M1 Mac mini overtakes entire Japanese desktop market in less than 2 weeks

[Dracarris]

8 minutes ago, Laborant said:

I guess, this is a matter of definition. Is a multi-die Ryzen CPU "one chip"?

No. Although IMHO there is a much tighter level of integration than a SoC and some DRAM put together.

8 minutes ago, Laborant said:

Maybe the term "System on Module" would fit better

Yes, all those examples are no monolithic single-chips.

8 minutes ago, Laborant said:

It is a multi-die design on a single chip substrate. 

How the naming is done, is basically irrelevant. 

The substrate is basically a mini-PCB. I think the naming here is really important. If Apple would've integrated DRAM and the SoC onto a single die this would actually be a game changer. But in the end the M1 is nothing else than a monolithic SoC with COTS DRAM chips slapped next to it - they are even packaged in regular packages that you could solder on any PCB as the recent teardowns show, so not even die-2-die wirebonds.

 

What Apple has done is for sure great but the M1 really is not a SoC.

[leadeater]

10 hours ago, Dracarris said:

What Apple has done is for sure great but the M1 really is not a SoC

It's called Package on Package, but it's really not that revolutionary what they have done in terms of packaging. All they have done is mounted an SoC and DRAM packages on to a single substraight and packaged them as a single component. People mistakenly believe this has some kind of architectural difference and related to unified memory somehow, it doesn't. The only benefit is functional and practical benefit of being closer to the SoC so you get lower latency and better memory timings with reduced load on the IMC. The unified memory aspect is architectural and is part of the design of the SoC and the IMC within it, it would still be unified if the memory were on SO-DIMMs off package or soldered i.e. PS4/PS5/Xbox are all unified memory with off package soldered GDDR memory.

 

So when people are talking about the M1 and using the term SoC it's not that incorrect because we are all talking about the SoC, those memory modules sitting off to the site are really the irrelevant part because they could be on or off package just the same and play no part in making the M1 what it is save for milliwatts of power and slightly better memory performance, neither of which would be greatly missed if not there and the M1 would still be just as good with nobody being any the wiser.

 

The packaging is much more of a benefit to system design and allows much more compact designs. DIMM slots and DIMM traces, so does BGA, do take up a not insignificant amount of space. Physical proximity is unrelated to unified memory access model.

[Dracarris]

31 minutes ago, leadeater said:

All they have done is mounted an SoC and DRAM packages on to a single substraight and packaged them as a single component.

Not even that, look at the teardowns, it is literally individual packages next to each other on a PCB substrate. We could also call it a compute module

[Lord Vile]

20 hours ago, bruhsfx2 said:

With 10% tax, base model Mac mini totaled at USD 766 (JPY 80,080) I'd say that's not "a lot more expensive". 

Plus the $700 in the US is without tax.

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, Dracarris said:

Not even that, look at the teardowns, it is literally individual packages next to each other on a PCB substrate. We could also call it a compute module

Ah.... that is exactly the same as what I said 

 

Edit:

But yes that is why it's called Package on Package, because it a collection of packages packaged on to a single package. Those being 1 SoC and 2 DRAM packages in to one collective "M1 package"

[Dracarris]

Just now, leadeater said:

Ah.... that is exactly the same as what I said 

Might be a bit of nitpicking, but they did not do package-on-package is what I meant, it is just multiple packages next to each other on a substrate, there is no second layer of packaging. When you remove the heatsink you can immediately see the individual packages.

[leadeater]

9 minutes ago, Dracarris said:

Might be a bit of nitpicking, but they did not do package-on-package is what I meant, it is just multiple packages next to each other on a substrate, there is no second layer of packaging. When you remove the heatsink you can immediately see the individual packages.

No it is called package on package, that's actually the proper name for this. The collective end product is the package, see my edit. It's packages on a package.

 

Edit:

Actually no I was misremembering, PoP is exclusive to vertical stacking. It's SiP.

 

Quote

SiP dies can be stacked vertically or tiled horizontally, unlike less dense multi-chip modules, which place dies horizontally on a carrier. SiP connects the dies with standard off-chip wire bonds or solder bumps, unlike slightly denser three-dimensional integrated circuits which connect stacked silicon dies with conductors running through the die.

 

An example SiP can contain several chips—such as a specialized processor, DRAM, flash memory—combined with passive components—resistors and capacitors—all mounted on the same substrate. This means that a complete functional unit can be built in a multi-chip package, so that few external components need to be added to make it work. This is particularly valuable in space constrained environments like MP3 players and mobile phones as it reduces the complexity of the printed circuit board and overall design. Despite its benefits, this technique decreases the yield of fabrication since any defective chip in the package will result in a non-functional packaged integrated circuit, even if all other modules in that same package are functional.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_in_a_package

[captain_to_fire]

4 hours ago, Video Beagle said:

You mentioned this idea in another thread, which prompted me to go looking at Xserves on ebay. 1) I wonder if you could do something with one today, upgrade it to make it usefull and 2) man, was the XServe a great looking server box.

