So there is really no reason why macOS couldn’t be installed on the IPP. i see SuperOS emerging. IPadPro with the new Keyboard for theIMac running macOS would be great. They just to put 16 GB ram in this with a big SSD.
Edit: and external monitor.
They already could have done this. iPadOS/iOS is based on OS X. They chose not to due to form factor and use case. They affirm it every year.
They're obviously lying, of course.
Mac OS just keeps getting more and more like iOS, not the other way around. And Mac hardware keeps becomeing more and more throwaway garbage, like the iPad.
The new iMac is idiotically thin.
The main failure point on the MacBook Air is now the display, because it's so stupidly thin that it's incredibly fragile. We used to see a broken display every few weeks, I was in the shop yesterday morning (I'm almost never there, I'm mostly working at home these days with occasional visits to client sites) and there were three broken display calls in half an hour. That display is going to cost $600 to $800 if you break it. "Oh, but I'll get Applecare" you think. Yeah, I don't know about you, but I keep computers a LOT longer than three years. My 2012 15" MBP is a MUCH better computer than this 2018 MBA that I'm typing on now.
I'll leave you with Three Dead Trolls In A Baggie.
Who brings a brand new, still-under-warranty MacBook Air to a third-party shop for repair?
At this point iPadOS lags far behind the hardware capabilities of this computer.
Maybe a quick fix would be adding BootCamp so users could switch back and forth between iPadOS or MacOS as needed.
... Technically, there's no reason why not.
Oh yeh, I forgot about the purity test. One machine can do only one thing. I keep forgetting that.
Microsoft tried to do everything with tiles. Fail. Apple will do everything with Apple Silicon. Success.
Apple are doing the sensible thing. Matching the os to the form factor. It's not about what's technically feasible. It's about what makes sense for the users. And Apple. The last thing users want is hardware that lags behind the OS and Apps. Like Intels CPUs. Users wants OS/apps to catch up with the hardware, NOT the other way around. That's what is happening now. Software RAPIDLY catching up with Apple Silicon.
At this point iPadOS lags far behind the hardware capabilities of this computer.
Maybe a quick fix would be adding BootCamp so users could switch back and forth between iPadOS or MacOS as needed.
... Technically, there's no reason why not.
Oh yeh, I forgot about the purity test. One machine can do only one thing. I keep forgetting that.
There's no purity test, but bootcamp and switching between MacOS and iPadOS is so thoroughly and completely not how Apple approaches things.
A theme that just keeps repeating over and over again on these forums is this one where people keep expecting Apple to become more like Windows or Android. I shouldn't let it baffle me any more, but it does. Why isn't it better to expect Apple to be Apple and the others to do what they do, resulting in more choice for consumers? Apple's products work as well as they do and as reliably as they do specifically because the hardware is designed in concert with the software, down to the last detail. They limit variables by not trying to incorporate every option, bell or whistle that might be possible. Fewer variables mean fewer crashes, conflicts and related problems.
So an iPad Pro device, designed and optimized for iPadOS isn't going to be optimized to run MacOS, and MacOS isn't written to operate an iPad. It goes outside Apple's basic design model to make swapping the OS back and forth an option. Why would they cannibalize MacBook sales by incentivizing customers to try a suboptimal, makeshift iPad swaparoo option? Not only would they lose sales of MacBooks, but they'd also lose ground in customer satisfaction, because the iPad trying to be all things to all people would end up not being as good as a Mac at being a Mac, and in the process would probably end up also compromising quality and user experience on iPad side as well. This is just not how Apple approaches its business. At all.
A few months ago I mentioned Apple using the same chip for all devices at some point. Didn’t think they would progress this soon!!
Mark my words, at one point in the future, iPhone, iPad and Mac will run on the same chip. Expect Glasses, Watch and other devices to join the “M” lineup in the future.
With M1 in iPad here’s my safe prediction:
Mac suite apps are coming to iPad!! Logic Pro, Final Cut and others.
