New Macs

[GeorgeWalk]

The New Macs and Macs in general ditched the TossLink output on their headphone jacks long ago. Has anyone tested the sound coming out of the headphone jack on the M1 Macs? I called Apple they say since the I/O is compliant, any Thunderbolt or USB peripherals will work seamlessly.

So if the internal sound is as good or better than the $10 Thunderbolt to 3.5mm (with better test results than many higher priced DACs) dongle tested here, it could be worthy of direct connection to an amp for streaming Music. The HDMI is already said it outputs multi channel 48k like any tv box. I am curious to find out how they sound.

I haven't used the headphone jack. I will try it next week. I have been using my Topping D90/A90 through USB and it work great.

 

[GeorgeWalk]

I just did a quick audio comparison of my new Mac Book Pro M1's headphone jack to my D90/A90 stack. I used my Senn HD 660s headphones. This wasn't double blind and I had to manually try and adjust levels when I plugged for one unit to the other.

General observations:
1 I could listen to the Senns at full volume on the MBP. It wasn't eardrum shattering. For me, it was just beginning to get uncomfortable.
2 At that volume, I didn't hear any distortion
3 The D90/A90 stack had more punch to the bass and it sounded more defined

This is very subjective, I didn't have a way to easily switch the headphones form one source to another (it was all manual plug/unplug). I tried to level match as best as I could by ear.

My conclusion is that the MBP headphone/audio is very listenable. If I was on a long trip (which I used to do and may be back doing again) I could use just the MBP audio without a dongle or severely missing my D90/A90.

 

[maverickronin]

There will be no need to waste $2k on a gaming PC when an ARM system with SOC will do the same and more for a fraction. No one will care for how much Ram you can install or what grade power supply to buy. If the M1 is the weakest processor of whats next to come, Apple will be sitting on real dominance. Linus and all the other gaming channels will need to change their tune.

This is a non-sequitur. It's been blindingly obvious for more than a decade that performance could be drastically improved by switching away from x86/64 which is essentially a legacy architecture and is more or less just used for backwards compatibility. It doesn't matter how fast a chip theoretically is if nothing (or nothing requiring that speed...) runs on it. The real achievement, if it actually works as well as it's supposed to, is the Rosetta translation layer.

Unfortunately for those hoping for revolution in usable high performance silicon, backwards compatibility is king. This is almost the entire reason Windows continues to exist.

Apple's new ARM chips will have almost no effect on the gaming market because very few AAA developers are making games for OSX to begin with. There are more games than ever on Macs, but they're pretty much all resource light indie or casual games which will already run on most anything. It will have little effect on the high end workstation market because most such software doesn't run on OSX either. Basically the only categories of resource intensive software which routinely have OSX versions are DAWs and the Adobe suite. Even a Windows shop where DAWs and Adobe CS are their primary applications isn't going to switch to Macs overnight due to the management overhead.

Apple will continue to exist in it's own little walled garden. Even if Apple's new ARM chips work out perfectly there will be no mass migration to Apple hardware unless Intel takes the better part of a decade to pick up the ball they've dropped and not come up with an appropriate response. Unless that happens there will just be a few years of Mac users bragging about their Photoshop or Premiere rendering faster before Intel catches up since it will take at least that long for enough Windows focused software companies to bother with Mac versions.

 

[Mashcky]

I mostly agree with maverickronan in that a hardware success won't mean automatic victory for Apple. What I do think it means is that it will enable or encourage developers of resource intensive software to make the switch or make a Mac version of their software, including perhaps AAA developers. The "if nothing runs on it" argument is maybe a little extreme for me though. Rosetta 2 has already been shown the work excellent (evidence of this is demonstrated in videos previously posted), and present Mac users already willingly make the compromise of fewer software choices to use the operating system of their choice.

I also wouldn't undersell how much this move is a success for Apple though. There are a lot of advantages of the SoC method that can't easily be bested by Intel deciding not to sit on their hands. One example is the shared integrated memory design and faster travel of processes from cpu gores to gpu cores as explained in an ArsTechnica interview here. I also don't see a clear path for manufactures of x86 processors to move to the more efficient ARM variants anytime soon. All but the best desktop computers are power/thermal limited, so the efficiency of ARM can benefit almost all products. Nvidia has experience producing chips using RISC-V processors, but what about Intel? Will Qualcomm become a desktop processor competitor? (currently they are way behind Apple ARM processor performance). I don't think the equilibrium reached by the conventional PC market in the next fews years is so clear, if manufacturers choose the Apple route at all...

