Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:18 AM   #726
AppleMacFinder
macrumors 6502a
 
AppleMacFinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
Many gaming titles on Macs these days exist just because the Mac is x86 and software porting houses use the Windows code base wrapped around with a specific WINE build (Guild Wars 2, Batman: Arkham stuff, etc..). Forget that with ARM Macs.
Well, that is why ported games' performance is inferior - because they run in a wrapper.
So, the introduction of ARM Macs will force gaming companies to work harder and make a native ports,
that work a lot faster.
AppleMacFinder is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:19 AM   #727
RichardI
macrumors 6502a
 
RichardI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada
You know, back in the 1980's, IBM had a chance to buy Intel and they decided against it......
__________________
iMac 27", i7, 8 Gb. ram, HD5750/1Gb, 1TB. Hard Drive, OSX 10.9.X Logitech wireless mouse, wired keyboard, iPod Shuffle (2nd G) 1 Gb.
RichardI is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:19 AM   #728
threesixty360
macrumors member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
I said the very same thing in this very same thread. But again, you're missing the point : The users Apple would leave behind with such a move are the ones that are discussing things here and now in this thread, not the masses that don't need the power of x86 chips.[COLOR="#808080"]
And as I said before there will still be high powered Mac machines available. So why worry? No doubt Intel will still have the most powerful processors in the market in the next 10yrs, so we will still see intel macs. Do you seriously think Apple would choose a slower processor for their high end machines on purpose?

Apple will make high end machines because its what they themselves use. Simple.

They only went with Intel because Power PC wasn't bringing them good performance. That was the only reason. If IBM stayed on target their would not be any Intel macs.

The short answer is. Apple will not let you down. If you want the a high powered machine to computing tasks, they will provide it because they need it too.
threesixty360 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:21 AM   #729
AppleMacFinder
macrumors 6502a
 
AppleMacFinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by gotluck View Post
no more bootcamp?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BSU2006 View Post
If Apple did this, without BootCamp functionality, my 2011 MBP would be my last Apple product.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech198 View Post
If Apple is going to switch, will this mean no more Bootcamp ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbSoluTc View Post
The big draw for a Mac to me was the x86 architecture. The Intel processors. The ability to bootcamp Windows. The compatibility right now for Mac is excellent. It works.
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertcoogan View Post
If this is true, unless Apple can ensure Windows (via BootCamp or a VM) can run on any future Apple processor, I would have to move away from Apple at my business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsamacthing View Post
It would mean the end of being an Apple customer for me... I need bootcamp
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
Forget Bootcamp and running Windows 8, you'll be stuck with Windows RT which is not compatible with the full suite of Windows software out there.
Well, that would reduce the number of people who buy Macs only to use Windows on them.
Heretics!

Last edited by AppleMacFinder; Nov 6, 2012 at 08:03 AM.
AppleMacFinder is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:22 AM   #730
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleMacFinder View Post
Well, that is why ported games' performance is inferior - because they run in a wrapper.
So, the introduction of ARM Macs will force gaming companies to work harder and make a native ports,
that work a lot faster.
The gaming companies I know won't work harder. They'll just ignore the Mac like they always have (and still do). That's the point of why they're using the WINE stuff in the first place and not putting in more effort to do a proper port.

I'd rather be able to play the games using WINE then not being to play them at all without booting in Windows.
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:24 AM   #731
VulchR
macrumors 68000
 
VulchR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Scotland
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
You're mistaken about one thing. Apple's market share won't dry up with iOS like devices completely replacing Macs. It'll just shift to a more consumer market and away from more computing intensive environnements.
IMO that would be corporate suicide. Think about it. It is worth considering why Apple have been able to charge such high prices over the years. It's because they attract professionals to their products, and these professionals have been trend-setters for consumers. In this regard, offering Mac's at cost to university students in the 1980's was a stroke of genius.

