ARM-Based MacBook Air Unlikely Based on Analyst Talk with Tim Cook

[KnightWRX]

Sharing a lot of components isn't the same as being 'the same'. Time to pick up the dictionary.

Can you prove that the code of iOS is exactly the same as the code of OS X? Because it clearly is not, which makes them different.

Besides, what does the code have to do with anything? Even a child can see that OS X and iOS aren't the one and the same.

The discussion was about "merging" them. This is a tad bit more than just a superficial "Joe average" "they're different!". Look, if you don't want to discuss the actual "merging" of things that are already pretty much merged on a component basis, fine, just let it be though, don't go running around with you're "they're different!".

And clearly OS X and iOS are not using the same code ? Sorry, I think you need to go look at how both OSes are made. There is a lot of code sharing there.

Your original claim was that iOS and OS X are different because OS X runs x86 binaries and iOS runs ARM binaries, something completely unrelated. You can have different OSes run the same binaries (FreeBSD on x86 can run Linux built and targetted binaries) and you can have the same OS on different architectures incapable of running the same binaries (Linux x86 vs Linux ARM). My original point was 2 folds :

- Discussing a merging of OS X and iOS as if it was the end of the world is dumbfoundingly stupid. The plain fact is Apple will always reuse code between both but they can never be completely identical because of the device form factors they run on requiring different UI paradigms.

- Trying to tie any such difference between these 2 OSes to CPU architecture is as dumbfoundingly stupid. OS X could very much run on ARM as is and iOS could run on x86 as-is also. ARM based desktop processors could be quite viable, and medfield SoCs are x86 processors and could run in the next iPhone for all we know.

 

[holmesf]

And clearly OS X and iOS are not using the same code ? Sorry, I think you need to go look at how both OSes are made. There is a lot of code sharing there.

This. At its core, both Mac OS X and iOS are built on top of Darwin. Beyond that they share the same core libraries (audio, networking, graphics, etc). They are so similar that from a programmer's point of view they are more distinguished by the minor things they don't share than by what they do.

 

[ThunderSkunk]

Lol...Obviously your concept of connectivity and file management is not the same as mine.

Get back to me the day one of these things can read, copy or paste any file to and from any usb stick or device, or let me navigate and manage my files like a proper finder or windows explorer.

It sounds like your concept of connectivity and file management is the same old time consuming manual one we all used and somehow thought could never be improved upon. Until it was.

That day you want to get back to was over a year ago. If you still can't manage your files, you're doing something wrong.

 

[kiljoy616]

To slow not enough power for my needs. A5 and A6 rock and will rock on things like iPhone and iPad, but laptops need so much more, maybe with the A8 who knows.

 

[linuxcooldude]

It's like this. If you download Ubuntu, and you install Gnome 3 over Unity, is it still Ubuntu? Yeah, it is. It looks considerably different, but it's still the same OS. If you restrict it so that you can only install from a certain repository that only accepts applications programmed in a certain language, is it still Ubuntu? Yup. It's all the same underneath.

Same thing could be said for iOS. They use the same kernel, do they not? So iOS is basically OSX in a more tightly controlled environment with a different UI.

Or if you wanna get all nerdy about it, you could say that iOS is a branch of OSX. No, it's not exactly the same, but arguing that point is splitting hairs over nothing.

Two totally different things. Gnome shell can run natively on ubuntu and other Linux distributions. iOS can't natively run on Mac OSX. I doubt they use the same kernel. They might be simular, but still different.

 

[Kludge420]

If Apple decided to use ARM chips for laptops those laptops would be less powerful than Android phones

Never, ever mention the other A word. Fanboi's can't comprehend liking more than one thing so talking about non-Apple things in a positive light makes their heads explode.