But I doubt Apple is gonna bring it back. Even after their Intel transition, few companies are buying it that's why it was discontinued in 2010. Sure Apple can compete in the consumer and even enterprise computing space thanks to secure enclave, but server space? Google and Twitter are now using AMD Epyc on their datacenters.

[Dracarris]

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

Actually no I was misremembering, PoP is exclusive to vertical stacking. It's SiP.

Yes, that is where my confusion was coming from. This is a prime example of a SiP, another one can be found in the Apple watches. I mentioned the term SiP in some other threads related to the M1 but SoC is now really sticking in peoples minds, good job Apple marketing..

[Dracarris]

7 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

Not sure about that, but you clearly have no idea how much work is done to maintain backwards compatibility and how any change can break a ton of old stuff that rely on specific behavior.

And yet, this has zero to do with the failure of the mentioned OSes. With Win10 all the sudden it was possible again to build a decent OS without breaking everything.

9 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

Oh, come on, this is wrong in so many levels. Windows supports 20yo applications on 20yo hardware.

I don't know why anyone in their right mind would want to run such a system. And I am pretty sure that Win10 runs quite badly on actual 20yo HW and with applications from that age.

10 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

Apple support is more like 2yo applications on 1-4yo hardware.

WHAT?? Here is the list of supported HW for MacOS Catalina: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210222 Computers from all the way back to 2012 are still fully supported.

12 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

Broken OS after broken OS, pain in the ass to develop with whiny users complaining to app devs that the application won't run even though Apple was the one who broke something up.

What on gods green earth are you talking about?? None of the MacOSes is broken, what is this even supposed to mean? I use a bunch of free, small hobbyist-developed tools to e.g. set custom screen resolutions. They all work just FINE - on every version of MacOS there is. With some of them you get a different looking UI or grizzly icons, but who cares?

14 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

You probably never used it. It was amazing. Way better than current android and ios. Plastic handsets? My glorious HTC Titan was completely out of aluminum. "Needlessly creating a third player": ios and android didn't even have freaking copy and paste until WP did it...

Woot?? The clipboard was brought to iOS and Andriod long before WP even hit the market.. And I have the fun of having an MS fanboy as a relative, every time I saw them using a WP with that awful UI I was in deep shock how sth so ugly could even be brought to market by a large corporation.

[NotTheFirstDaniel]

6 hours ago, Dracarris said:

What? I highly doubt that this level of compatibility is there, given that they broke it multiple times in more recent days. e.g., going from the Win9x/ME family to the 2000/XP based OSes, basically nothing survived. Then on the other hand, shipping a DOS box with whatever recent version is not a problem at all, this stuff was so slow that you can easily emulate it.

 

Has anything changed in the Windows kernel so significantly since before Win7 that major effort needs to be done to keep apps compatible? After all we are dealing with NTFS and Windows NT-based OSes since the 2000/XP area.

Windows 32-bit uses NTVDM to keep support with 16-bit apps. I've seen people run the Windows 1.0 Program Manager on Windows 10.

 

[Commodus]

15 hours ago, huilun02 said:

To be clear, its lead is in the system brand desktop market for retail. Meaning desktop systems under the apple brand vs non-Apple systems under individual OEM brands. Instead of MacOs vs Windows market share. It also excludes everything used by businesses.

 

That aside, the Mac minis look very attractive from a form factor point of view. Can they really replace a full fledged Windows desktop for heavy loads though?

For certain kinds of loads, sure. It appears to be a champ for audio and even 4K video editing. I wouldn't edit a feature film on one, but it's powerful enough that you don't need much more if you aren't a professional (and in some cases, even then) or into gaming.

[Dracarris]

52 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

Lion (10.7)

https://www.businessinsider.com/mac-os-x-lion-problems-2011-11

https://www.theverge.com/2012/2/2/2766036/mac-os-x-10-7-3-update-sever-app-crashes

https://appleinsider.com/articles/11/08/08/apple_issues_lion_recovery_disk_assistant_for_external_drives

https://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/09/shellshock-bug-spells-trouble-for-web-security/

https://www.cultofmac.com/106120/any-mac-with-a-firewire-port-running-os-x-lion-can-be-hacked-within-minutes/

https://www.cultofmac.com/218514/2009-imac-users-still-complaining-of-kernel-panic-unresolved-since-snow-leopard/

https://9to5mac.com/2011/10/19/for-some-folks-headache-with-wifi-bluetooth-thunderbolt-display-after-updating-to-mac-os-x-lion-10-7-2/

https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-issues-update-to-address-macbook-pro-black-screen-bug/

https://www.cnet.com/news/hdmi-output-not-working-in-os-x-lion/

 

