OneZero Debugger

ARM is RISC , Intel and AMD are CISC,
One important reason is their new pipelining facility.

Apple M1 has 16 units that can pipeline their instructions.

Meaning, they can reorder sequential instructions that aren't dependent on each other to run in parallel. That is not threads or anything, that can be and is being done in a single threaded program.

AMD and Intel have 4 units for reordering tops, because their architecture is CISC and on instruction can be up to 15 bytes. M1 is RISC and instructions are just 4 byte fixed-length.
Thus architecturally it is easier to reorder instructions for RISC than CISC.

CISC were better because of the specific instructions but now Apple has stuffed their CPU with specific hardware for alot of things including machine learning, graphic processor and encryption, instead of specific instructions, Apple has specific hardware, and can do with less instructions.

And since they control hardware, software SDKs and OS they can actually get away with such radical changes. Intel and others can't, without a big change in industry.

Source:
https://debugger.medium.com/why-is-apples-m1-chip-so-fast-3262b158cba2

For the most part, I think it's mostly (but not all!) the same, where the hype and excitement is from a new generation of VCs and founders who didn't experience the VRML/second-life era.

Of course, not only is the technology to facilitate a metaverse is better, but I think society has also evolved a lot since then. Remote work/life is now much more of a mainstream/accepted thing than it used to be. Internet is now a mainstream full-blown appendage via our smartphones.

I'm much more optimistic a metaverse (in a Platonic ideal sense) could catch on this time around, BUT I'm much less sure that what will be hawked to us is the "right thing" (whatever that means).

I do think this article posted on HN last week is definitely onto something that Meta and other attempts may not be thinking about. https://debugger.medium.com/the-metaverse-is-already-here-its-minecraft-99c89ed8ba2

1. Always sad for me to know how much popular are wireless chargers, wasting 47% more energy aprox for charging the same as a wired charger. https://debugger.medium.com/wireless-charging-is-a-disaster-waiting-to-happen-48afdde70ed9 (too much catastrophic conclusions in this article but that percentage is real, you could check it in another tests, articles, whatever ..)

2. Totally agree with that, if camera is fundamental for you maybe not the right choice.

3. They also take compromises to have an ethical production, try to guarantee there is no exploitation as much as they could, from the extraction of mineral, manufacturing ... (they didn't do it for all, but they are advancing as far as they could, also with all existing certifications for that, so it's normal that is expensive. So our choice to value that things, if we could afford it, or not.

Here's two great examples of the standard's ineffectiveness

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10508494

https://debugger.medium.com/usb-c-was-supposed-to-simplify-our-lives-instead-its-a-total-mess-626bb2ea3688#Echobox=1601499898

Apple has stringent regular testing standards on MFI certified cables - they regularly buy them up "in secret" to continuously test that they're meeting cert requirements. If memory serves, the contract stipulates Apple can levy massive penalties for "bait and switching" actual certified cables with inferior product.

When the Nintendo Switch came out, Nintendo, being Nintendo, wired the USB-C adapter not to spec, so you'd need a Nintendo power brick to charge the thing. This lead to people trying to use the Nintendo charger on other devices (because USB-C looks like USB-C) and frying them/ blowing them up.

>1. Always sad for me to know how much popular are wireless chargers, wasting 47% more energy aprox for charging the same as a wired charger. https://debugger.medium.com/wireless-charging-is-a-disaster-... (too much catastrophic conclusions in this article but that percentage is real, you could check it in another tests, articles, whatever ..)

The percentage value looks bad but how much is that in absolute terms? Using the figures from the article, wireless charging uses 6.75 Wh more per full charge. Assuming you charge that much every day, that's 2.46 kWh per year, or 42 cents at average US electricity prices[1]. I think that's a price worth paying for the convenience.

[1] https://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/data/averageenergyprices_selectedareas_table.htm

> "Why? Somehow Apple's chips will get better, but competition will stand still?"

Arguably this has been the case for the last ten years (comparing chips on iPhones to others).

I think x86 can't compete, CISC can't compete with RISC because of problems inherent to CISC (https://debugger.medium.com/why-is-apples-m1-chip-so-fast-3262b158cba2)

It won't be for lack of trying - x86 will hold them back.

I suppose in theory they could recognize this e-risk, and throw themselves at coming up with a competitive RISC chip design while also somehow overcoming the integration disadvantages they face.

If they were smart enough to do this, they would have done it already.

I'd bet against them (and I am).