Apple can't compete in the low-end consumer market, where MS and Android will dominate. They have to stay in the high end. Do you really think Apple will be able to sustain their presence in the high-end consumer market if they alienate people in academia, healthcare, creative industries, etc. who require flexible, high-power computers in their work?
__________________
My first was a Mac+. Now I own an iPhone with 3.5x the pixels, a colour display, WiFi, 512x the RAM, >1500x the data storage, and 100x the speed. And it fits in the palm of my hand.
VulchR is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:24 AM   #732
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by threesixty360 View Post
And as I said before there will still be high powered Mac machines available. So why worry? No doubt Intel will still have the most powerful processors in the market in the next 10yrs, so we will still see intel macs. Do you seriously think Apple would choose a slower processor for their high end machines on purpose?
You're assuming Apple won't just ditch their high end machines. Look at their revenues, margins, profits and think of just how Apple operates.

Then you'll understand where this is really going if Apple does indeed switch to an ARM line-up.
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:26 AM   #733
AppleMacFinder
macrumors 6502a
 
AppleMacFinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
I have seen nothing of the sorts. ARM CPUs have a power advantage because they sacrifice sheer number crunching ability.
At the moment Intel's performance (not considering low-end: Atoms and Celerons) is higher,
but the power consumption is a lot more higher - compared to ARM.

Result: Intel's Performance/Power ratio is worse.
AppleMacFinder is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:29 AM   #734
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by VulchR View Post
IMO that would be corporate suicide. Think about it. I think it is worth considering why Apple has been able to charge such high prices over the years. It's because they attract professionals to their products, and these professionals have been trend-setters for consumers. In this regard, offering Mac's at cost to university students in the 1980's was a stroke of genius.

Apple can't compete in the low-end consumer market, where MS and Android will dominate. They have to stay in the high end. Do you really think Apple will be able to sustain their presence in the high-end consumer market if they alienate people in academia, healthcare, creative industries, etc. who require flexible, high-power computers in their work?
Yes. The Mac hasn't been a gateway products for years. If anything, it's now the other way around. Consumers are what drive Apple these days, and consumers don't need dinky scientists or movie editors to tell them what to buy.

The new reality is that Apple doesn't need the high-end computing segment anymore, and they don't need to compete in the low-end consumer segment either. They've effectively built themselves up in the mid to high end consumer segment and now that is their primary market and motivator for sales and revenue.

It's a sad reality, but Apple probably wouldn't be commiting corporate suicide at all.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleMacFinder View Post
At the moment Intel's performance (not considering low-end: Atoms and Celerons) is higher,
but the power consumption is a lot more higher - compared to ARM.

Result: Intel's Performance/Power ratio is worse.
You're not understanding ratios. Power consumption is higher, but processing power also is.

If I perform 4 instructions in 4 watts, sure my power consumption is higher than that 1 watt CPU that performs 1 instruction, but my ratio is the same 1 instruction per 1 watt of power.

Intel's Power to watt ratio isn't any different than the different ARM SoCs out there. Medfield proves x86 can also be made into a power efficient, low performance SoC. It's not about instruction sets, it's about chip design.

Intel just doesn't really cater to power efficient applications right now, outside of Medfield and ATOMs.
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:32 AM   #735
M-O
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by gotluck View Post
no more bootcamp?
didn't Microsoft announce that new versions of windows will run on ARM?
M-O is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:35 AM   #736
slughead
macrumors 68030
 
slughead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleMacFinder View Post
Well, that would reduce the number of people who buy Macs only to use Windows on them. Heretics!
Or people who buy macs and want to get decent performance out of their games. Or want to test their websites in Internet Explorer. Or want to run PC builds of linux. Or want to run X11 apps without worrying about porting problems.

Hopefully Apple is not this stupid.
slughead is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:37 AM   #737
Rogifan
macrumors G3
 
Rogifan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
733 comments on a story all based on rumors from someone named "anonymous". Wow.
__________________
"When we se something huge and powerful we aspire to make it small and meaningful." Jony Ive 
Rogifan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:38 AM   #738
AppleMacFinder
macrumors 6502a
 
AppleMacFinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
You're not understanding ratios. Power consumption is higher, but processing power also is.
In example, if power consumption is higher in 20 times, while performance is higher in 5 times,
the Performance/Power ratio is worse - 75% worse.
Something like that in the Intel's case.
AppleMacFinder is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:38 AM   #739
fredoviola
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Ugh, please no.............
fredoviola is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:40 AM   #740
Elbon
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
It's unlikely...