So there is really no reason why macOS couldn’t be installed on the IPP. i see SuperOS emerging. IPadPro with the new Keyboard for theIMac running macOS would be great. They just to put 16 GB ram in this with a big SSD.
Edit: and external monitor.
They already could have done this. iPadOS/iOS is based on OS X. They chose not to due to form factor and use case. They affirm it every year.
People like you also used to say they’d never make a bigger iPhone over the iPhone 4, or a notch, or a camera bump or so on and so forth. Apple WILL merge the OS’s one day. How and when are still up in the air.
So there is really no reason why macOS couldn’t be installed on the IPP. i see SuperOS emerging. IPadPro with the new Keyboard for theIMac running macOS would be great. They just to put 16 GB ram in this with a big SSD.
Edit: and external monitor.
They already could have done this. iPadOS/iOS is based on OS X. They chose not to due to form factor and use case. They affirm it every year.
People like you also used to say they’d never make a bigger iPhone over the iPhone 4, or a notch, or a camera bump or so on and so forth. Apple WILL merge the OS’s one day. How and when are still up in the air.
Or use a Stylus. But they came out with an excuse for the Apple Pencil. We will see how things develop with the macOS and iPadOS at WWDC this year.
LOL you just don't understand what Jobs said about the stylus, vs what the Pencil is. He was referring to mobile phones which required the use a small stylus for basic UI operation, which believe it or not was a thing for a short while. He was not referring to an optional drawing & handwriting tool. I cannot believe this still has to be explained.
"Who wants a stylus? You have to get 'em, put 'em away, you lose 'em. Yuck! Nobody wants a stylus. So let's not use a stylus."
I still think it will be 3 to 5 years before the Mac is deployed on the iPadPro. But if they really do drop the TouchBar from the MBP we may actually have a hint of that happening. Remember back in 2016 when they introduced the TouchBar Federghi gave a interview basically saying that adding the touch strip to the keyboard was a better way of doing things than having users move their fingers to a touch display. If they then actually drop the TouchBar this may be an indication that they have rethought their views. There was a couple rumors in the last few months that say the MBP will be redesigned without the touch strip. If Apple thought the touch Strip was such a success they would have added it on the new Magic Keyboard with the TouchID. I'm sure that there is still plenty of work to do with implementing common frameworks across their OSes which will need to be scheduled with all the annual updates along with finding time for new development like Apple Glasses so it won't be overnight - But hope springs eternal that I could have one device that I could use in bed with touch or with a mouse connected to external display(s).
A few months ago I mentioned Apple using the same chip for all devices at some point. Didn’t think they would progress this soon!!
Mark my words, at one point in the future, iPhone, iPad and Mac will run on the same chip. Expect Glasses, Watch and other devices to join the “M” lineup in the future.
With M1 in iPad here’s my safe prediction:
Mac suite apps are coming to iPad!! Logic Pro, Final Cut and others.
Why would Apple limit their desktop computers to a chip that has to fit in an Apple Watch? Don’t be absurd please.
At this point iPadOS lags far behind the hardware capabilities of this computer.
Maybe a quick fix would be adding BootCamp so users could switch back and forth between iPadOS or MacOS as needed.
... Technically, there's no reason why not.
Oh yeh, I forgot about the purity test. One machine can do only one thing. I keep forgetting that.
There's no purity test, but bootcamp and switching between MacOS and iPadOS is so thoroughly and completely not how Apple approaches things.
A theme that just keeps repeating over and over again on these forums is this one where people keep expecting Apple to become more like Windows or Android. I shouldn't let it baffle me any more, but it does. Why isn't it better to expect Apple to be Apple and the others to do what they do, resulting in more choice for consumers? Apple's products work as well as they do and as reliably as they do specifically because the hardware is designed in concert with the software, down to the last detail. They limit variables by not trying to incorporate every option, bell or whistle that might be possible. Fewer variables mean fewer crashes, conflicts and related problems.
