Has Apple Silicon Changed Your Mind About Building a PC?

For those with a genuine passion for building their own PCs, Apple's shift to Apple Silicon may not have made a significant impact. However, for those weighing the decision to upgrade or stick to their current setups, Apple's move to self-developed chips presents a compelling argument for those focused on productivity rather than gaming or extensive hardware customization.

Enthusiasm and Gaming

The hobby of building your own PC often embodies a blend of technical expertise and the desire to tailor the hardware to specific needs. This demographic can be further divided into two main categories: hardware enthusiasts who enjoy the tinkering and customization, and gamers who prioritize the best possible gaming experience for their budget.

For enthusiasts and gamers, PC builds are typically about pushing the boundaries of performance, optimizing every component to achieve the desired balance of power and efficiency. Apple's approach, however, is fundamentally at odds with this mindset, adhering more to a closed-system philosophy where every aspect of the machine is tightly controlled and integrated.

Apple Silicon: Power Efficiency and Performance

One cannot deny the power efficiency of Apple Silicon. Despite this, in terms of raw processing power, Intel and AMD Ryzen remain superior choices for many use cases. This becomes especially evident when discrete graphics cards are involved, as the performance gap between Apple's integrated graphics and a dedicated GPU from either Intel or AMD is substantial.

That said, for users who do not require peak performance and are looking for a more efficient and easily maintainable system, Apple's hardware can be a compelling solution. The 2011 13-inch MacBook Pro mentioned in the article is a prime example of a machine that has been repurposed and optimized with additional RAM and an SSD, significantly enhancing its performance without a complete overhaul.

Personal Experience and Future Prospects

The author of the original article has had a significant shift in their perspective due to Apple's use of Apple Silicon. They won a 2011 13-inch MacBook Pro and, despite its limitations, have added more RAM and an SSD, greatly improving its performance. With the 2013 27-inch iMac, they chose to keep the system as is, running an unsupported version of macOS, rather than upgrading to newer hardware.

For the author, the decision to hold off on an upgrade is driven by the balance between cost and continued usability. The next version of the operating system is the last to support the hardware, and while Apple continues to update productivity applications like Pages and Numbers, the core OS remains unchanged. This presents an opportunity for users to explore alternative operating systems like Linux or BSD without losing access to necessary apps.

Alternatives and Future Outlook

The author acknowledges that while some Linux distributions might offer more up-to-date support, the transition involves overcoming initial hurdles such as iCloud limitations and file transfer challenges. The trade-offs between convenience, cost, and continued productivity make the current configuration more attractive.

As technology evolves, the author remains open to exploring other options. They suggest waiting a few years to see how Apple's ecosystem changes and how new developments in software and hardware might affect their needs. This approach aligns with a cautious yet informed decision-making process, leveraging both the current strengths of Apple's existing solutions and the potential future opportunities.

In conclusion, while Apple Silicon brings unique benefits to productivity users, the decision to upgrade or stick with the current hardware depends on individual needs, budget, and the desire for continued performance and compatibility. For some, Apple's self-developed chips may indeed change their mind, while for others, the established reliability and flexibility of traditional PC builds remain compelling alternatives.