It might shock you to learn that I don't really care :)
I doubt Pat Gelsinger does either, since he's publicly stated that Intel would fab Apple Silicon chips at their ARM foundry if/when TSMC goes offline. The guy's just having a laugh by putting an awfully accurate label on a fruit that pays extra to resist labeling.
Maybe he should start caring* otherwise he risk running Intel completely into the ground? After all Apple was one of their largest clients until recently. Then a "lifestyle company" managed to somehow design better CPUs than Intel despite that just being an afterthought for them (since apparently Apple only focuses on the "lifestyle" stuff..).
I find it so fascinating the people get really obsessed by Apple (both in a negative and a positive way).
> I don't really care :)
Well a string of your comments would imply that you could actually care less about Apple.
*(I'm pretty sure he does in non imaginary reality )
Apple should be able to design better CPUs than Intel. They've poached their chip designers for over a decade, and have been the world's largest company for years. Beating Intel's single-core IPC is so easy that AMD did it with Ryzen for a laugh - if Apple couldn't do it on RISC, they may as well have given up making chips entirely.
I own no stock in Intel or Apple. It's worth discussing to me because it exposes how insecure people are about relying on "lifestyle" companies. Even Intel is a lifestyle company for some people, and those users are equally as pathetic as the people who let Apple, AMD or Nvidia define who they are. If Apple didn't go to such extreme lengths to appear different and look accountable, their staunchest defenders wouldn't have so far to fall.
Apple's just doing age-old value selling, where you promote the benefits of a product rather than the features. See https://blog.hubspot.com/sales/value-based-selling