So an iPad Pro device, designed and optimized for iPadOS isn't going to be optimized to run MacOS, and MacOS isn't written to operate an iPad. It goes outside Apple's basic design model to make swapping the OS back and forth an option. Why would they cannibalize MacBook sales by incentivizing customers to try a suboptimal, makeshift iPad swaparoo option? Not only would they lose sales of MacBooks, but they'd also lose ground in customer satisfaction, because the iPad trying to be all things to all people would end up not being as good as a Mac at being a Mac, and in the process would probably end up also compromising quality and user experience on iPad side as well. This is just not how Apple approaches its business. At all.
So, Bootcamp (an Apple product!) is not how Apple does things?
I guess Apple failed your purity test.
The truth is: it's not trying to do things like anybody else. It's letting a machine reach its full potential so it can best serve the needs of the people. It doesn't matter who got there first. It only matters who does it best.
So there is really no reason why macOS couldn’t be installed on the IPP. i see SuperOS emerging. IPadPro with the new Keyboard for theIMac running macOS would be great. They just to put 16 GB ram in this with a big SSD.
Edit: and external monitor.
They already could have done this. iPadOS/iOS is based on OS X. They chose not to due to form factor and use case. They affirm it every year.
People like you also used to say they’d never make a bigger iPhone over the iPhone 4, or a notch, or a camera bump or so on and so forth. Apple WILL merge the OS’s one day. How and when are still up in the air.
I would absolutely love a single, high-powered iPad Pro that I could put in a dock that includes additional cooling (and maybe some existing processing?) that connects to a monitor when I need the space. Would use more for a MacOS UI. When you pull it out to use as a tablet it uses the iPadOS UI. Even better yet if they could fit it into an iPhone.
Feels like this is maybe 4-6 years away at the earliest. Apple would have to make sure that it doesn't completely cannibalize all their Mac sales. I think they'd need to see some additional product lines launched (VR / Apple Glass, Apple Car) and pulling in decent revenue before they could actually make this transition.
The truth is: it's not trying to do things like anybody else. It's letting a machine reach its full potential so it can best serve the needs of the people. It doesn't matter who got there first. It only matters who does it best.
When the M1 models have reached their full potential they will be replaced by both Apple and users.
At this point iPadOS lags far behind the hardware capabilities of this computer.
Maybe a quick fix would be adding BootCamp so users could switch back and forth between iPadOS or MacOS as needed.
... Technically, there's no reason why not.
Oh yeh, I forgot about the purity test. One machine can do only one thing. I keep forgetting that.
There's no purity test, but bootcamp and switching between MacOS and iPadOS is so thoroughly and completely not how Apple approaches things.
A theme that just keeps repeating over and over again on these forums is this one where people keep expecting Apple to become more like Windows or Android. I shouldn't let it baffle me any more, but it does. Why isn't it better to expect Apple to be Apple and the others to do what they do, resulting in more choice for consumers? Apple's products work as well as they do and as reliably as they do specifically because the hardware is designed in concert with the software, down to the last detail. They limit variables by not trying to incorporate every option, bell or whistle that might be possible. Fewer variables mean fewer crashes, conflicts and related problems.
So an iPad Pro device, designed and optimized for iPadOS isn't going to be optimized to run MacOS, and MacOS isn't written to operate an iPad. It goes outside Apple's basic design model to make swapping the OS back and forth an option. Why would they cannibalize MacBook sales by incentivizing customers to try a suboptimal, makeshift iPad swaparoo option? Not only would they lose sales of MacBooks, but they'd also lose ground in customer satisfaction, because the iPad trying to be all things to all people would end up not being as good as a Mac at being a Mac, and in the process would probably end up also compromising quality and user experience on iPad side as well. This is just not how Apple approaches its business. At all.
So, Bootcamp (an Apple product!) is not how Apple does things?
I guess Apple failed your purity test.
The truth is: it's not trying to do things like anybody else. It's letting a machine reach its full potential so it can best serve the needs of the people. It doesn't matter who got there first. It only matters who does it best.
Bootcamp was available to allow Mac users to run a copy of Windows on intel macs, as a way perhaps to wean users off of Windows. (It’s not supported on M1 machines.) That’s an entirely different thing than making Apple’s own operating systems optional on an iPad. If Windows offers a suboptimal experience running in a Mac, it’s just another good reason to switch back over to MacOS. If macOS offers a suboptimal experience on an iPad Pro, that just reflects poorly on Apple. Again, other than satisfying a small few who are hellbent on a preferred alternate universe narrative, Apple has no good reason to do that.
I really wish the Apple Pencil would have an eraser on it, like with the Wacom stylus. Now that it can be charged magnetically, it shouldn't be an issue. It's much more intuitive to flip the pencil around to erase something (because that's what we've been doing for, like, a gazillion years) than to select the "eraser" tool. And for painting, the back of the pencil could operate like the back of a standard paintbrush, so you could "etch" into your painting.
You must not be aware of the tap functionality of the Apple Pencil, where in most apps, it toggles what the stylus does, and usually it's erase. Then double-tap again, and you're back to whatever brush/mode you were in before. This functionality is dependent on the app you are running, but all the popular ones support it.
The only difference between the 128/256/512GB and 1/2 TB configs (other than the storage) is the 16GB RAM in the 1/2 TB configs. But comparing the prices to the 2020 iPadsPro, the 128/256/512GB models are $100 more, but the 1TB 2021 model is $300 more. Are 8GB RAM sticks that expensive these days?
Just complaining....
There are no "RAM sticks" in any Apple product with the M1 - the memory is on the M1 package.
They also explained that the storage is much faster now - desktop speed storage (made possible by the M1).
All previous iPads (and iPhones) used a different type of flash storage that couldn't come near the storage speed we have in desktops/laptops.
On the M1 Mac mini, to go from 8GB RAM/512GB storage -> 16GB RAM/1TB storage is $400 ($200+$200). Same for the iPad Pro 12.9".
This may or may not change your opinion on the price/value, but there is a reason.
At this point iPadOS lags far behind the hardware capabilities of this computer.
Maybe a quick fix would be adding BootCamp so users could switch back and forth between iPadOS or MacOS as needed.
... Technically, there's no reason why not.
Oh yeh, I forgot about the purity test. One machine can do only one thing. I keep forgetting that.
There's no purity test, but bootcamp and switching between MacOS and iPadOS is so thoroughly and completely not how Apple approaches things.
A theme that just keeps repeating over and over again on these forums is this one where people keep expecting Apple to become more like Windows or Android. I shouldn't let it baffle me any more, but it does. Why isn't it better to expect Apple to be Apple and the others to do what they do, resulting in more choice for consumers? Apple's products work as well as they do and as reliably as they do specifically because the hardware is designed in concert with the software, down to the last detail. They limit variables by not trying to incorporate every option, bell or whistle that might be possible. Fewer variables mean fewer crashes, conflicts and related problems.
So an iPad Pro device, designed and optimized for iPadOS isn't going to be optimized to run MacOS, and MacOS isn't written to operate an iPad. It goes outside Apple's basic design model to make swapping the OS back and forth an option. Why would they cannibalize MacBook sales by incentivizing customers to try a suboptimal, makeshift iPad swaparoo option? Not only would they lose sales of MacBooks, but they'd also lose ground in customer satisfaction, because the iPad trying to be all things to all people would end up not being as good as a Mac at being a Mac, and in the process would probably end up also compromising quality and user experience on iPad side as well. This is just not how Apple approaches its business. At all.
So, Bootcamp (an Apple product!) is not how Apple does things?
I guess Apple failed your purity test.
The truth is: it's not trying to do things like anybody else. It's letting a machine reach its full potential so it can best serve the needs of the people. It doesn't matter who got there first. It only matters who does it best.
