You OK, Apple? Seriously, your silicon lineup is … a mess Apple seems to have skipped a few steps in its silicon roadmap. The launch of Cupertino's M4 iPad Pro this week wasn't just met with backlash over another tone-deaf ad campaign, but left us with more questions than answers regarding the health of Apple's silicon portfolio. For one, the "new" M3-series parts powering the …
Even that has begun to loose its shine for many of the i-Fanbois. It is only a very few years ago that the launch of new Apple kit mandated queues round the block on launch day with the customers high-fiving one another as they emerged from their local Apple emporium with their latest shiny. Dare I suggest the commoditization has to some degree now begun to affect Apple kit as well?
The great leap in processor speed, thermal performance and battery life happened with the transition from Intel to M1. The jumps to M2 and M3 were nowhere near as large.
I suspect that many people are perfectly satisfied with the performance of their M1 processors and aren't tempted to upgrade.
Sorta. My current iMac (2019 27") is getting long in the tooth, so I'm in the early stages of socking away money for a replacement desktop.[1] By the time I have said cash, a midrange Mac Studio or even perhaps a high-end Mini will probably will have a beefier version of it, and it'll be more mature then as well. While I may not give a shit about the new iPads with more power than a limited tablet OS can really take advantage of, a new desktop on a now mature platform is something that future me *can* make use of.
[1] I wasn't even going to consider it previously unless I suffered catastrophic hardware failure[2] for the M1 or M2 anyway. I may use their kit, but I'm never going to get a first-gen anything, since I don't want to pay Apple prices to basically beta test for them.
[2] Which would necessitate financing which I'd rather avoid otherwise.
Consider buying a MacBook instead of a Mini or a Studio. For only a few hundred dollars more you can get a computer with similar specs that functions as a desktop and a laptop.
95% of the time, my MacBook is lid-closed, vertical, on the floor, alongside my desk. I have a stand that keeps it from falling over. Can't even see it. Connects to all of my stuff with one USB-C cable. I might as well have an all-in-one desktop.
And then when I need to go somewhere, turns out my desktop computer has a built-in monitor and keyboard...
That is an idea. It's still a ways away, and that might work, although I'd probably go full docking station if I did. I tend to hate Apple's keyboards[1] though, so I would need a decent one for on the go as well. Either way, I'd need a new primary display, and I guess that I'll see when I get there.
[1] Although my mechanical keyboard mimics the design of the full ones that came with the G5s, the internals are much nicer.
An Apple Studio Display is the obvious choice, but for a small fraction of the price (~$350) it's easy to find a 27-inch 4K display with Power Delivery and downstream USB ports (sometimes advertised as a "USB hub").
It won't be 5K, but you have to be sitting pretty close to tell a difference. Also, if you want to run the monitor at 4K 60Hz, the downstream USB ports will be limited to 2.0 speed, but that's more than enough for things like mice, printers, webcams, etc.
So I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "full docking station" but if you have a setup like this, you can "dock" your laptop by plugging in one single cable. Pretty convenient.
There are other 4K+ displays out there, which is sufficient. 1080 is just not fine enough for comfortable photo work, and I'm more concerned about resolution and colour gamut than anything else, and I know that there are others who make something that'll fit my needs.
An idea, but a VERY bad idea.
You obviously like to use your computers for several years. Get a desktop, not a laptop that you'll cook to death running with the lid closed. And avoid the current iMacs, only consider a Mac mini or Studio, the iMacs aren't adequately cooled either.
Cooling was one reason that I am leaning against it. The Studio/Mini are still what I'd be leaning towards. But I would be amiss not even considering all of the options, and I *hadn't* yet with laptops. And yes, cooling is a big issue. The current iMac has survived all I've been throwing at it, but even so struggles towards the end of a long day and an integrated display (either laptop or iMac) means another component that can go wrong and would take the whole thing down rather than all displays (all more easily replaceable in a hurry) being on their own.
That is a TERRIBLE idea.
You are shortening the life of your computer. It's slowly cooking itself to death. Apple laptops are only designed to cool properly with the screen open.
