Boring is what we wanted

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Apple Silicon vs Intel Panther Lake

  • Debate over claims that 2025 x86 (Panther Lake) beats M5 on perf/W; critics note Panther Lake isn’t shipping yet, has no independent benchmarks, and Intel has a long history of overpromising and delaying nodes.
  • Several commenters stress the practical difference: M5 laptops are in stores now; Panther Lake systems are not expected until 2026.
  • Others welcome strong Intel competition, arguing the ideal is leapfrogging between Apple, Intel, AMD, and ARM, not Apple’s permanent dominance.

“Boring” Incremental Updates & Cadence

  • Many welcome routine, “boring” yearly CPU bumps: avoids buying 3‑year‑old machines and lets gains compound (e.g. ~7% per year → substantial over 3–5 years).
  • Frustration with reviewers and “attention economy” demanding radical redesigns; fear this pushes OEMs toward risky changes (butterfly keyboard, Touch Bar) or gimmicks just to have something “new.”
  • Counterpoint: hardware progress across the industry feels less exciting than earlier eras; generational improvements (CPUs, GPUs, handhelds, even LLMs) feel incremental, feeding audience fatigue.

Hardware vs Software: Innovation, Quality, and OS Direction

  • Widespread sense that Apple hardware is excellent while macOS quality and UX are slipping: laggier animations, unstable Wi‑Fi, cluttered UI, and ads/upsells in notifications and apps.
  • Strong nostalgia for a “Snow Leopard-style” release: few features, focus on performance, bug fixes, and polish.
  • Specific complaints: lack of basic built-ins (window snapping, better terminal, better input), awkward window/app switching model, multiple UI styles, controversial Tahoe “Liquid Glass” redesign.

Ecosystem Limits: CUDA, GPUs, Linux, and Openness

  • Several posters say Apple squandered a chance to compete with CUDA; Metal is seen as “SPIR‑V in a trench coat,” not a true CUDA-class ecosystem.
  • Some praise open alternatives (Vulkan/SPIR‑V, Triton, AMD GPUs) but note Apple is neither open nor CUDA-compatible, so it satisfies neither camp.
  • Strong desire from Linux users to buy Apple hardware if specs were documented; skepticism that Apple will ever support this.

Pricing, Specs, and Design Choices

  • Persistent anger at Apple’s RAM and SSD markups (seen as 4–8x commodity pricing) and soldered components; defended by some as standard market segmentation.
  • Requests for non-CPU improvements: cheaper RAM/storage, Wi‑Fi 7, 5G, better webcams/monitors, more ports, less notch, Face ID (or smaller notch), and possibly touchscreens.
  • Mixed feelings about design experiments like the Touch Bar and Vision Pro: technically impressive but often ergonomically or economically flawed.

Performance Overshoot, Local AI, and Upgrade Pressure

  • Many developers on M1–M4 machines feel no compelling upgrade reason: current systems are “stupid fast” and already run Docker, builds, games, and small LLMs well.
  • Some report large real gains from newer chips (faster builds, 2–4× local LLM throughput), but also note local models still lag cloud quality.
  • Broader complaint that software bloat (especially browsers and web apps), not hardware limits, forces upgrades; others argue disciplined engineering, not frozen hardware, is the real solution.