Bootcamp was available to allow Mac users to run a copy of Windows on intel macs, as a way perhaps to wean users off of Windows. (It’s not supported on M1 machines.) That’s an entirely different thing than making Apple’s own operating systems optional on an iPad. If Windows offers a suboptimal experience running in a Mac, it’s just another good reason to switch back over to MacOS. If macOS offers a suboptimal experience on an iPad Pro, that just reflects poorly on Apple. Again, other than satisfying a small few who are hellbent on a preferred alternate universe narrative, Apple has no good reason to do that.
You are making assumptions and claiming them as fact
No, Bootcamp was not created to "wean users off of Windows"
No, WIndows is not a subotimal experience running under Bootcamp on an Intel Mac
And, there is no reason to believe that MacOS running on what is essentially a Mac with a touch screen and external keyboard & mouse, would be suboptimal.
It's about functionality. And that's where Apple came from. That's their roots.
The only difference between the 128/256/512GB and 1/2 TB configs (other than the storage) is the 16GB RAM in the 1/2 TB configs. But comparing the prices to the 2020 iPadsPro, the 128/256/512GB models are $100 more, but the 1TB 2021 model is $300 more. Are 8GB RAM sticks that expensive these days?
Just complaining....
There are no "RAM sticks" in any Apple product with the M1 - the memory is on the M1 package.
They also explained that the storage is much faster now - desktop speed storage (made possible by the M1).
All previous iPads (and iPhones) used a different type of flash storage that couldn't come near the storage speed we have in desktops/laptops.
On the M1 Mac mini, to go from 8GB RAM/512GB storage -> 16GB RAM/1TB storage is $400 ($200+$200). Same for the iPad Pro 12.9".
This may or may not change your opinion on the price/value, but there is a reason.
No, the Ram is not part of the M1. But it is soldered to the mother board.
And, while it cannot be upgraded or replaced like a "ram stick", it is the functional equivalent of one.
And, Apple has a history of charging exorbitant prices for their "ram stick" upgrades as well as for storage upgrades. Its a standard marketing model not unique to Apple where higher end products carry higher markups than the lower end, base model products.
A few months ago I mentioned Apple using the same chip for all devices at some point. Didn’t think they would progress this soon!!
Mark my words, at one point in the future, iPhone, iPad and Mac will run on the same chip. Expect Glasses, Watch and other devices to join the “M” lineup in the future.
With M1 in iPad here’s my safe prediction:
Mac suite apps are coming to iPad!! Logic Pro, Final Cut and others.
This would be the logical next step. I wouldn't be surprised if they're developed from the ground-up & optimized for the M1 iPad Pro and then Apple uses Catalyst or SwiftUI to bring them over to the Mac.
At this point iPadOS lags far behind the hardware capabilities of this computer.
Maybe a quick fix would be adding BootCamp so users could switch back and forth between iPadOS or MacOS as needed.
... Technically, there's no reason why not.
Oh yeh, I forgot about the purity test. One machine can do only one thing. I keep forgetting that.
There's no purity test, but bootcamp and switching between MacOS and iPadOS is so thoroughly and completely not how Apple approaches things.
A theme that just keeps repeating over and over again on these forums is this one where people keep expecting Apple to become more like Windows or Android. I shouldn't let it baffle me any more, but it does. Why isn't it better to expect Apple to be Apple and the others to do what they do, resulting in more choice for consumers? Apple's products work as well as they do and as reliably as they do specifically because the hardware is designed in concert with the software, down to the last detail. They limit variables by not trying to incorporate every option, bell or whistle that might be possible. Fewer variables mean fewer crashes, conflicts and related problems.
So an iPad Pro device, designed and optimized for iPadOS isn't going to be optimized to run MacOS, and MacOS isn't written to operate an iPad. It goes outside Apple's basic design model to make swapping the OS back and forth an option. Why would they cannibalize MacBook sales by incentivizing customers to try a suboptimal, makeshift iPad swaparoo option? Not only would they lose sales of MacBooks, but they'd also lose ground in customer satisfaction, because the iPad trying to be all things to all people would end up not being as good as a Mac at being a Mac, and in the process would probably end up also compromising quality and user experience on iPad side as well. This is just not how Apple approaches its business. At all.