 

[I WAS the one]

I think The next BIG thing logically needs to be a Mac Book Touch. two touch screens as a clam device or a touch display that can swivel as a tablet. it need to happen if Apple wants to do the next BIG thing. I see Apple future without Mac OS X and just running iOS for all their devices. iOS will be having a pro update soon. you'll see

 

[smulji]

I think The next BIG thing logically needs to be a Mac Book Touch. two touch screens as a clam device or a touch display that can swivel as a tablet. it need to happen if Apple wants to do the next BIG thing. I see Apple future without Mac OS X and just running iOS for all their devices. iOS will be having a pro update soon. you'll see

"I see Apple future without Mac OS X and just running iOS for all their devices. iOS will be having a pro update soon. you'll see"

I was thinking about this as well. It's definitely possible that Apple may eventually scale iOS up to have more advanced OSX features where one day it may be able to replace OSX. We'll just have to wait and see.

 

[gnasher729]

What does the average joe have to do with a conversation about OS components and portability ? This is a technical forum, we discuss technical things. iOS and OS X share a lot of components, to say they are different when they clearly aren't only dumbs down the conversation.

If you don't want to discuss things on a technical level and want to keep it at the level of "looks different therefor it is!", then there's plenty of good non-technical forums for that.

1. Apple has Intel versions of all the iOS versions. People can even download them for free. They are there to run the iPhone / iPad emulator that is part of XCode. Real Intel code.

2. Apple had versions of MacOS X that run on PowerPC 32 or 64 bit, and on Intel 32 or 64 bit. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was a PowerPC version of Lion running somewhere at Apple. And creating an ARM version wouldn't be any technical problem at all, so I wouldn't be surprised if they had that as well.

3. Porting applications from 32 bit Intel to ARM is no problem at all. While there were major differences in behaviour between PowerPC and Intel, making careful programming for portability necessary in some cases, there is very little difference between 32 bit Intel and ARM.

According to Apple, 85 percent of the iOS code is taken unchanged from MacOS X, with the percentage growing.

So technically, an MBA using an ARM processor is no problem. Whether it makes much sense, I doubt it.
But if Intel and AMD both shut down today, it would be shipping in four weeks time. Well, let's say 3 months.

 

[b166er]

I agree with him- in another generation or two the iPad will probably meet the demands of a very high percentage of users. My computing has become a lot more casual lately and I could see myself ditching the laptop in the next 5 years if tablets continue to get better. The main thing I use my macbook for these days is my word processing for school- and there is hardly a need to buy a macbook air just for that.

 

[KnightWRX]

Two totally different things. Gnome shell can run natively on ubuntu and other Linux distributions. iOS can't natively run on Mac OSX. I doubt they use the same kernel. They might be simular, but still different.

iOS is a full OS distribution, so is OS X. "Running" one on the other is quite disingenuous and shows you do not understand what is under the hood for both.

Both use the Darwin kernel. Both use Quartz for a graphical display technology. Both use identical NeXTSTEP APIs for their core runtime.

The difference lies in the UI toolkits and the "shell".

 

[balamw]

This is a technical forum, we discuss technical things.

FWIW each thread and sub-forum has a different level of technical discussion. Not every discussion needs to be technical and in fact many are far from it.

Put another way: We also discuss lots of non-technical things in non-technical ways.

B

 

[KnightWRX]

FWIW each thread and sub-forum has a different level of technical discussion. Not every discussion needs to be technical and in fact many are far from it.

Put another way: We also discuss lots of non-technical things in non-technical ways.

B

Last I checked, this thread was about CPU architectures and computer form factors.

PRSI this isn't.

 

[Bheleu]

Not a MacBook Air! It's an iBook (iPad with keyboard/ports)

Its a physical iBook with iOS, has ports for data drives, etc. so kids can turn in homework, reason it has a keyboard.

 

[linuxcooldude]

Both use the Darwin kernel. Both use Quartz for a graphical display technology. Both use identical NeXTSTEP APIs for their core runtime.

So you can take the same exact kernel from iOS ( except for being compiled for its perspective architecture like intel processor ) run it unmodified and have the same full functionality within Mac OSX? How about the same for Quartz or the rest? If not, its not quite the same thing.

