Comment by yyyk
4 years ago
Nearly all the HW items have equivalent or superiour replacements, and a fair amount are dependent on the Apple ecosystem. Without Apple's ecosystem it's a good system but overpriced, and that's before you run into Linux compatibility problems.
For example, take the monitor - there are monitors with higher refresh rates or more resolution (Retina does 'only' 6K). Also, Mac OS colour processing has no good equivalent elsewhere, so you won't see as much benefit from Apple's monitor without Mac OS.
M1 is nearly a year old now, and the replacement (M1X, M2?) is rumored to be released in a couple of months. So far no other SoC has been able to come close to even the current-gen M1 in terms of performance + efficiency, with a remarkable x86 emulation on top.
On the software side, Apple has the unique position to force every developer who cares about their user base to rebuild their stuff for a completely different CPU architecture.
M1-based products are anything but overpriced. The Air’s price is comparable to modern flagship smartphones.
The context of the thread is the idea of "avoiding Apple ecosystem while still buying M1" (See paulcarroty's post and my reply). If you install Linux, you don't get their Rosetta x86 emulation or any advantage from 'forcing developers', etc. etc.
I was more focused on the "equivalent or superiour replacement" part.
At this point in history, you can't avoid Apple's ecosystem if you want to use their ARM-based laptops/desktops unless it's a hobby of yours. And it's sad, because this is the best hardware I've ever owned.
Don't higher density displays take more power? Can we actually start making laptop displays that cap out at 1080 or 1440p?
For me (and many out there) DPI is more important than slightly higher battery consumption which becomes less of an issue with other components such as SoC mitigate that with more optimized power usage.
Retina Display when it first arrived was literally THE reason I started switching to Apple ecosystem as it was exponentially better to look at that screen, and I'd even pay more for a 4K display on a MacBook if they brought it.
My comment was for laptops primarily. On the desktop side, I'd not buy an Apple branded system unless I need macOS specifically, but on the portable space, their systems are superior to most of the offerings.
They're not EliteBook/Thinkpad tough, but they're more than enough unless you're going to handle it rough.
I can calibrate a screen regardless of the OS I use with the help of a good calibration device, and having a good panel is a good start for that. On desktop, there are possibly better panels for pure color accuracy, I won't argue that.
OTOH, on the portable space, their hardware formula is pretty robust.
I did think more about desktops, but I think same applies to laptops. I think that if you tilt the field by not allowing Mac OS (that's the context of the thread) the top PC laptops are better, since you lose many Apple advantages given by integration.
Worse, it would take some time for me to even trust Linux on M1 laptops to not fail exactly when I need it - that's the nature of reverse engineering. Since they don't have the specs, the only real test is lots of people running it for some time and reliability is more important to me than specs.
As for monitors, Apple's colour advantage is more than good calibration - the entire ecosystem can handle 10bit HDR. That's something AFAIK you won't get elsewhere.