...that Apple would move their entire lineup to ARM. What's more likely is that they would move systems that might benefit from it (such as the MacBook Air) to ARM, while continuing to use Intel CPUs in other systems. This is essentially what Microsoft is doing with Windows 8.
Elbon is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:41 AM   #741
GoCubsGo
macrumors Nehalem
 
GoCubsGo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
This seems like a very bad idea. Wasn't the whole switch to Intel how they gained more market share? At least one of the reasons that is.
GoCubsGo is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:41 AM   #742
miniroll32
macrumors 6502a
 
miniroll32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
I think those who are whining about this topic should reserve judgment until Apple actually does release these CPU's. Then we can see for ourselves the differences in performance, because using the current ARM chips in iOS products as a guide is totally the wrong way to go about this.

Besides, it's years away, and the they're not going to release this sort of hardware unless it actually benefits them.

Last edited by miniroll32; Nov 6, 2012 at 07:49 AM.
miniroll32 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:42 AM   #743
Skika
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Apple should buy ARM.
__________________
MacBook Pro, iPad, iPhone
Skika is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:44 AM   #744
KnightWRX
macrumors Pentium
 
KnightWRX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Quebec, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleMacFinder View Post
In example, if power consumption is higher in 20 times, while performance is higher in 5 times,
the Performance/Power ratio is worse - 75% worse.
Something like that in the Intel's case.
Sorry, but that's not the case at all. Quite the contrary. In a sheer processing ratio to power conversion, Intel is ahead of ARM SoCs. Compare the power draw and integer or floating point performance of a ULV MacBook Air chip to a A6X. You'll be surprised to learn that the Intel design is more efficient.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elbon View Post
This is essentially what Microsoft is doing with Windows 8.
No, that's not what Microsoft is doing with Windows 8. People need to stop spreading this FUD.

ARM Windows 8, aka, Windows RT, is iOS basically.

You're saying Apple would benefit from selling iOS based MacBook Airs. Wouldn't those just then be iPads with attached keyboards ?
__________________
"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others."
-- Pericles
KnightWRX is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:45 AM   #745
AppleMacFinder
macrumors 6502a
 
AppleMacFinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by slughead View Post
Or people who buy macs and want to get decent performance out of their games.
In case of ARM switch, Macs would get a native game versions, not just a miserable ports in a WINE wrapper, which performance is of course lower.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slughead View Post
Or want to test their websites in Internet Explorer. Or want to run PC builds of linux. Or want to run X11 apps without worrying about porting problems.

Hopefully Apple is not this stupid.
Most educated people don't use Internet Explorer.
If the website doesn't work good in Internet Explorer, that is the problem of Microsoft.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slughead View Post
Or want to run PC builds of linux. Or want to run X11 apps without worrying about porting problems.
Since Mac OS X is 100% UNIX certified, everything that works in linux works in Mac OS X as well -
in most cases, without any changes. I have compiled and used lots of Linux libraries (from src,
without any macports), and they all are working fine. That means, linux is not that needed.
AppleMacFinder is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:47 AM   #746
VulchR
macrumors 68000
 
VulchR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Scotland
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
It's a sad reality, but Apple probably wouldn't be commiting corporate suicide at all....

Well, at least we agree it would be sad. Interesting times.
__________________
My first was a Mac+. Now I own an iPhone with 3.5x the pixels, a colour display, WiFi, 512x the RAM, >1500x the data storage, and 100x the speed. And it fits in the palm of my hand.
VulchR is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:48 AM   #747
AppleMacFinder
macrumors 6502a
 
AppleMacFinder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightWRX View Post
Sorry, but that's not the case at all. Quite the contrary. In a sheer processing ratio to power conversion, Intel is ahead of ARM SoCs. Compare the power draw and integer or floating point performance of a ULV MacBook Air chip to a A6X. You'll be surprised to learn that the Intel design is more efficient.
If that is not the case, nobody would use ARM at all.
AppleMacFinder is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:50 AM   #748
patent10021
macrumors 68000
 
patent10021's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Japan
All the "No Bootcamp, I'm not buying a Mac" guys make me crack up.

