Microsoft don't control the whole ecosystem unfortunately. They have a much harder time making that architectural shift than Apple does (although they could have done it better). There's all sorts of backwards compatibility guarantees with Windows that Apple doesn't have to care about.

Rosetta is the key piece here to 'fill in the gaps'. IMO, Rosetta only really works because of Apple's silicon and so how insanely fast the machine is compared to the Intel equivalent. The M1 has such a performance advantage over Intel that you can use it up in translation and your options become "x86 version of program running at roughly the speed it always used to" or "ARM version that is lightning quick".

Whereas the Windows ARM machines weren't a performance leap over Intel so even if you had translation it would be "x86 version that is very sluggish" or "ARM version that is just about OK".

Unfortunately, Windows ARM laptops were and are poorly executed.

Apple is carrot and stick, where the carrot is performance and the stick is obsolescence.

With Windows, there's neither carrot or stick. ARM isn't that much more performant, the battery life isn't that much better, and they're certainly not abandoning Intel.

OTOH, Microsoft could invest a huge amount of their money on making ARM attractive, but the Wintel ties clearly run deep.

> and the stick is obsolescence

Does this really apply?

My gf and I each earn FANG salaries and could upgrade a,couple of times a year if we were so inclined but haven’t bothered until the M1 arrived. IPhone 6s & 7, watch 0 & 3, 2016 Macbook + 2017 MacBook Air (TBF she has a big 2019 Intel MBP from work though)...upgrading that old gear didn’t seem worth it. Patches and upgrades continued to arrive (except for the watch 0).

But we finally upgraded everything and now I’ll upgrade my 2014 ipad that I’m typing on now.

I doubt most people upgrade simply because something new has arrived. Apple doesn’t really drive you to it.

I think the "stick" the GP was referring to is applied to developers, not consumers. Developers who don't get on board with Windows ARM get... to save themselves some effort. Developers who don't get on board with M1 will have their apps running slower than their competitors' apps across the entire ecosystem within another year or two, period.

As @brundolf said.

Whilst you can run Intel code via Rosetta indefinitely(), Apple's strategic position is no more Intel hardware.

I'm typing this on a 2013 MBP. I'm personally waiting for an M2 chip, which I expect will follow Moore's law, albeit for ARM. Which backs up your point.

() indefinitely as defined by Apple is until they change their mind.

Depends on who you’re asking. My 2012 Thinkpad is on the latest Windows 10. It works very well with its SSD and it is really quiet (new thermal paste). Meanwhile, my 2011 MBA cannot even get GarageBand from the App Store because its OS won’t upgrade. Otherwise it’s fine...

Well sure it depends on who you ask, but though it’s just anecdotal, both you are examples that “obsolescence” may not be that big a driver.

The decade of hand wringing about Tim Cook’s deficiencies as CEO compared to Steve Jobs have got to be put to rest by even the biggest skeptics. The timing, execution, and scale of this transition has been so well done.

Jobs was focused on vision and product design. Cook is on operations and execution -- it also shows in his presentations. He follows the relatively safe "Apple-formula" that was put in place in the 2000s. Even the transition to Apple Silicon mirrors that of PowerPC to Intel.

Looking at the products it is hard to see where Cook has made his impression. It feels like it is about refinement and improvements year after year. That isn't a bad thing, because over time those things add up, and Apple is probably a much more well-oil and stable machine behind the facade today than 10 years ago. This is what Cook does (even before he became CEO).

I suspect Cook also knows that this is his strength, and that's where he should focus, but I would like to see something more risky and exciting come out from Apple.

I'd argue that the fundamental worry of the skeptics is correct. Apple hasn't been innovative in the same way. Apple's not brought out any products that created or disrupted an entire market niche since Cook took over, and it's arguably taken fewer risks. Instead, Apple's big wins over the past decade have been things like this: Really impressive operational successes.

Personally, I'm OK with that. But I've never really stayed abreast of the latest trends, anyway. I can also see where people who enjoyed the excitement of those famous "one more thing" moments might feel like some of the magic has been lost.

The Watch, or AirPods? I give Cook a lot of crap for being a bean counter, but AirPods are amazing and dominate the market.

I agree but the criticism of Tim Cook has never been about execution - he is clearly world class on that - but about quantum leap innovation.

We will need a new product category to put that to rest.

An old app in Apple's ecosystem isn't the same as an old app in Windows.

You can still run executables compiled under Windows2000 today. Meanwhile, programs as old simply won't work in MacOS (at the time, Apple was shipping OS9).

I have no doubt that a Windows release with legacy components removed can run fast on ARM (it was already demonstrated with Windows 10 mobile).

But that's just the tip of the iceberg: Nobody is shipping a chip comparable to the M1. All the ARM vendors are focused on phone chips, with completely different power optimization goals.