undefined | Better HN

0 pointsdijit25d ago0 comments

> arguably sandbagging their x86 offering

tbh, I always read this as Intel doing some sales magic here.

Apple: "Hey, we're making a product that has a 15w thermal envelope, do you have anything?"

Intel: "Yes!"

(Unspoken: their products will throttle down to fit, in fact, they will try to run always at 99ºC so you always get the best performance! FEATURE!)

Apple: "uhhhh..."

Consumers: "HEH IS IT EVEN A PRO DEVICE IF IT DOESN"T HAVE <INTEL MARKETING BRAND TERM>?"

Apple: "UHHHH... Guess we'll do it ourselves"

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

kllrnohj25d ago· 1 in thread

> tbh, I always read this as Intel doing some sales magic here.

Possibly, but Apple choosing a new, thicker chassis the same generation that they introduce their more power efficient replacement is certainly a thing. Even if Intel failed to achieve the TDP they told Apple, Apple also seems to no longer believe the thinness they were doing was viable for that TDP anyway.

Intel's product offering certainly wasn't as compelling towards the end there, but it also looked almost uniquely bad in Apple's chassis vs everyone else's

amazingman25d ago

This narrative only really fits the pro line, and only if you squint hard enough. The story falls apart immediately with the MacBook Air. I remember the late Intel years: constant fans spinning, noticeable latency between mouseclick and UI response, 1-2h battery life in scenarios that now reliably get 8-10. Those were dark times.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse