maximara

elijahg said:

viclauyyc said:

techconc said:

This is the type of acquisition that Apple really needs to make.  Apple just doesn't get the gaming market or simply has no interest in it.  Small indie games in Apple Arcade are fine, but Apple's platforms need A list games.  Apple has great hardware with the M1 Max but a poor gaming selection.  Ironically, Mac sales are at record levels now, but gaming on the Mac is worse than any time in history.  Sad.  

Even Apple buy half of AAA list games on the market, I don’t expect to see people will rush to buy a Mac just to play these games. Hardcore gamer has a long history of dislike/hate Mac/Apple. They might just not to play these games anymore if it is a Mac only.

That was the same consensus before the iPhone and iPod though. The majority of people didn't like Apple for no real reason than seeing them as overpriced. That slowly changed when the iPod became popular, because it was fairly cheap and worked well. If Apple had a decent machine that wasn't as overpriced as the Mac Pro is, and showed gamers that they can too join in making decent hardware that wasn't extortionate (as they did with iPod and iPhone) enough gamers would eventually change their minds. Apple's only got themselves to blame for the ire of gamers - plus the hardcore gamers are a fairly small faction (think the types who go to gamer cons) compared to those gamers who are more casual but still like AAA games, and those IMO would be more open to Apple. 

I have friends who have switched back from Mac to PC because they wanted to game, and Apple just didn't have a decent offering without paying through the nose. Their refusal to use Nvidia GPUs (attributable to a childish spat years ago) means we are/were stuck with slow and hot AMD GPUs. The Pro Vega 48 in my iMac is crap compared to the 2080Ti, which came out at the same time and for the same cost - the Pro Vega 48 gets 11500 benchmark, the gets 18600. Again Mac users get jilted because of Apple's stubbornness.

slow n easy said:

I will be very disappointed if they try to break up Apple.

waveparticle said:

muthuk_vanalingam said:

maximara said:

GeorgeBMac said:

xbit said:

highframerate said:

Intel is not "in peril" in any sense. Quite the contrary, Intel is #1 by a mile. AMD is #2 even if only because being forced to share TSMC with Apple, Qualcomm, MediaTek and Nvidia means that they can't come close to matching Intel's volume. (AMD is FINALLY shifting manufacture of their low end chips to Samsung later this year.) Apple is a distant #3. ARM CPU makers like Qualcomm, MediaTek and Samsung are going to be held back by the limitations of Windows on ARM (though there is some potential with Chrome OS ARM, which works a lot better). Indeed, now that Intel is re-entering the discrete GPU market, they are going to sell more chips in 2022 without Apple than they ever did with them.

Hello Intel employee.

I worked for Nokia around 2008/9. At the time, they were selling hundreds of millions of smartphones a year, outselling Apple by an order of magnitude. Comfortably the number #1. But the writing was on the wall. Everyone internally knew it. 

I doubt Intel will ever crash and burn like Nokia but it's only a matter of time until Microsoft crack ARM on Windows. Once that happens, no-one is going to pay Intel's inflated prices for CPUs.

Then Intel will simply get a license and start making ARM based processors.   Easy-Peasy.  No problem.

Big problem - the majority of code for PC desktops is X86.  Without a good translator (rather than emulator) Intel will have the same problem Microsoft had with Windows on ARM did - little adoption.  PC user like to hold on to their machines until way past their use by date (many times due ironically to cost).  Why do you think there are still a good number of ATMs running Windows XP?  Apple can force its users on to ARM - Intel cannot without some sort of software help (a hardware option would defeat the whole idea of going to ARM).

I think you missed to read the context of George's response - @xbit mentioned that Microsoft will take care of getting windows fully ready for ARM processors eventually (say in 2-3 years, not explicitly mentioned, but implied). George's response should be read in that context. The question of translator/emulator does not arise in that scenario.

Not that easy for Microsoft. There are hundreds or thousands accessories that were designed to work with Microsoft Windows. They will become obsolete with ARM based Windows OS. 

GeorgeBMac said:

xbit said:

highframerate said:

Intel is not "in peril" in any sense. Quite the contrary, Intel is #1 by a mile. AMD is #2 even if only because being forced to share TSMC with Apple, Qualcomm, MediaTek and Nvidia means that they can't come close to matching Intel's volume. (AMD is FINALLY shifting manufacture of their low end chips to Samsung later this year.) Apple is a distant #3. ARM CPU makers like Qualcomm, MediaTek and Samsung are going to be held back by the limitations of Windows on ARM (though there is some potential with Chrome OS ARM, which works a lot better). Indeed, now that Intel is re-entering the discrete GPU market, they are going to sell more chips in 2022 without Apple than they ever did with them.

Hello Intel employee.

I worked for Nokia around 2008/9. At the time, they were selling hundreds of millions of smartphones a year, outselling Apple by an order of magnitude. Comfortably the number #1. But the writing was on the wall. Everyone internally knew it. 

I doubt Intel will ever crash and burn like Nokia but it's only a matter of time until Microsoft crack ARM on Windows. Once that happens, no-one is going to pay Intel's inflated prices for CPUs.

Then Intel will simply get a license and start making ARM based processors.   Easy-Peasy.  No problem.

highframerate said:

Intel's deal with TSMC is only short-term: 2022-2024. In 2025, Intel will start producing chips on their 5nm process and will no longer need TSMC to compete with AMD. (Despite what Apple fans believe, Intel's competition is AMD, not Apple.) Yes, the primary benefit of Intel buying capacity from TSMC is that it will further exacerbate AMD's supply problems. Which leaves poor AMD between a rock and a hard place: capacity problems at TSMC and yield problems at the only viable alternative Samsung.