The Apple M1’s Success Hinges Not on Performance But on Compatibility
Microsoft’s ARM approach was dead on arrival but can Apple do better?
Up to 3.5x faster CPU performance. Up to 6x faster GPU performance.
Apple’s delivery of the capabilities of its devices has changed little over the past decade. But these numbers are impressive, even by Apple standards. The new M1 chip promises performance and endurance hitherto unheard of in the computing space. The power of a workhorse in a device that lasts as long as a smartphone? 20 hours of battery life on a family of devices superior to its predecessors? I wouldn’t be surprised if viewers left Apple’s snazzy keynote with equal parts hope and skepticism.
Right off the bat, Apple bets big on its ARM-powered future with not one but three powerful additions to its Mac lineup, from the diminutive Macbook Air to the desktop-class Mac Mini. With a sprinkling of terms like unified memory architecture, neural engine, and industry-leading 5nm technology, there’s no doubt that the M1 is a powerhouse that packs a punch. Comparing one of its four cores to the performance of its current Intel-powered dual-core Macbook Air set the stage for the next generation of Macbooks. But performance isn’t what I’m worried about.
Compatibility is the name of the game here. A game where Microsoft’s venture already serves as a cautionary tale.
Microsoft’s ARM Push Remains a Dream
Last year, Microsoft partnered with Qualcomm and gunned for the always-connected, ultra-light crown with the Surface Pro X, a $999 2in1 device whose promises don’t sound all that different from Apple’s. All-day battery life with unrivaled performance in a svelte package? It sounded like a tech enthusiast’s dream come to life. The catch? Compatibility.
For a device that costs a thousand dollars, the Surface Pro X’s performance was downright disappointing in the services that worked. While ARM-based apps ran without a hitch, 32-bit apps were a chore regardless of how lightweight they were. Even workplace staples like Slack and Discord ran in an emulator that ended up pushing users towards web-based alternatives. Bizarrely, Microsoft hadn’t figured 64-bit apps emulation out before their snazzy $999 device hit the market, leading to a quick fall from relevance. And while their emulation has certainly improved from its infancy, it didn’t exactly usher in the next generation of computing.
Apple gets some leeway in terms of ARM-based apps owing to its dominance in the smartphone and tablet space but people don’t get a Macbook for tasks that could be done on an iPhone 12 or an iPad Pro. Apple says their new chips deliver the peak performance of a regular laptop CPU at a quarter of the power draw. It’s clear who their target audience is. Creative professionals expect their apps to run seamlessly on the new ARM CPU, an expectation that Apple’s Rosetta 2 emulation tool intends to satisfy.
Will Rosetta 2 Succeed Where Microsoft Failed?
While comparing Rosetta 2 to Microsoft’s emulation layer is an apples-to-oranges comparison, it’s a cause for concern that both tech behemoths need to face. Apple’s Big Sur update for macOS promises quick 64-bit app emulation with some apps even performing better with Rosetta 2’s translation, easing the transition from Intel chips into Apple silicon. Developers won’t need to make changes to their existing apps; they’ll just work. But with no real-world results for critics to sink their teeth into, it remains to be seen whether Rosetta 2 does what Microsoft could not.
“The vast majority of developers can get their apps up and running in just a matter of days.”
- Craig Federighi, a senior VP at Apple
Digging through Apple’s documentation for porting macOS apps did little to alleviate concerns. While major software giants like Adobe and Microsoft have pledged support for Apple’s flashy new chips, the quality of the transition can only be vetted by people getting their hands on these new devices. Apple’s woes with the 2015 Macbook Pro keyboard fiasco show that the Cupertino giant isn’t bulletproof. And while Rosetta 2 promises to be invisible to the user, only time will tell.
Apple expects to transition its Mac ecosystem to its own processors over the next two years which means that Rosetta 2 might not be around forever. Its seamless “Universal App” plan certainly stirred the pot at Microsoft’s HQ but Apple is in a far better position than Microsoft was. iOS app support can stem the tide but it’s only a matter of time before Rosetta 2 is put to the test. Curiously, Netflix, and YouTube are opting out of the transition process at the moment.
Apple seeks to reinvent the PC experience with its groundbreaking chips and three new Mac additions are proof that it is committed to that vision. But if key apps don’t run well on these machines, it jeopardizes Apple’s ARM push and puts its entire ecosystem at risk. If everything goes as promised, Apple might have just changed computing as we know it.