Mountain Lion (10.8)

https://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/09/shellshock-bug-spells-trouble-for-web-security/

https://tidbits.com/2013/03/14/os-x-10-8-3-mountain-lion-fixes-nagging-bugs/

https://www.cultofmac.com/218514/2009-imac-users-still-complaining-of-kernel-panic-unresolved-since-snow-leopard/

https://www.zdnet.com/article/os-x-mountain-lion-still-unsupported-and-vulnerable/

https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/os-mountain-lion-perfect/

 

Mavericks (10.9)
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/09/shellshock-bug-spells-trouble-for-web-security/

https://www.zdnet.com/article/mavericks-smb2-problem-and-fixes/

https://9to5mac.com/2014/02/26/even-after-os-x-10-9-2-mavericks-update-users-still-complaining-about-mail-issues/

https://www.cultofmac.com/285567/os-x-mavericks-10-9-4-released-big-wifi-fix-updated-safari/

https://www.macworld.com/article/2061969/apple-fixes-trackpad-and-graphics-issues-on-new-retina-macbook-pros.html

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/02/four-days-in-and-still-no-patch-for-os-x-critical-goto-fail-bug/

https://www.zdnet.com/article/mac-mavericks-app-nap-power-nap-dont-always-play-well-with-others/

https://www.macrumors.com/2014/02/18/sleep-wake-crash-macbook-air/

Yosemite (10.10)

https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2014/10/22/os-x-yosemite-wi-fi-problems-can-you-help-us-solve-them/

https://www.pcworld.com/article/2867212/glitch-in-os-x-search-can-expose-private-details-of-apple-mail-users.html

https://www.macworld.com/article/2841965/swedish-hacker-finds-serious-vulnerability-in-os-x-yosemite.html

https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2015/04/19/apple-fails-to-patch-rootpipe/?sh=44dd8f4a4aa4

 

[...]

 

Catalina (10.15)
https://www.techrepublic.com/article/why-macos-catalina-is-not-apples-finest-moment/
https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/12/20908567/apple-macos-catalina-breaking-apps-32-bit-support-how-to-prepare-avoid-update
https://www.macrumors.com/2020/04/06/macos-10-5-4-kernel-panic-crashing-issues/
https://www.macworld.co.uk/news/macos-catalina-3690189/#toc-3690189-3

This is ridiculous. Of course every modern OS has issues here and there that affect some people and most of them get fixed with OS updates sooner or later. Shall I now also compile such a list for every Windows and Ubuntu version? I'll bet quite some money on especially the Windows bug list will being waaaaay longer than what you have provided.

 

An OS that has some issues =/= it is broken, can't believe we have to argue about this.

52 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

Let me guess: tiny applications custom made for the mac that get rebuild for every single xcode release? This is not the reality for most reasonably complex and cross-platform applications.

AFAIK they are not rebuilt but usually they are small yes. And doing a rebuild of an application in the most recent xcode version is IMHO not too much to ask from a developer.

 

Just checked the tool that I am daily using to change the resolution, it has been released in 2012 and not updated ever since, works to this day (I am on Catalina).

[DrMacintosh]

1 hour ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

All Mac OSes I've tried since Snow Leopard have been way more broken than Windows and Ubuntu. Usually WiFi and USB issues, kernel panics, breaking applications, etc.

This has not been my experience nor has it been the experience of most owners of a Mac. These sound like issues that you would get when trying to run macOS on unsupported hardware. 

[leadeater]

5 hours ago, Dracarris said:

What on gods green earth are you talking about?? None of the MacOSes is broken, what is this even supposed to mean? I use a bunch of free, small hobbyist-developed tools to e.g. set custom screen resolutions. They all work just FINE - on every version of MacOS there is. With some of them you get a different looking UI or grizzly icons, but who cares?

Mac OS updates breaking applications certainly is a thing, I experience it every time Apple makes security changes with the OS and it breaks the endpoint backup client software, every time. Like it's not a hard fix but it requires that I update the entire backup server infrastructure to the latest version so I can package and deploy/update the latest Mac OS version (clients can't be versions ahead of the servers).

[WhitetailAni]

6 hours ago, Dracarris said:

I don't know why anyone in their right mind would want to run such a system. And I am pretty sure that Win10 runs quite badly on actual 20yo HW and with applications from that age.

Memes.

Why not run Windows 10 on a 286?

[Dracarris]

4 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

"Sooner or later" it took 4 years for them to fix some wifi issues in some models. Not deal-breaking? "But it just works"...

I have no idea what wifi issues you keep referring to, Wifi is indeed one of the things that works just awesome on Macs. For anyone I know and myself Wifi always worked flawlessly. It looks to me a bit like you are desperately searching for problems related to Macs and MacOS.

