tedz98

Some general observations: There are some extremely intelligent comments here about the design challenges and trade offs for processors. You guys really know your stuff and it’s very educational! Some commenters don’t really appreciate the technical challenges in processor design. They flippantly express dismay that performance isn’t what they think it should be. The M1 in all its flavors is an incredible achievement! Given the complexities of the hardware design, software integration and compatibility it makes me realize that Apple was dissatisfied with Intel technology many years ago. They had to have started working on this architecture change at least 5-7 years ago. All the while Intel sat on their hands with minimal/routine upgrades to the X86 chips. Fat dumb and happy with their virtual monopoly and revenue stream. Then they fell behind in foundry capabilities and lost their technology lead to TSMC. Intel claims they will catch up and surpass others by 2024/2025. I’m not sure they have the corporate culture for that. Catch up is always challenging. In many ways it’s easier to stay in the lead than catch up. Apple has shown what leading edge chip design and technology looks like.

I agree with all of the disparaging descriptions and categorizations of Zuckerberg- lest we forget how he stole and cheated the Facebook founding from his days at Harvard. Actually the world needs less Meta Reality, Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality and more hands-on real world reality. Are we as a society to become a population of drones imprisoned wearing Occulus goggles with our butts firmly anchored to a soft cushy chair? Zuckerberg is morally bankrupt as CEO of Facebook and the world should think twice about using any of his products that enhance his personal wealth and power.

This is a classic example of the failures of communism, big government and central planning. They can’t keep the lights on! The article, which in many ways from a journalistic perspective, isn’t written well - doesn’t answer the basic question of why there is a power shortage in China. It also speaks to the corruption of big government. Companies with political influence, and by inference, the resources to bribe officials, are the ones who get electricity (sounds a bit like what’s going on in Washington D.C.) You can be sure if companies are being denied electricity, private citizens are going without power in their homes. Do global warming alarmists really think China is going to limit CO2 output when they are bringing new coal burning power plants online every week, yet still can’t meet power demand? Apple should have been undertaking a serious effort to leave China a long time ago. But the lure of cheap labor and easier profitability has kept them there longer than they should have been. So wake up America! The siren’s lure of big brother government being the provider of the basic necessities of daily life touted by the likes of AOC, Bernie, Biden, Nancy and Schumer are deceptive and false. California, which is already a semi-socialist state, is well on its way to being unable to meet everyday power needs during periods of peak demand. Gavin Newsome and his ilk in Sacramento falsely think they posses the intellectual superiority to control the basic economic, environmental and societal variables of California to lead to optimal outcomes for the citizens of California. Given the outflow of people and companies from California I would argue they are failing. Tesla is moving their headquarters to Texas as a very recent example of this. Not to mention the California problems with homelessness. Apple’s next big worry is TSMC and their reliance on Taiwan for Apple CPU’s. If Apple were smart they’d be knocking on the doors of Intel and other domestic chip producers and start developing backup supply chains for chips. This is a multi-year effort so get started now! The China pendulum has reached its apex. Time for new plans Apple!

There is no doubt the Apple ecosystem is highly managed and controlled. Therefore Apple decides from a marketing-driven perspective when or if new technologies get released. You’ll never see a touch screen Mac because touch screens are the purview of the iPad. With Apple Silicon the performance of the system heavily depends on the RAM being integrated on the same silicon as the CPU - which means RAM upgradability will probably/can never be offered. However SSD’s could be upgradeable but Apple chooses not to offer that for marketing reasons. If Apple didn’t price gouge on upgrades for RAM and Storage it would be a different story (these upgrades are huge profit makers). Given Apple’s big focus on sustainability it’s unfortunate that some of their systems can’t be upgraded to give the system a longer useful life. But Intel has failed to perform over the past 5 years regarding advances in manufacturing technology (no where near ready to offer 5nm chips). Intel could be offering more tightly coupled CPU/RAM architectures. Or lower power consumption designs for laptops. Or advancing Windows on ARM technology. Intel missed the boat on mobile platform technology as well. And since Microsoft is in control of Windows there will never be the tight hardware/OS coupling Apple Silicon offers. Intel was fat, dumb and happy and unmotivated to innovate. Plus Intel should have not have been surprised by Apple’s move to new technology. IBM and before them, Motorola were both pushed aside by Apple as changes to new CPU technologies occurred. I think Intel is pushing this advertising campaign because of a bruised ego and trying to prove to the stock market that they haven’t totally messed up. I don’t think they have any expectation that Apple is capable of converting a huge chunk of the Wintel market to Apple - there’s too much inertia to overcome. Kudos to Apple for truly innovating.

Tim Cook just needs to be careful that Apple doesn’t wind up being the real world personification of the crazed security apparatus found at Hooli in “Silicon Valley.” Security is important but Tim needs to make sure Apple doesn’t loose agility or innovation at the expense of security. Year to year updates to existing products are less of a security issue than brand new products. Software capabilities will overtake hardware capabilities as revenue continues to shift from devices to services. For most people it’s affordability that drives purchasing decisions vs. gee wiz new features of hardware.