 

[Ismapics]

This is a non-sequitur. It's been blindingly obvious for more than a decade that performance could be drastically improved by switching away from x86/64 which is essentially a legacy architecture and is more or less just used for backwards compatibility. It doesn't matter how fast a chip theoretically is if nothing (or nothing requiring that speed...) runs on it. The real achievement, if it actually works as well as it's supposed to, is the Rosetta translation layer.

Unfortunately for those hoping for revolution in usable high performance silicon, backwards compatibility is king. This is almost the entire reason Windows continues to exist.

Apple's new ARM chips will have almost no effect on the gaming market because very few AAA developers are making games for OSX to begin with. There are more games than ever on Macs, but they're pretty much all resource light indie or casual games which will already run on most anything. It will have little effect on the high end workstation market because most such software doesn't run on OSX either. Basically the only categories of resource intensive software which routinely have OSX versions are DAWs and the Adobe suite. Even a Windows shop where DAWs and Adobe CS are their primary applications isn't going to switch to Macs overnight due to the management overhead.

Apple will continue to exist in it's own little walled garden. Even if Apple's new ARM chips work out perfectly there will be no mass migration to Apple hardware unless Intel takes the better part of a decade to pick up the ball they've dropped and not come up with an appropriate response. Unless that happens there will just be a few years of Mac users bragging about their Photoshop or Premiere rendering faster before Intel catches up since it will take at least that long for enough Windows focused software companies to bother with Mac versions.

Apple if they anted to after what has been demo by these SOC could easily re dee x86 obsolete. Photo video editing, done, what else is there cpu/gpu intensive, games , ok let’s do it. The developers will follow the users. If they can demo even more power 9n the next M#s consumers will follow. No more water cooling this, Ram that or gpu this. It’s a $2 trillion company, with tons of brain power. If they wanted to they can.

 

[maverickronin]

Photo video editing, done, what else is there cpu/gpu intensive, games , ok let’s do it. The developers will follow the users

That's totally possible, but it's more or less a chicken and egg situation.

 

[Blumlein 88]

In the interview with some of the M1 team, they were asked if later iterations might be powerful enough and even less expensive. The response was more or less, "Apple doesn't do cheap, so no, we aren't planning on moving down market with this." So I doubt if they are interested in some battle to obsolete x86 or the world that lives on it. In time that world may also move to ARM, but probably not Apple sourced ARM chips I would think. I'd also think it would take another large outfit a decade to catch up on the ARM platform.

 

[tuga]

Apple will continue to exist in it's own little walled garden. Even if Apple's new ARM chips work out perfectly there will be no mass migration to Apple hardware unless Intel takes the better part of a decade to pick up the ball they've dropped and not come up with an appropriate response. Unless that happens there will just be a few years of Mac users bragging about their Photoshop or Premiere rendering faster before Intel catches up since it will take at least that long for enough Windows focused software companies to bother with Mac versions.

According to this, Apple sold almost as much in iPads as they did in Macs last year. iPhones made less than 50% for the first time since 2012.
As you say, pro Mac users are a very small niche.

And one wonders about how many of those pro users will still be floating once we're out of the Covid tunnel...

 

[pierre]

We will see how things goes. My guesses:
- laptop will go to arm. They are more efficient and battery last longer.
- desktop will go with the cheapest or with the more powerful one. not that many people want a desktop: gamers, developers etc. as pointed out above, software availability is critical. Gamers will only move if games are available and if they get the best performance. This will not append quickly if at all: apple could change its mind and bet on nvidia again or stay with amd.
- servers: half the time you optimize for efficiency half the time for perf. You also need multiple sockets per machine which apple is not doing. I would be surprised if Apple move in this direction that’s a low margin business.

 

[maverickronin]

According to this, Apple sold almost as much in iPads as they did in Macs last year. iPhones made less than 50% for the first time since 2012.

Definitely. That's why I was surprised by the performance of the new chips. When I first head they were moving to ARM I though it was just for the power savings and battery life. The fact that they got such performance out of it to makes it seem like they want to make a bigger play for the laptop/desktop market.

 

[sweetchaos]

Here’s an Apple Silicon M1 Mac Apps Compatibility List
https://isapplesiliconready.com/

About 60% of apps we're watching are fully Apple silicon M1 compatible

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1330215793120907267

 

[sweetchaos]

How to Install Any iOS App on Your M1 Mac [Step By Step]

By using Apple Configurator, you can install your favourite iPhone and iPad apps on your M1 Mac.
Simply follow the steps below to get started.