It's got a screen. USE IT. Get a stand that will hold the laptop open above your desk, giving you some extra screen real estate and extending the life of your computer significantly.
If you need a desktop, get a desktop like a Mac mini or Mac Studio.
^^This^^
There is very little benefit to having your laptop closed, and a second monitor is always a bonus. Even as a third monitor i usually end up keeping my mail inbox or music player open on it, basically anything i need to glance at every once in a while.
Using your laptop in such a way also quickly degrades your battery and fan, which is the main reason macbooks fail over time (from my anecdotal experience).
I personally use a desktop PC at home, and use a small portable laptop on the go. It's a shame Apple really doesn't have any remotely affordable options for this. (because if you're using Mac, there's a definite benefit to keeping most devices within their ecosystem). Even MacBook Airs (which have terrible value IMO), are basically the same cost as high-end ultrabooks from other brands.
Hell, even refurbished 2020 macbook airs are €600 around here, for that kind of money you can get yourself a very capable mid-range laptop.
Your anecdotal experience matches mine, and I have good news for anyone who wants to/is stuck using their MacBook docked all the time: there is software to protect the battery lifespan. I use Al Dente, which allows you to limit the charge, prevent charging until it gets down to a certain level, and prevent charging while the battery is hot. It also does not charge and discharge over and over, the laptop stops charging but continues to run on AC power. Batteries are degraded by spending a lot of time at high charge levels, frequently cycling, and charging while hot (this is a big one). I have mine set to charge at 60% up to 70%, unless the battery is 35°C+. I have used my MacBook for hours every day (coding and Lightroom) since I got it (November 13 2023).
Here are my stats:
SSD power on hours: 495
Battery charge cycles: 15
Battery design capacity: 6249 mAh
Battery maximum capacity: 6313 mAh (101%)
And my 2018 MacBook Air which was about 50/50 docked/on-the-go, and which did not get Al Dente until recently:
SSD power on hours: 1,199
Battery charge cycles: 560
Battery design capacity: 4381 mAh
Battery maximum capacity: 3469 mAh (79%)
The fans are not nearly as active on the M1+ laptops as well. They only spin up a bit on my M3 Pro while browsing quickly through compressed RAWs (verified by monitoring software, not ears), but the Intel Air gets them going all the time, and they run much faster.
To sum up, these newer MacBooks, with protective software installed, can spend a large portion of their lives docked without much worry about their lifespan, at least regarding battery and fans.
[1] I wasn't even going to consider it previously unless I suffered catastrophic hardware failure[2] for the M1 or M2 anyway. I may use their kit, but I'm never going to get a first-gen anything, since I don't want to pay Apple prices to basically beta test for them.
The M series is derived from the "A" series processors used in the iPhones / iPads so are not first gen, first gen for naming but not for architecture evolution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_M1#Variants
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A14#Variants
True. But moving from mobile to a powerful laptop or desktop is a big enough leap that I have to be cautious. I don't quite have the disposable income[1] to take the risk on it until I was sure that it was done successfully, and the major kinks worked out. By the time the M3 or M4 hit the Mini/Studio, then I can evaluate whether those or the laptop suggested would better suit my needs. Regardless, I'd be happy to not have an integrated display as my primary one, since any display that I can put on the *other* swing arm of my display stand would give me a bit more flexibility when it comes to keeping my desk in order.
[1] Also, while I do admit that I like shiny new, or in this case "new" things, I also don't like the whole mentality of disposing of something that just isn't the newest model. I'll keep hardware as long as it's still useful to me, and when it's not, if it still functions well enough I'll wipe it and give it to someone who doesn't necessarily need modern computing power.
This post has been deleted by its author
Just keep in mind that if you're using any virtualisation software, you'll be up the creek without a paddle if you switch from Intel to Apple silicon.
Don't make the mistake I made, thinking that because they trumpeted the use of Rosetta v2 in the OS that virtualisation would also be ok. It wasn't. Nothing like the message "VM cannot be started because it contains an Intel-based operating system". If you're stuck with some Intel stuff, find a decent mac Mini from 2018 to run those VMs on.