So, Bootcamp (an Apple product!) is not how Apple does things?
I guess Apple failed your purity test.
The truth is: it's not trying to do things like anybody else. It's letting a machine reach its full potential so it can best serve the needs of the people. It doesn't matter who got there first. It only matters who does it best.
Bootcamp was available to allow Mac users to run a copy of Windows on intel macs, as a way perhaps to wean users off of Windows. (It’s not supported on M1 machines.) That’s an entirely different thing than making Apple’s own operating systems optional on an iPad. If Windows offers a suboptimal experience running in a Mac, it’s just another good reason to switch back over to MacOS. If macOS offers a suboptimal experience on an iPad Pro, that just reflects poorly on Apple. Again, other than satisfying a small few who are hellbent on a preferred alternate universe narrative, Apple has no good reason to do that.
You are making assumptions and claiming them as fact
No, Bootcamp was not created to "wean users off of Windows"
No, WIndows is not a subotimal experience running under Bootcamp on an Intel Mac
And, there is no reason to believe that MacOS running on what is essentially a Mac with a touch screen and external keyboard & mouse, would be suboptimal.
It's about functionality. And that's where Apple came from. That's their roots.
Apple's roots is offering computing tools that are intuitive and easy to use for the average consumer. "The computer for the rest of us" => That's their roots.
The only difference between the 128/256/512GB and 1/2 TB configs (other than the storage) is the 16GB RAM in the 1/2 TB configs. But comparing the prices to the 2020 iPadsPro, the 128/256/512GB models are $100 more, but the 1TB 2021 model is $300 more. Are 8GB RAM sticks that expensive these days?
Just complaining....
There are no "RAM sticks" in any Apple product with the M1 - the memory is on the M1 package.
They also explained that the storage is much faster now - desktop speed storage (made possible by the M1).
All previous iPads (and iPhones) used a different type of flash storage that couldn't come near the storage speed we have in desktops/laptops.
On the M1 Mac mini, to go from 8GB RAM/512GB storage -> 16GB RAM/1TB storage is $400 ($200+$200). Same for the iPad Pro 12.9".
This may or may not change your opinion on the price/value, but there is a reason.
No, the Ram is not part of the M1. But it is soldered to the mother board.
And, while it cannot be upgraded or replaced like a "ram stick", it is the functional equivalent of one.
And, Apple has a history of charging exorbitant prices for their "ram stick" upgrades as well as for storage upgrades. Its a standard marketing model not unique to Apple where higher end products carry higher markups than the lower end, base model products.
The M1, A12Z and A14X in Apple parlance are MCM (multi-chip module) modules containing the SoC and 2 LPDDR RAM packages. This package is then mounted to the I/O board. Here's what the A12X looks like:
The SoC is under the heat spreader, with the A12X label, and the 2 LPDDR RAM packages are adjacent to it. You can see the green PCB substrate underneath. This is what the bottom looks like:
This looks like your basic BGA with about 2300 balls or so. You know, that's a lot for a package that doesn't need to have RAM memory pins. Wonder what they are all for? Anyways, so it just looks like you regular CPU from AMD or Intel, except there are RAM packages there too, and the heat spreader looking like it was cut in half also looks odd.
So, the M1 is a MCM package with the SoC chip and 2 LPDDR RAM packages in the MCM package. It is mounted by way of a BGA socket to Apple's I/O board or logic board. It really isn't a motherboard as in PC parlance.