 

[KnightWRX]

So you can take the same exact kernel from iOS ( except for being compiled for its perspective architecture like intel processor ) run it unmodified and have the same full functionality within Mac OSX? How about the same for Quartz or the rest? If not, its not quite the same thing.

Can you take the exact kernel from OpenWRT (except compile it for Intel) and run it on a modern Sony Vaio laptop ? Of course not. It's still the Linux kernel even though both had much different compile time configurations. Someone called linuxcooldude should understand this stuff, at least, I'd hope.

 

[sunspot42]

But They Are

This is what is wrong with current smartphone mentality. They don't realize that these are two different markets completely and not everyone believes that smart phone and tablets are the answer to all computing.

Except smartphones and tablets already are the answer to all personal computing for most users. They're able to do all the browsing-related things most users spend something like 95% of their time doing on a PC or laptop. Once the ability to dock them to external monitors and keyboards becomes commonplace, they'll easily be able to handle the other 5%.

That leaves behind isolated professional users with heavy-duty needs - professional video editors, CAD/CAM jocks and so forth, and hardcore PC gamers. In the same way that a tiny minicomputer market survived the dominance of the PC a small professional workstation market will survive the rise of mobile computing, but it's gonna be a tiny market. Apple has already shown with its exit from the server business that they have zero interest in serving tiny professional markets. It's not worth the distraction from their core consumer business.

I give the Mac 5 years. I wouldn't be surprised to see it gone sooner than that, depending on how this whole television thing Apple's apparently working on goes.

 

[prowlmedia]

10 years? I doubt Apple will still be in the business of selling Macs in 5 years, at the rate iOS devices are growing.

Face it - for most of the stuff people do with computers, tablets are a fundamentally superior solution. Browsing, watching YouTube, updating Facebook - all best done from an iPad (or an iPhone, which is with you literally everywhere).

Desktop and even laptop PCs are only going to be really needed by business people, and even then only at the office. In fact, I'm not even sure most of them will need a PC - if the iPhone gains the ability to dock and work with external monitors and keyboards, it could function as your desktop PC as well (and as your laptop, with a mobile dock equipped with a keyboard, monitor and larger battery).

Any processing job the mobile device can't handle will simply be offloaded to the cloud, OnLive style. That's already practical in most offices, with their high-speed networks and fat internet pipes. It'll become increasingly practical in the home as well over the next decade.

The PC and laptop as we've grown to know them are as obsolete as the buggywhip. Apple won't be making an ARM-based MacBook because by the time that becomes worth the hassle, they won't be making desktop and laptop computers anymore. The form factors are totally obsolete.

Your second paragraph hints at the right direction - You mention browsing / viewing etc - and you seem to have forgotten that the ipad and iPhone are really content devices. And whats going to create that content? OSX is the creator for all that content and way more powerful than iOS + it's got the the ability to create for any other device or medium.

Whiles the ipad may seem powerful for what it is and does it's nothing compared to an iMac even. On Geekbench - the ipad scores about 700... my 4 year old(!) mac pro 8 core score 14600 - 20 times faster. Of course iPad's will get faster... but so will the machines needed to create for them.

A practical example is in 3d rendering. A single render frame of a job I am working on on my mac takes about 40 mins... on an iPad if there was a renderer and the stupidly complex software such as Maya or cinema 4d that same render would take about 30 hours.

I can of course see the cloud and processor power going to the web in the future... but I don't know many companies that would allow sensitive data / processing to be handled externally... let alone the relative slow speed of the internet. I use online renderfarms now and again - which is essentially the perfect example - massive processor capability. upload a file and get the results back... but the cost is massive and the biggest bottle neck is getting the files up and down. Imagine what that would be like for video work etc. Even Single photos now can be 100mb.

And While I have a 50mb line most people I know have 6.. and the forseeble average for built up areas is 16! In the county they are lucky to get 2...

 

[linuxcooldude]

Can you take the exact kernel from OpenWRT (except compile it for Intel) and run it on a modern Sony Vaio laptop ? Of course not. It's still the Linux kernel even though both had much different compile time configurations. Someone called linuxcooldude should understand this stuff, at least, I'd hope.