I agree that their assumption of why people buy these is wrong. I'm not really sure why people buy these, other than to know that they do. My guess is that, having decided they want an iPad, they don't consider whether they need a certain level of performance and just assume that the M* version is better than an A* version so they'll get it. I've never heard someone explain the thing they are doing that requires M-series performance.
Based on real world experience from people I know, some people really *are* all about having the new iShiny.
I just keep telling my friends that "sure, you spent yet another grand on a new thing, but mine does what I wanted it for, nothing more, nothing less... And the longer I use it, the cheaper it gets". Having spent close to half a grand on this phone (when the iPhone 8 first became the 'economy' model), I will still happily wave it at them going nee-ner-nee-ner ;-)
Yet despite all of this POWER (in a Clarkson voice) Siri and Alexa remain as dumb as shit.
Doesn’t know anything - inc about music in My Library you have recently played, can’t understand spoken language reliably.
“Sorry I don’t know that” … you just played it 20 fucking minutes ago.
Sorry. Nope. I have an iPad here that is less than 10 years old. It is entirely useless because Apple has turned it out of the walled garden. I can't even update basic stuff like the browser. With an aged browser, many current websites don't work. I could go on. Please trust me, the device is entirely useless. Can't do anything useful with it at all. Folks overuse the term "doorstop", but this really is one.
A similar aged Android tablet might be slow and unable to run stuff using the absolute latest APIs, but generally they are still usable and take updates to Chrome and so on.
So... No, I don't agree that Apple provider "solid long-term support." On the contrary, once they nix something, it's dead as a usable device.
Apple's Mac support lifetimes have been shortening. You may be thinking of phones, where an IOS device is virtually guaranteed to have updates for years more than any Android device, though a couple ones have been sold promising to equal it. However, when you compare Macs with Windows, it doesn't end up looking as obvious. I've used this example before, but I have a MacBook from 2013. According to Apple, the latest Mac OS I can run on it is Mac OS 11. They stopped releasing security patches for that some time ago and many of the Apple-developed apps won't run on that. If I installed Windows on the same hardware, I would have Windows 10 security updates for another year and a half.
What I did instead was to use OpenCore Patcher to install Mac OS 14 on it instead. It works perfectly well, demonstrating that, just like Microsoft's dubious claims of technical problems requiring a minimum CPU level for Windows 11, Apple did not have a technical reason to cut off the updates. I am happy to praise them for their phone support, although most of that is simply comparing their adequate numbers to Android's unacceptable ones. That does not extend to everything they do.
"Apple did not have a technical reason to cut off the updates"
Eh, maybe, or maybe it's one that you haven't run into yet. Some feature that doesn't work right, but maybe you haven't noticed yet because you don't use that feature. Or maybe there's some unpatchable security flaw with the hardware, and Apple doesn't want to encourage people to keep using the hardware by releasing more updates for it. I wouldn't just assume that it's purely a money grab.
That could be true, but the project I speak of has gotten tens of devices to run many releases after Apple dropped support. If there were serious problems, just ones I never encounter, they would know about that. They do, for example using this table of devices with known problems. The issues they report are nearly entirely related to driver issues, and crucially, driver issues that they can't get around but Apple, having the code for them, could.
My laptop wasn't cut off unusually early, either, the way that it might have been if there was a security flaw in it specifically. Unless you're suggesting that all Apple hardware develops unavoidable security flaws after seven or eight years, that's not it.
Love the Mac Mini, I have a bunch of them in use as media PCs. I admit it, I have them in Intel, M1, and M2 flavors. And when the next chip comes out, I'll probably take the oldest and upgrade it.
So basically, Apple, if you want to sell me one with an M3 or M4 chip, just bring it to market. I'll buy.
I don't worship the fruity company, I just like the Mini's. I'll self-impose a Fanboi icon to save everyone else the hassle.
