The new mini is almost $1,400 US. How many MAC users here contemplating buying one?
Until CorelDRAW is recompiled for native ARM CPU operation, and until Corel changes some of its licensing arrangements to less onerous terms, any Mac is a strict "no sale" for me. IMHO, if you have a CorelDRAW subscription or an active "upgrade protection" setup you should be able to download and use any installer you prefer, be it for Windows or for Mac OSX. That's how it works for Adobe Creative Cloud; the platform does not matter. Corel needs to do the same thing and allow existing users to use whatever OS they want to use. The current arrangement is a travesty.
I agree! Platform should not matter. I use Windows at work and Mac when working from home so it's not like I'd be running multiple installations concurrently. I'd also greatly appreciate if the two versions were a whole lot more alike. I've been using the Mac version of CorelDRAW and I don't enjoy the experience at all. Unlike the Adobe products, CorelDRAW is so different between Mac and Windows that for me it feels like I'm learning and using an entirely new, different program. I've seen rumors that Microsoft may release an ARM version of Windows that'd run on the new Macs. If so, that would be ideal. I wouldn't have to purchase a separate version of CorelDRAW and I wouldn't have to cope with such a different GUI and functionality.
Regarding Windows 10 on ARM-based CPUs, like what is inside Microsoft's Surface Pro X notebook, the same problems exist for it like what does for the new M1-based Mac notebooks. Intel-based OSX applications have to run via emulation in a new M1-based Mac. Windows applications have to be compiled to run natively in Windows 10 for ARM CPU architecture. A Windows-based application meant for Intel x86 CPUs will be run via emulation, which dramatically harms performance.
Not all ARM CPUs are universally compatible with each other. The ARM CPUs Apple has been developing are heavily customized for OSX and iOS. The ARM-based version of Windows 10 may not run properly on an M1 Mac.
If Corel (and its higher-ups at KKR) intend to maintain a Mac version of CorelDRAW they will be forced at some point to re-engineer the application to run natively on Apple's ARM chips. And they'll have to maintain an Intel for OSX version for some time as well. Not every existing Mac user will immediately replace their Intel-based machines. My guess is that will be a fairly heavy burden for developers.
On the Windows side, an ARM-based version of CorelDRAW seems like a longer shot. Intel is in pretty serious trouble, all thanks to years of monopoly-style complacency, milking old tech for all it was worth. So they've been caught flat-footed by AMD with its Ryzen CPUs as well as Apple's shift to its own ARM-based CPUs, with the shift now in progress. The x86 platform will still dominate the PC Platform for years to come. But for the next year or two the Ryzen CPU will be thumping pop-knots on Intel's head. Apple has big things planned for "M2" and "M3" chips for Mac Pro towers, iMacs and notebooks. If those new chips dramatically outperform CPUs from both Intel and AMD then it might start making the prospects for the x86 platform look iffy. One thing is certain: Intel has to s#!t-can that glacier-slow, old development roadmap and start getting competitive ASAP. Given the way CPU development works, it will be 2022 before Intel can have a product ready to answer the CPUs from Apple or AMD.
Intel certainly needs to up its development game. My question is how will the economic situation and development cost affect development on all platforms? The extreme cost of the MAC VS lower cost of the PC added to the reality that 97% of MAC users already use low end MAC systems not only because of cost but due to very low return on investment. In plain language very few graphics jobs are lucrative and today 98% of graphic work does not require top of the line systems or software. Video processing and gaming is driving the technology.
I'm of the opinion that this economic pressure is what's been inhibiting development. The question for MAC is, can their business model with extreme system cost sell enough systems. They do sell alot of other products so poor sales may not kill them as they can subsidize poor computer sales for some time, and making the chips for those other products allows those plants to run.
I cannot remember the last time I was in an output shop and saw a MAC tower or server.
I don't think Apple is trying to sell computers to workers in production environments. I think their efforts are focused more on selling products as status symbols for fashion conscious consumers with douchebag tendencies. Some people like to display an image of being successful, whether they have money or not. So they'll spend over $550 on a pair of Air Pod Max headphones even though there are other cans in the marketplace that cost over $200 less that are just as good. I wouldn't expect to see a Mac Pro tower in the graphics department of a sign company. But it wouldn't surprise me seeing one on some real estate broker's desk. The coffee shop kids will blow $1000 on a minimally configured Mac Book Air, but they're still showing off that Apple logo.
With that being said, the M1 chip is a pretty big development. Its efficiency in terms of performance per watt totally slays anything from Intel. And what Apple has in the works for 2021-22 poses a potentially much bigger threat. No one knows how Apple will price this stuff (probably ridiculously high). If the performance gains live up to the advance hype it will spell even more trouble for Intel. Businesses will take a closer look at those products as well as weigh the advances AMD continues to make with its Ryzen line. nVidia is getting in hot water lately. So that's an added wrinkle. Right now it's a pretty terrible time to consider buying a new computer.
I agree, it's a crappy time for buying but an interesting time to watch development. Microsoft OS development is migrating toward marketing and may be taking a back seat to their military contract.
Ryzen is still suffering from configuration issues but once you resolve it they run well. They're punching Intel in the nose regularly.
Apple is doing what they always do but their tested performance is interesting as it does well as long as it's limited. It fails on heavier tasks ant it remains to be seen if extra RAM and a different processor will make it competitive with the future PC's. Right now the MAC is a non starter for heavy lifting.
$1,400 + shipping better get me more than what the MAC can do right now.
The douchebag factor is what made me stop servicing MAC clients. Even without the MAC they were still douchebags.
Which is ok, I have a rule, as long as I really don't have to take my pants off you can be a pain in my butt in direct proportion to the level of profitability of your work. Which leaves MAC people out.