Step 1: Download Apple Configurator 2 from the App Store on your Mac.
Step 2: Sign-in to your account
Step 3: Now plug in your iOS device and download the app you want to install on your Mac.
Step 4: Once downloaded, locate the .ipa file in Library.
Step 5: You can now either run a Terminal Command or simply AirDrop the file to your Mac
Step 6: Double the .ipa file on your M1 Mac to install.
Step 7: The iOS app will be installed in your Applications folder on your Mac.
Step 8: You should now be up and running that your iOS app on your Mac.

We have not yet tried the process ourselves but if you are looking to try to get any iOS app on your M1 Mac, this is the safest solution.
Also, the process will only work with signed apps, which are downloaded from the App Store, and are registered to the Apple ID used by your Mac.

 

[MZKM]

Just convinced my mother to get a Mac Mini M1 for herself; she is using a late 2012 model with 4GB of memory and it’s slow as balls, and all she uses it for is spreadsheets and internet browsing; and I mean seriously slow, the beach ball comes on every few minutes. So we’ll see how much better the new one is for her.

 

[GeorgeWalk]

Just convinced my mother to get a Mac Mini M1 for herself; she is using a late 2012 model with 4GB of memory and it’s slow as balls, and all she uses it for is spreadsheets and internet browsing; and I mean seriously slow, the beach ball comes on every few minutes. So we’ll see how much better the new one is for her.

I think she will like it. I upgraded from a 2012 Macbook Pro. It had 8GB and would frequently go "spinning beachball of death". I had to manage how many browser windows were open and what apps I was using. The new M1 MBP is screaming fast.

 

[thefsb]

What were you planning on running that needs more than 16GB?

In my case, VirtualBox.

Limited memory was the top reason I quit using Apple hardware many years ago.

When I got tired of running a hackintosh I switched back to Windows a couple of years ago. Since WSL got good, Windows has a shell env that's better than MacOS.

 

[tmtomh]

In my case, VirtualBox.

Limited memory was the top reason I quit using Apple hardware many years ago.

When I got tired of running a hackintosh I switched back to Windows a couple of years ago. Since WSL got good, Windows has a shell env that's better than MacOS.

So far it appears the M1's integrated memory architecture is enabling M1 Macs to compete with and sometimes exceed Intel Macs with up to 64GB RAM in certain tests and benchmarks. Of course if you are happy with Windows you should stay there - no reason at all to switch back.

However, I would suggest maybe keeping an eye on new Macs in 2021, as the M2 (or whatever their mid/high-end CPU will be called) will no doubt come out when Apple releases new iMacs and higher-end MacBook Pros. Those might have a RAM ceiling of more than 16GB, and they will no doubt be faster than even the M1 Macs.

 

[Ron Texas]

In my case, VirtualBox.

Limited memory was the top reason I quit using Apple hardware many years ago.

When I got tired of running a hackintosh I switched back to Windows a couple of years ago. Since WSL got good, Windows has a shell env that's better than MacOS.

I had a hackintosh for a while, but it crashed too often for my tastes.

 

[DWPress]

Apple user from the wayback machine of OS7 here. I ran a hackintosh from Lion to Mavericks before I got tired of upgrades and compatibility issues. I've been using a late 2012 mini the last couple years but have halted the OS upgrade at Mojave to retain use of CS6 and other apps. I swore my next machine would be some Linux flavor but these new M1s are so cheap and juicy I might stay onboard despite myself and Apples continuing alienation of power users and locking down their system. I don't think I'd regret a new mini as much as that $1k+ bondi blue gumdrop iMac I sprung for when they were new at least!

 

[BenF]

I'm not a Mac guy but I am very impressed with what they achieved with the M1 SoC. This is solid engineering!

 

[Habu]

Hello from France

Just sold in one week Mac Pro 5.1 2010, Mac Mini 2012, MacBook Pro 2012 and ordered Mac Mini M1 and MacBok Air M1 (Both 8/512).

In 2014, I ordered a MacBook Pro 13 Retina, but send it back without opening it as it was not reasonable for me !

In October 2020, I was still thinking that I will probably never buy a mac again due to bad performance/price versus PCs.

Next move will eventually happen if Apple release really professionnal M1x machines (New design and/or more ports/CPU’s/Memory) and still affordable (Less than 2000 $)

Take Care

Habu