You probably know Apple has introduced what it calls the next generation of Macs. The new MacBook Air, 13in MacBook Pro and Mac mini share common architecture based around an Apple-designed M1 chip – a (presumed) relative of the A-series chips that powers its mobile devices. During the most recent Apple event, the company threw Bezos charts and figures around with merry abandon; but even though they lacked scales and tangible reference points, what we could glean from them was exciting.

Unless Apple had ramped up a fib machine to max, these M1 Macs are blazingly fast and efficient. Apple talked of 3.5× CPU and 6× GPU increases over previous models. And even though digging into the details suggested the reference systems Apple was using weren’t always stellar performers, there’s no misunderstanding statements like “M1 is faster than the chips in 98 per cent of PC laptops sold in the past year”.

This comes alongside huge increases in battery life (up to 20 hours in the MacBook Pro) and claims that these new Macs allow video editors to scythe through 4K or even 8K footage without skipping a frame. It’s therefore hardly surprising Apple believes the M1 “transforms the Mac experience” – and that’s just as well, because Apple doesn’t seem to have transformed anything else about these new Macs.

Put an M1 Mac next to its predecessor and the two computers look identical. For the MacBooks in particular, this leaves Apple with brand-new laptops that on the surface look oddly archaic. The bezels are whoppers compared to sleek equivalents on rival PCs. There’s no cellular option – nor touchscreens, despite macOS Big Sur’s design looking decidedly finger-friendly. Face ID frustratingly remains absent, forcing you to authenticate with a digit rather than your beautiful visage.

Because of this, Apple faces arguments it’s being stubborn in believing ageing designs are best, that it lacks the courage to unleash something radical, and that it’s disappointed legions of Mac users who were eagerly expecting something revolutionary. But the answer as to why this has all happened is very simple: Apple likes being in control.

Being in control doesn’t mean you don’t take risks – but it does mean you take care. Transitioning chip architecture is one of the biggest risks you can take on a computing platform – an awful lot can go wrong. Under those circumstances, it’s a reasonable approach to move slowly and not break things. Hence these Macs utilise tried-and-tested components Apple knows work, allowing the company to put the majority of its efforts into focusing on the new architecture.

All this shouldn’t come as a shock. If you are unaware Apple prizes meaningful but incremental change, you haven’t been paying attention for the past 20 years. Apple is rarely about the flashy gesture, which explains the lack of iPads that fold in half, iPhones with multiple displays that can be configured into a T shape, or Macs that transform into tablets while keeping a beady eye out for evil Decepticons. Only occasionally in recent history have Apple products become design playgrounds – notably, the iPod nano.