To answer boomer0127's question regarding RAM costs, and NAND storage costs, it is staring at you right in the image. To get 4, 6, 8, 16 GB RAM, Apple needs to have RAM packages with increasing LPDDR RAM density as they are limited to 2 RAM packages. The lower density RAM is cheaper per GB than the higher density RAM because they are more mature and have been fabbed for a long time on older fabs. The higher density RAM uses modern state of the arts fabs and end up costing more per GB for awhile. Apple is likely the biggest buyer of 8 GB LPDDR4X RAM packages among all buyers. 16 GB LPDDR5 RAM packages have been "available" for ages now. They aren't going to be cheap when Apple start's using them. It's the same scenario for NAND chip storage, and there complexities with the type of NAND too.
The reason some high GB PC DIMM memory modules are cheaper per GB then other is likely because they are putting 16 lower density RAM packages in the DIMM rather than 8 higher density ones, or slower ones, or some combination. If you look at DIMMs using the highest density RAM, they will not be cheap.
The only difference between the 128/256/512GB and 1/2 TB configs (other than the storage) is the 16GB RAM in the 1/2 TB configs. But comparing the prices to the 2020 iPadsPro, the 128/256/512GB models are $100 more, but the 1TB 2021 model is $300 more. Are 8GB RAM sticks that expensive these days?
Just complaining....
There are no "RAM sticks" in any Apple product with the M1 - the memory is on the M1 package.
They also explained that the storage is much faster now - desktop speed storage (made possible by the M1).
All previous iPads (and iPhones) used a different type of flash storage that couldn't come near the storage speed we have in desktops/laptops.
On the M1 Mac mini, to go from 8GB RAM/512GB storage -> 16GB RAM/1TB storage is $400 ($200+$200). Same for the iPad Pro 12.9".
This may or may not change your opinion on the price/value, but there is a reason.
No, the Ram is not part of the M1. But it is soldered to the mother board.
And, while it cannot be upgraded or replaced like a "ram stick", it is the functional equivalent of one.
And, Apple has a history of charging exorbitant prices for their "ram stick" upgrades as well as for storage upgrades. Its a standard marketing model not unique to Apple where higher end products carry higher markups than the lower end, base model products.
The M1, A12Z and A14X in Apple parlance are MCM (multi-chip module) modules containing the SoC and 2 LPDDR RAM packages. This package is then mounted to the I/O board. Here's what the A12X looks like:
The SoC is under the heat spreader, with the A12X label, and the 2 LPDDR RAM packages are adjacent to it. You can see the green PCB substrate underneath. This is what the bottom looks like:
This looks like your basic BGA with about 2300 balls or so. You know, that's a lot for a package that doesn't need to have RAM memory pins. Wonder what they are all for? Anyways, so it just looks like you regular CPU from AMD or Intel, except there are RAM packages there too, and the heat spreader looking like it was cut in half also looks odd.
So, the M1 is a MCM package with the SoC chip and 2 LPDDR RAM packages in the MCM package. It is mounted by way of a BGA socket to Apple's I/O board or logic board. It really isn't a motherboard as in PC parlance.
To answer boomer0127's question regarding RAM costs, and NAND storage costs, it is staring at you right in the image. To get 4, 6, 8, 16 GB RAM, Apple needs to have RAM packages with increasing LPDDR RAM density as they are limited to 2 RAM packages. The lower density RAM is cheaper per GB than the higher density RAM because they are more mature and have been fabbed for a long time on older fabs. The higher density RAM uses modern state of the arts fabs and end up costing more per GB for awhile. Apple is likely the biggest buyer of 8 GB LPDDR4X RAM packages among all buyers. 16 GB LPDDR5 RAM packages have been "available" for ages now. They aren't going to be cheap when Apple start's using them. It's the same scenario for NAND chip storage, and there complexities with the type of NAND too.
The reason some high GB PC DIMM memory modules are cheaper per GB then other is likely because they are putting 16 lower density RAM packages in the DIMM rather than 8 higher density ones, or slower ones, or some combination. If you look at DIMMs using the highest density RAM, they will not be cheap.
Thank you all for the explanations. Hopefully this extra RAM will be effectively utilized in future software updates.
Comments
Apple will do everything with Apple Silicon. Success.
