Bear with me : this is , on the face of it , a eldritch musical theme . But is it possible Apple is cook its Macstoopowerful ?
Okay , okay , I know : how could having a computer that ’s too powerful be a bad affair ? But after this week ’s promulgation of the newMacBook ProandMac miniskirt , I establish myself wondering whether the company has painted itself into a corner , vis - a - vis its telling ironware .
It is , admittedly , a strange state of affair when you find yourself question if Apple has mayhap gotten too good at make computers that are so powerful they are overkill for the purposes of most tasks , but you do n’t have to reckon too far to see another example of this same phenomenon .
This is a battle that Apple ’s long vie with on the iPad . Ask any drug user pushing the envelope of an iPad Pro and the consensus will likely be that the hardware is awesome and incredibly powerful – if only the software could keep up .
metalworks
To be fair , the trouble with the iPad is more about what ’s available on the platform . Yes , you’re able to have all the major power of an M2 processor , but how do you really put it to use ? Most iPad users are n’t doing high - tier video redaction , coding , or work with giant Photoshop images . ( That said , Apple ’s publicizing would like to remind us that any of us could be doing all those thing … if only we ’d buy an iPad Pro . )
I ’m not suggesting that a want of powerful software system is what ’s holding theMacback : if anything , Apple ’s clearly committed to letting users throw as much HP at pro - unwavering applications programme as they possibly can . And it ’s doing so by offer a short ton of different machines powered by a spate of ever more powerful chip . When Apple announced its first post - M1 processors over the last match of years , the rollout took on almost mirthful ego - topping proportions as it announced first the M1 Pro and M1 Max , and then in 2022 , the M1 Ultra . It feel a chip like one of those quondam infomercials “ But wait ! There ’s more ! ”
The verity of the matter is that even the Pro series processors are way overpowered for most common computation tasks . Email , web browsing , parole processing , spreadsheets – the M1 and M2 handle all of those with power to give up . And yet Apple keeps push out quicker and faster chips , appeasing a smaller and small-scale recession of the food market ( albeit one with high leeway ) . Between the M2 Pro and M2 Max MacBooks , the M2 Pro Mac mini , theMac Studio , and the still - to - be - unveiled Mac Pro , it seems like there are more automobile aimed at the securities industry for brawny professional desktops than consumers . and yet , the higher you go , the thin the air : there are few people in the market for machines that potent .
The long - stand paradigm for the computer diligence is that the more you expend , the more king you get . That used to be embodied by a single spec : the clock speed of a processor . in the belated 1990s and early 2000s , customers had fixate on clock speed as the only measurement that count – an idea Apple even attempted to disperse with its idea of “ the megahertz myth “ . And , to some point , it worked : Search Apple ’s specs pages or public press releases for its newfangled Macs , and you wo n’t even see mention of the speeding of any of its processors .
It ’s all about the number of cores now , and we ’ve go past clock speed .
Apple
Instead , it ’s been supplanted by an alternate measured : cores , both CPU and GPU . The more money you shell out , the eminent your number of parallel processing units . But even with that , we ’ve fallen back into the trap of just blithely increase the phone number , with a focus on “ bighearted is upright . ” And just like with the megahertz myth , the fixation on nucleus ignores the tone that are really gain the differentiation between model for most exploiter .
Because when all your devices are ridiculously powerful , the distinction comes down to other more tangible features : Screen size . manakin factor . figure and type of port . Heck , embrasure emplacement . All of those are more promptly understood by ( and arguably more relevant to ) the market than abstract numbers like “ 20 percent faster . ” Sure , to a visual artist pumping out renders that eat up their entire CPU , 20 pct quicker might entail saving them a day ’s Charles Frederick Worth of piece of work . But nobody believes that a 20 - pct faster CPU will allow them answer email so much more efficiently that they can kick off their weekend on Thursday . That ’s simply not the define agent .
With the first two generations of its own potato chip under its belt , Apple has readily proved that it ’s capable of making ironware that is second to none . And I ’m sure not advocating that Applenottry to give rise the safe chips it can . But no saltation in the near future is going to be as expectant as that first one , from Intel to Apple Si , and as it draw exit the end of this transition geological period , Apple might want to consider other ways to push the Mac forward – young form factors ? touchscreens?–rather than just ever quick chips with more plentiful burden . In other words , to throw some of the company ’s most famous words back in its face , perhaps it ’s clip to once again think dissimilar .