5 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

As expected. Why would a cross-platform application use Xcode garbage? You can't even virtualize OS X on normal servers.

Hm, there is probably no sense in discussing with someone that titles xcode as garbage and has general such a negative attitude towards anything Mac related.

6 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

Example: High Sierra .6 doesn't run MusicBrainz Picard. Previous versions and newer OS X releases work just fine, but that specific version doesn't. What have they broken? No idea. Their tools refer to issues that are not documented.

I am so sorry they broke your favorite music creation app. And there are probably millions of examples on Windows and other OSes where the same happened after some stupid update or the machine got bricked alltogether.

[DrMacintosh]

29 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

It sounds like you never had a problem and did not have to look in Mac forums for solutions... Don't now how about you, but MacMini mid 2010 and iMac end 2015 seem like supported hardware to me.

I’ve had plenty of issues with my Macs. But those are usually because I broke them in software. I’ve had 1 kernel panic in about 4 years, so yeah idk what you’re doing. 
 

and for the record, no the 2010 Mac mini is not supported hardware. 

[bruhsfx2]

9 hours ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

People run what they need to run. If it is an OS in 20yo hardware, so be it. If it is a 20yo application, so be it. Who are you or Apple to tell what people should run or not and where?

This is why Windows desktop experience is so much fragmented. It runs everything and cope with everyone's need but everyone is just utilising a very small subset of the features that the OS provides and being so reluctant to changes. 

 

Just imaging how many years since Windows has introduced scaling and many native apps still suck and people are spreading "knowledge" like 27-inch 4K is too dense. Just imaging how many years since Windows has introduced its ARM build yet Chrome won't even consider build an ARM version for it until M1 is on the market, and it took them what, several days?

 

Modern softwares require maintenance. And it cost money. If you want to stay at the specific hardware + OS + software, so be it. Don't drag us with you. You are just asking every Windows customer to pay for the maintenance of your specific need. 

 

And your list of OS X/macOS bugs is just a joke. Every OS has issues and issues =/= broken OS. 

[himynameisryan21]

On 12/1/2020 at 9:29 AM, huilun02 said:

Can they really replace a full fledged Windows desktop for heavy loads though?

No, but it's certainly going to beat a lot of higher priced windows desktops in video editing (especially 10 bit 4:2:2 footage from newer DSLR/mirrorless cameras which virtually no other desktop can currently edit) and if you need Final Cut Pro like me (not want, need), it's certainly a great deal.

Imma get the 16gb model since my windows laptop is falling apart at this point

[CarlBar]

19 hours ago, bruhsfx2 said:

This is why Windows desktop experience is so much fragmented. It runs everything and cope with everyone's need but everyone is just utilising a very small subset of the features that the OS provides and being so reluctant to changes. 

 

Just imaging how many years since Windows has introduced scaling and many native apps still suck and people are spreading "knowledge" like 27-inch 4K is too dense. Just imaging how many years since Windows has introduced its ARM build yet Chrome won't even consider build an ARM version for it until M1 is on the market, and it took them what, several days?

 

Modern softwares require maintenance. And it cost money. If you want to stay at the specific hardware + OS + software, so be it. Don't drag us with you. You are just asking every Windows customer to pay for the maintenance of your specific need. 

 

And your list of OS X/macOS bugs is just a joke. Every OS has issues and issues =/= broken OS. 

 

It's called business. You develop and sell your product based on what your most profitable customer bases want, and windows is much more of a corporate than a home software item. Business don;t want and don't care about new innovative flashy features or advancements every generation, what they want is stability and predictability. Windows development is heavily influenced and constrained by that. it has to be, Microsoft entire OS business model is built around it. The onyl reason it gets as much new and fancy stuff as it does is because MS also sells a cutdown version for home use and they try to build new stuff in for that. Well that and if they want to get businesses to buy a new generation of OS they have to try to give them some reason to upgrade, but by the nature of the market they're allways going to be fighting an uphill battle in that area and they know it well enough to not push their luck.

[Brooksie359]

On 11/30/2020 at 7:29 PM, huilun02 said:

To be clear, its lead is in the system brand desktop market for retail. Meaning desktop systems under the apple brand vs non-Apple systems under individual OEM brands. Instead of MacOs vs Windows market share. It also excludes everything used by businesses.

 

That aside, the Mac minis look very attractive from a form factor point of view. Can they really replace a full fledged Windows desktop for heavy loads though?

I think the reason why the Mac mini sells so well is that for most people ot really does everything they need it to do and there isn't really a reason to go with anything else unless you need windows. My dad would probably like this as he only uses a couple of programs and uses the internet. If you are a power user you likely build your own system anyways instead of buying a computer from the store.