Thats the very reason why I asked the question the way I did. Once you start taking the source code and modifying it, the difference between the two platforms becomes more evident. Both have the same beginnings using the Darwin kernel and end up being different on their prospective platforms. Simular in some ways, different in others.

 

[sunspot42]

Migration

And whats going to create that content? OSX is the creator for all that content and way more powerful than iOS + it's got the the ability to create for any other device or medium.

A practical example is in 3d rendering. A single render frame of a job I am working on on my mac takes about 40 mins...

And what percentage of the population worldwide needs that kind of computing power on the desktop? Maybe 2%, tops. The most processor-intensive thing the rest of the world does is probably run Microsoft Office. An iPad already has enough horsepower to do that.

Apple could give a crap about the special needs of high-end users. They're a pain to support, the product line consumes a ton of development resources that could be better directed toward the other 98% of the market, the margins are worse than they are on the iPhone and iPad and Apple still has trouble attracting a robust developer community (especially compared to iOS, which is absolutely on fire).

Staying in the PC market with the Mac also leaves them beholden to Intel, a company that's increasingly going to become a rival as Apple develops newer and more powerful chips based on ARM technology in-house.

Apple will migrate most OS X users to iOS over the next 5 years as they slowly pull X features into iOS and begin to release smartphone and tablet hardware that can dock and be used with keyboards, monitors and such. Their TV plans will probably also include the option to utilize the device as a "desktop" PC (with a 42" double HD-resoultion screen - yowza!).

The vast majority of OS X users will be overjoyed to own a single device, an iPhone, that doubles as a replacement PC and goes with them everywhere they go. A handful of power users will whine and moan and nobody in Cupertino will give a flip. They will in fact be glad to get rid of the professional crybabies.

 

[KnightWRX]

Thats the very reason why I asked the question the way I did. Once you start taking the source code and modifying it

But that's the point. The same kernel tree, without any modifications, downloaded from kernel.org can produce both kernels for an embedded networking appliance like used in OpenWRT and a full desktop computer for 3D gaming like Alienware makes or a laptop computer for mobile computing like the Sony Vaio. There is no source code to modify to get the results.

So in essence, you've just proven my point. It's all build-time configurations to get the proper code built into the kernel that will eventually run your device, trimming the fat off for what your particular target doesn't need.

Linux is Linux, no matter if it's your TV's Linux kernel, your laptop's Linux kernel or the Linux kernel we used on our servers. Same goes for Darwin.

----------

And what percentage of the population worldwide needs that kind of computing power on the desktop? Maybe 2%, tops. The most processor-intensive thing the rest of the world does is probably run Microsoft Office. An iPad already has enough horsepower to do that.

It's not all about horsepower though. Frankly, with the kind of stuff I do on my computer, I could get by with quite an old computer. Writing code, typing out Unix commands in an ssh session and multi-tasking a couple of text editor windows/terminal emulator windows while compiling/linking code is stuff I was doing 12 years ago on my Pentium II or even the Pentium I had prior to that.

An ARM based MacBook Air, powered by something like a Cortex A9 or Cortex A15 with a proper GPU (something like an SGX543MP or even the 6 series PowerVR stuff that's upcoming) is plenty of computer power.

The problem for me with iPad and other tablets is purely the form factor. Forget the OS for a minute, and let's say both could run the same OS that enabled me to perform my tasks. The tablet form factor just doesn't cut it for. I don't want half the screen hidden away by a keyboard. I want a lot of visible pixels. I also don't want to hold up my arms to the screen to move the "cursor" around, the trackpad is perfect and my fingers don't hide what's going on screen.

The laptop form factor is mobile as much as I need it to be and it lets me work on a computer without any ergonomical problems a tablet brings (I can't stand browsing the web on my TouchPad for more than 5 minutes, I get a sore neck from looking down or get tired from holding the thing up).