My Mac mini is now my portable PC - not a laptop grant you - but it doesn't take up much more space in a backpack even with a small keyboard and mouse.
And the iPad makes an emergency display if there's nothing HDMI to plug into.
Sure you don't use it on the plane or train, but with a bit of forward planning you can do a lot on the iPad and transfer it afterwards.
By and large I upgrade (anything) for only two reasons. An un-fixable fault* or the device no longer being supported. And sometimes not even then.
*and the last one of those I had was with my 20 year old, 330k miles, car - and I’m pretty sure I could have repaired it, but that was prohibited by the management (which seems unfair - I’ve been with her for more than 20 years, and I’d do anything to keep her too!)
Seems to me it may be Apple felt the need to offer something on top of the previous IPad Pro and was going for the extreme thin and light yet big screen form factor. I doubt that was possible with either the M2 or M3 without down clocking it a lot.
So M4 it was. From https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/05/apple-introduces-m4-chip/ they claim (to be taken with a bag of salt, but it still seems on their own lineup lower power could be the differentiator among M processors): "M4 can deliver the same performance as M2 using just half the power. And compared with the latest PC chip in a thin and light laptop, M4 can deliver the same performance using just a fourth of the power."
The claim of same performance at half power is "traditional" (was also claimed when M3 was introduced versus M1), the claim of a quarter of the power in thin and light isn't. The addition of two more efficiency cores may play a big role in this. For their thin-and light, only 4 efficiency cores might have limited them too much.
Coming out with a successor too quickly calls the "health" of their portfolio?
I guess for some people Apple can't do anything right. If the M4 arrives too quickly, that's bad. If it arrived too slowly, that would also be bad. I guess Goldilocks is alive and well for some!
Those of us paying attention knew there would never be an M3 Ultra, because the M3 Max did not have the I/O pads necessary to connect two of them together. That was a quite deliberate design decision, showing that the M3 was planned to have a short life all along. Why? That requires knowing that the N3B process used by TSMC to make them has been problem plagued, and Apple wanted to move onto the "fixed" N3E process as quickly as possible. Apple is the only major customer using N3B - maybe the only customer AT ALL using it (maybe a few small volume products like cryptomining chips do, but nothing else publicly known has used it)
I also find the criticism somewhat strange. After all, the shift in architectures was driven as much by the lack of development for x86 as anything else. Apple's own silicon has been impressive but hardly earth shattering. It's used some clever tricks to juice performance but it's clear that they know there's more to be had, especially memory.
I also don't think people who've bought any recent Macs will really mind. The main reason for buying an Arm-Mac is much better battery life and no fan. IIRC the M3 broke this a bit and requires more aggressive throttling as a result.
That said, I'll be sticking with my x86 MacBooks for a while yet, not least because of the stunts Apple is pulling with the OS. There's also the unpleasant shift to subscription models for some software I use, including Parallels.
When it's a short release cycle with only an incremental improvement rather than some stunning leap forward yes, it does rather make you wonder what's happening, if there's a problem with the devices and given their admissions of unpatchable security flaws in earlier parts it's not unreasonable to ask.
And it's fun to poke the lickspittles
No stunning leap forward? I guess not, but the single thread performance of the M4 beats EVERY single CPU out there, including the fastest and most expensive Intel and AMD CPUs.
But other than that, what a terrible thing Apple has done by updating after only 7 months they should be ashamed!
Seems like the problem is with the name, then?
If they had called the chip the M3b, or the M3x, or the M3 ][, or something else that would imply an incremental improvement, then everybody would be super cool with it.
But they called it the M4 and now people are confused and worried and complaining.
Oh, they can always stick more stuff on. They've done it before. They could either put something else on the end (this isn't the M4, it's the M3A/M3A Pro), or they could stick on more words (M3 plus ultra). Sure, eventually doing that will result in something that looks stupid (M6B plus ultra max), but it wouldn't be the first time as trying to explain the different versions of iPads, nor would it likely be as hard to understand as what Intel and AMD have sometimes done to their processor numbers.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