Apple are doing the sensible thing. Matching the os to the form factor. It's not about what's technically feasible. It's about what makes sense for the users. And Apple. The last thing users want is hardware that lags behind the OS and Apps. Like Intels CPUs. Users wants OS/apps to catch up with the hardware, NOT the other way around. That's what is happening now. Software RAPIDLY catching up with Apple Silicon.
A theme that just keeps repeating over and over again on these forums is this one where people keep expecting Apple to become more like Windows or Android. I shouldn't let it baffle me any more, but it does. Why isn't it better to expect Apple to be Apple and the others to do what they do, resulting in more choice for consumers? Apple's products work as well as they do and as reliably as they do specifically because the hardware is designed in concert with the software, down to the last detail. They limit variables by not trying to incorporate every option, bell or whistle that might be possible. Fewer variables mean fewer crashes, conflicts and related problems.
So an iPad Pro device, designed and optimized for iPadOS isn't going to be optimized to run MacOS, and MacOS isn't written to operate an iPad. It goes outside Apple's basic design model to make swapping the OS back and forth an option. Why would they cannibalize MacBook sales by incentivizing customers to try a suboptimal, makeshift iPad swaparoo option? Not only would they lose sales of MacBooks, but they'd also lose ground in customer satisfaction, because the iPad trying to be all things to all people would end up not being as good as a Mac at being a Mac, and in the process would probably end up also compromising quality and user experience on iPad side as well. This is just not how Apple approaches its business. At all.
Mark my words, at one point in the future, iPhone, iPad and Mac will run on the same chip. Expect Glasses, Watch and other devices to join the “M” lineup in the future.
With M1 in iPad here’s my safe prediction:
Mac suite apps are coming to iPad!! Logic Pro, Final Cut and others.
Feels like this is maybe 4-6 years away at the earliest. Apple would have to make sure that it doesn't completely cannibalize all their Mac sales. I think they'd need to see some additional product lines launched (VR / Apple Glass, Apple Car) and pulling in decent revenue before they could actually make this transition.
There are no "RAM sticks" in any Apple product with the M1 - the memory is on the M1 package.
They also explained that the storage is much faster now - desktop speed storage (made possible by the M1).
All previous iPads (and iPhones) used a different type of flash storage that couldn't come near the storage speed we have in desktops/laptops.
On the M1 Mac mini, to go from 8GB RAM/512GB storage -> 16GB RAM/1TB storage is $400 ($200+$200). Same for the iPad Pro 12.9".
This may or may not change your opinion on the price/value, but there is a reason.
The SoC is under the heat spreader, with the A12X label, and the 2 LPDDR RAM packages are adjacent to it. You can see the green PCB substrate underneath. This is what the bottom looks like:
This looks like your basic BGA with about 2300 balls or so. You know, that's a lot for a package that doesn't need to have RAM memory pins. Wonder what they are all for? Anyways, so it just looks like you regular CPU from AMD or Intel, except there are RAM packages there too, and the heat spreader looking like it was cut in half also looks odd.
So, the M1 is a MCM package with the SoC chip and 2 LPDDR RAM packages in the MCM package. It is mounted by way of a BGA socket to Apple's I/O board or logic board. It really isn't a motherboard as in PC parlance.
To answer boomer0127's question regarding RAM costs, and NAND storage costs, it is staring at you right in the image. To get 4, 6, 8, 16 GB RAM, Apple needs to have RAM packages with increasing LPDDR RAM density as they are limited to 2 RAM packages. The lower density RAM is cheaper per GB than the higher density RAM because they are more mature and have been fabbed for a long time on older fabs. The higher density RAM uses modern state of the arts fabs and end up costing more per GB for awhile. Apple is likely the biggest buyer of 8 GB LPDDR4X RAM packages among all buyers. 16 GB LPDDR5 RAM packages have been "available" for ages now. They aren't going to be cheap when Apple start's using them. It's the same scenario for NAND chip storage, and there complexities with the type of NAND too.