and why Intel even had previously unreleased chips got into production for Apple. But Intel saved Apple and without only picking Intel as a vendor Apple wouldn't exist today. 🙄
Read in context to what I was replying to.
That said, Apple does have a fairly long list of strategic missfires under its belt.
I wouldn't say that characteristic is exclusive to them but let's be realistic.
Moving to Intel was a hugely bitter pill to swallow at the time. As was having Bill Gates beamed into a MacWorld Expo before that. As was kissing and making up with Qualcomm. As was the failure of Copland. Now we have the killing of the car project and being behind on AI. Plus the ongoing inability to deliver a homegrown 5G solution (even if it's not really homegrown because they had to spend a billion dollars to get Intel's IP and workforce).
Comments
Where do you think Intel/AMD/Nvidia will be in a few years time? Google/Microsoft-Qualcomm/Meta are not bashful these days in pursuing solutions closer to the Apple business plan. Every year the A and M series advances forward thru iteration A20 M5, M6, and R3 coming up. Some of the competition are even having a rethink on what UMA memory design can do particularity for AI inference.
Intel and Qualcomm have made pronouncements in recent times about their mobile chips but so far its been typical hot air when compared to what Apple has actually done (sell) across all of their SOC chips and Intel/AMD/Qualcomm without a in house OS are up the creek with IBM/Xerox without a paddle long term. The Microsoft, Qualcomm (patent troll) is a marriage made in hell and will end like Apples with Intel/IBM
That said, Apple does have a fairly long list of strategic missfires under its belt.
I wouldn't say that characteristic is exclusive to them but let's be realistic.
Moving to Intel was a hugely bitter pill to swallow at the time. As was having Bill Gates beamed into a MacWorld Expo before that. As was kissing and making up with Qualcomm. As was the failure of Copland. Now we have the killing of the car project and being behind on AI. Plus the ongoing inability to deliver a homegrown 5G solution (even if it's not really homegrown because they had to spend a billion dollars to get Intel's IP and workforce).