That's why you should buy a Windows machine. Apple won't miss you.

Not dissing you, just sayin'. You didn't buy a Mac to run Windows. The fact that you were able to means nothing to AAPL.

This is going to be exciting. Changes don't mean slower!
patent10021 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:50 AM   #749
albusseverus
macrumors 6502a
 
albusseverus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
I have no problems what processor Apple uses, as long as it does the job. Apple's always chosen the best CPU for the job. Changed to Intel when the chips they were co-developing weren't up to it, so we'll see how they go this time, with more control over the development process.

That said, ARM chips are not the stuff of actual computing. Being able to design ARM chips and thinking you can build a computer, is like building a petrol mower (do you have those in the US?) and deciding you can build a motor car.

There is no relation between the two, except internal combustion. Ditto for ARM and computing. While it's true, millions of people who would never buy a computer have bought iOS - that's not computing!

Call them trucks, if you like, but for that market, the (former) traditional computing market, ARM or anything like it, just won't do.

Now for what bothers me. The Retina 13" MacBook "Pro" ships with barely more GPU grunt than the 13" Air, and less grunt than the Non-Retina model. This is a disturbing trend in the 13" so-called Pro line. Both of these models are really MacBooks, nothing Pro about them. [Oh, that's right they have FireWire, wasn't that the first definition of a Pro? FireWire who?]

One of them has a fancy screen, which in real-world use will probably be the downfall of this year/model, making it notorious for all the wrong reasons. The 15" Retina should have taught Apple that GPU is everything, and you don't want people describing your flagship Pro notebook as having a screen that's a bit laggy (no matter how much of a technological marvel it is). Apple don't don't seem to have learnt that lesson. We await the next model, to see if it's a deliberate direction for Apple or just a misstep.

When did Apple become the company you never buy the first year/model of anything?

So, can ARM power Air models?, for example, where customers want light and functional, but don't expect grunt with at capital G? Not in ARM's wildest dream, unless Apple is prepared to do to the Airs what it's already done to the 13" Pros. This year dual core i7, next (year?) just like the first Air, an iPod with a keyboard and screen. And a dog to boot!

Despite my first sentence, this "news" disturbs me, deeply. This is not the same Apple that changed to Intel because it had a new architecture that just worked better. This is an Apple unfettered by a humbling defeat like Power PC. This is the company that coined the expression "Post PC" and we should all be very worried indeed.
albusseverus is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 6, 2012, 07:57 AM   #750
GoCubsGo
macrumors Nehalem
 
GoCubsGo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by patent10021 View Post
All the "No Bootcamp, I'm not buying a Mac" guys make me crack up.

That's why you should buy a Windows machine. Apple won't miss you.

Not dissing you, just sayin'. You didn't buy a Mac to run Windows. The fact that you were able to means nothing to AAPL.

This is going to be exciting. Changes don't mean slower!
Uh Apple did once care that you could run windows on a Mac. Do you not recall that it was actually something that they marketed? It seems as though you weren't around for the PPC to Intel shift and all the hype and excitement about being able to run windows on a Mac.
GoCubsGo is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tim Cook: Apple 'Spending an Enormous Amount' on 'Macs of the Future' MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 212 Apr 23, 2014 12:04 PM
TSMC Confirms Deal with Apple to Produce A-Series Chips for Future iOS Devices MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 92 Jul 5, 2013 01:27 PM
Xbox One: It is the 'Apple Intel Switch' all over again rjcalifornia Console Games 28 May 22, 2013 12:19 PM
Apple and Intel Have Reportedly Discussed Deal for Production of Future iPhone and iPad Chips MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 128 Mar 20, 2013 08:12 PM
Intel Looking to Cut Power Consumption on Future Ivy Bridge Chips MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 125 Dec 18, 2012 11:18 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:12 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC