As others have said Intel failed. There were Intel phones back in the days. Maybe they should have kept going even if it lost money. Maybe not. Who knows.
Not to mention Apple isn’t moving regardless since they were 1 of the founders of ARM.
20 years ago, probably. I don't understand why it is still the case today that legacy is important. Who is still running very old, 25yo software, and just how are they wagging the dog?
I'm on a newer generation chip that has a lower power draw. Meets my network speed minimum. All for the price of the entry level Studio. This box is basically an experiment to see how much processing power I need. I have a very specific project that will require the benchmarking of Apple's machine learning frameworks. I want to see how much of a machine learning load this Mini can handle. Once I have benchmarks maybe the Pro will exist and I will be in good shape to shop and understand what I'm buying.
I think a Mini of any spec is a great value. The studio has a place but I'm hoping the Pro ends up being like an old Sun E450.
This Mini experiment is to help me frame the hardware power vs. the software loads.
My second suggestion for 16-core was M2, also. $100 less with 1Gb, and with 10Gb it would be $100 more than you paid. i.e. two of the 8-core M2 Minis with 24GB RAM each would do about twice as much work as the high end Mini M2 Pro alone, sometimes less than twice the work, sometimes more. The same is true of two M1 Max Studios vs one M1 Extreme Studio for the same price. 2 less powerful machines spank one more powerful machine every single time, and one M1 Extreme Studio is definitely NOT worth two M1 Max Studios, same as one 12-core M2 Pro Mini is definitely NOT worth two 8-core M2 Minis.
Everyone is drawn to "the best," and that's where Apple fleeces and makes its money. Pretty consistently forever, the best buys from Apple are never the high end configurations. We may feel secure in what our choices were, doubling down on affirming them, but we definitely pay for it.