A reason for M1 Macs' excessive writing to NVMe SSD

[pastrychef]

It looks like Intel may eventually stop Apple from including Rosetta 2 in "certain regions" due to legal restraints. If so this will solve much of the NVMe SSD wear issues. No Rosetta 2 means no x86 based apps can run in emulation on the new M1 Macs. Intel is no longer "playing nice" with Apple since the big breakup.

Apple may disable Rosetta 2 on M1 Macs in some regions, macOS 11.3 code suggests - 9to5Mac

Just like the original Rosetta technology, Rosetta 2 lets users run macOS apps from one platform on another — this...

9to5mac.com

Intel really seems to be running scared. They've gone as far as to hire Justin Long (I'm a Mac) to do a bunch of anti-M1 Mac commercials.

‘I’m a Mac’ star Justin Long pivots to Intel in new ads mocking M1 Macs - 9to5Mac

Intel has launched a series of new ads that feature Justin Long, the former “I’m a Mac” star from Apple’s...

9to5mac.com

Hopefully, the exclusion of Rosetta will just accelerate the transition of apps to native M1 code.

Also, with the relationship having seemingly deteriorated severely, do you really believe there will be another new Intel based Mac coming from Apple?

 

[UtterDisbelief]

Also, with the relationship having seemingly deteriorated severely, do you really believe there will be another new Intel based Mac coming from Apple?

After this campaign it does seem - unlikely! I really liked the original "I'm a Mac" ads. PC and Mac were really friends and that was a positive vibe. Luckily the actor doesn't quite look the same now as he did so will only be spotted by sad old fans like ... me.

As Rene Ritchie pointed out, nothing in the adverts really relates to Intel but instead the PC implementations by the manufacturers. Such as Asus's second display above the keyboard and detachable screens. Neither anything Intel specific.

Also liked the face unlock gaff. Why did no-one at Intel spot that blooper.

(By the way, we haven't seen these ads in the UK yet - at least not in my area).

 

[craighazan]

I read an interesting article a few months ago about how intel ignored a phone call from Acorn Computer in the mid 80's when they needed help with the BBC Computer Literacy Project. Acorn then used the BBC micro to simulate and develop the ARM architecture. How different things would be now if only someone at Intel picked up the phone!. In another LTT video I saw yesterday about snapdragon and SQ2, Windows ARM still couldn't compete, even running through VM on a M1. I suggest getting out the Fab business, but then, they've been off the ball since the mid 80s.

How an obscure British PC maker invented ARM and changed the world

1987's Acorn Archimedes was the first production RISC-based personal computer.

arstechnica.com

 

[pastrychef]

My take on this is, Apple Silicon is, at the very least, good enough to cause serious concern at Intel. Given how small of a market share macOS has, I didn't think that the loss of Apple as a customer would mean much to Intel's bottom line. I think what concerns Intel is that "Arm" and "M1" has gained a solid foothold in the mind share of consumers. Even on these forums, I've noticed far less users opining that "Arm is weak" or "Arm is just for phones".

In regards to Windows on Arm, I think it's just a matter of time before Qualcomm and Samsung step up their game on the Snap Dragons and Exynos CPUs. PC makers are going to want to make "always on" laptops with true "all day" batteries. Also, there are some lesser known Arm licensees in Asia pushing the envelop on Arm CPUs such as MediaTek and Kirin.

How long will it be before Google starts using Arm CPUs in Chromebooks instead of Intel? Obviously, Android already runs on Arm. It should be trivial for them to make the switch.

I'm wondering what AMD's response will be to the increasing adaptation of Arm. Will they end up licensing Arm from Nvidia? Will the conflict of interest cause anti-trust regulators to block Nvidia's Arm acquisition?

Interesting times are coming...

 

[trs96]

Interesting times are coming...

If the upcoming M1(x) Macs have an option for 16 or 32 high power cores (on 3nm) and a 128 core GPU then the whole PC industry, AMD, Intel, Nvidia and the PC box makers should be really worried because they won't be able to compete. Apple products will have much more power for processing at a much lower power draw, who will be able to compete with that ? The price/performance ratio will be in Apple's favor. Not everyone needs an ultra high spec/high power computer but those that do will switch to Macs and run Windows in a VM via Paralells, Vmware etc.

Parallels Desktop for Mac with Apple M1 chip

Best way to run Windows on Mac - Parallels Product Blog - Run Windows, Linux, and more on your Mac. Helpful tips and tricks, Apple macOS and Mirosoft Windows news

www.parallels.com

 

[dehjomz]

Catalina runs just fine on a 2009 MacBook with a core 2 duo and 8 GB of RAM and a Samsung sata SSD. The machine only came with 2 GB and maxes out at 8! Depending on your use case, 8 GB on a modern macOS installation is just fine.

 

[trs96]

Catalina runs just fine on a 2009 MacBook with a core 2 duo and 8 GB of RAM and a Samsung sata SSD. The machine only came with 2 GB and maxes out at 8! Depending on your use case, 8 GB on a modern macOS installation is just fine.

The mechanical, 5400 RPM platter drives in older MacBook Pros make them nearly unusable with High Sierra or newer macOS versions. Upgrading to even a low end Sata SSD makes a major difference in performance. Upgrading ram to 8GB helps a lot too. My 2011 MBP with a basic 20 dollar, 128 GB SSD boots up in about 12 seconds. It doesn't feel laggy at all even though I've only got 4GB of ram. It's mostly used for internet surfing, checking email etc.

 

[UtterDisbelief]

Catalina runs just fine on a 2009 MacBook with a core 2 duo and 8 GB of RAM and a Samsung sata SSD. The machine only came with 2 GB and maxes out at 8! Depending on your use case, 8 GB on a modern macOS installation is just fine.

Ah, but did you have to "trick" it into installing Catalina because the OS isn't supported on such a "veteran" machine. Glad it works for you though.

My old iMac 2015 model with an HDD was terrible with Catalina. I had much quicker boot and performance with an SSD in an external USB caddy.

 

[trs96]

My old iMac 2015 model with an HDD was terrible with Catalina. I had much quicker boot and performance with an SSD in an external USB caddy.

From reading what the CCC site has to say about APFS and old school hard drives, it appears that most of the slowness is related to the new Apple file system not working well at all with platter drives. It's amazing to me the Apple kept those and Fusion drives around so long when they're against keeping older, outdated hardware in Macs. i.e. Floppy drives, CD/DVD drives, USB type A ports etc. etc.

 

[pastrychef]

The mechanical, 5400 RPM platter drives in older MacBook Pros make them nearly unusable with High Sierra or newer macOS versions. Upgrading to even a low end Sata SSD makes a major difference in performance. Upgrading ram to 8GB helps a lot too. My 2011 MBP with a basic 20 dollar, 128 GB SSD boots up in about 12 seconds. It doesn't feel laggy at all even though I've only got 4GB of ram. It's mostly used for internet surfing, checking email etc.

The SATA 2 in the 2009 is a big bottleneck. Even switching to an SSD has limited benefits.