Tablets vs Laptop is the wrong argument. That's very much a personal preference. I think the bigger debate should be on iOS like controlled computing, and OS X like free computing. My step dad would very much be much more at ease and wouldn't require my assistance all the time with an iOS like environnement on his computer (but a tablet doesn't appeal to him). Likewise, some people might prefer the tablet form factor, but require more than the limited OS environnements provided by the current crop.

I'd very much like to see Apple offer ARM powered laptops with full desktop OSes, x86 powered tablets with limited functionality OSes, the Macs they already do and the iPads they also already do. But that's not going to happen obviously. The next best thing for me is something like the MacBook Air, and my step dad is stuck on Windows 7.

 

[linuxcooldude]

But that's the point. The same kernel tree, without any modifications, downloaded from kernel.org can produce both kernels for an embedded networking appliance like used in OpenWRT and a full desktop computer for 3D gaming like Alienware makes or a laptop computer for mobile computing like the Sony Vaio. There is no source code to modify to get the results.

So in essence, you've just proven my point. It's all build-time configurations to get the proper code built into the kernel that will eventually run your device, trimming the fat off for what your particular target doesn't need.

Linux is Linux, no matter if it's your TV's Linux kernel, your laptop's Linux kernel or the Linux kernel we used on our servers. Same goes for Darwin.

Yet the kernels are not directly cross compatible. Prove your point? Nice try, but not the same.

 

[MattInOz]

I think The next BIG thing logically needs to be a Mac Book Touch. two touch screens as a clam device or a touch display that can swivel as a tablet. it need to happen if Apple wants to do the next BIG thing. I see Apple future without Mac OS X and just running iOS for all their devices. iOS will be having a pro update soon. you'll see

I thought the Next Big Thing was the commodity cluster and getting data syncing between devices so smooth and fast that they become indistinguishable from a single machine, at least when the devices are in proximity to each other.

If this is the way they go then there is still a distinct difference between iOS and OS X that would still be needed in different products. iOS focus on portable and instant will mean it never works well for brute force. OS X and x86 allows for brute force and some workflows need to start as brute force then get streamlined.

 

[KnightWRX]

Yet the kernels are not directly cross compatible. Prove your point? Nice try, but not the same.

At this point you're just refusing to be wrong even though it's right there in front of you. I'll end this sub-thread now.

 

[hstewart]

And the trucks are absolutely required to deliver the parts and fuel to make and keep cars running.

One of the reasons that iOS devices are piling in the profits is several 100k iOS Developers and nearing a million apps. Until tools such as Xcode run on something other than Mac OS X (Linux?, Windows 8??, iCloud???), Apple has to keep the app supply chain running, and thus keep on shipping Macs that developers like to use.

And the other option, converting iOS to support the full Developer tool chain would pretty much make it Mac OS X on ARM.

It very simple ARM is not powerful enough to run the tools - it like trying to run Windows 7 on 486 - it possible it can be done but not very well.

----------

An ARM based MacBook Air, powered by something like a Cortex A9 or Cortex A15 with a proper GPU (something like an SGX543MP or even the 6 series PowerVR stuff that's upcoming) is plenty of computer power.

The problem for me with iPad and other tablets is purely the form factor. Forget the OS for a minute, and let's say both could run the same OS that enabled me to perform my tasks. The tablet form factor just doesn't cut it for. I don't want half the screen hidden away by a keyboard. I want a lot of visible pixels. I also don't want to hold up my arms to the screen to move the "cursor" around, the trackpad is perfect and my fingers don't hide what's going on screen.

The laptop form factor is mobile as much as I need it to be and it lets me work on a computer without any ergonomical problems a tablet brings (I can't stand browsing the web on my TouchPad for more than 5 minutes, I get a sore neck from looking down or get tired from holding the thing up).

Tablets vs Laptop is the wrong argument. That's very much a personal preference. I think the bigger debate should be on iOS like controlled computing, and OS X like free computing. My step dad would very much be much more at ease and wouldn't require my assistance all the time with an iOS like environnement on his computer (but a tablet doesn't appeal to him). Likewise, some people might prefer the tablet form factor, but require more than the limited OS environnements provided by the current crop.

I'd very much like to see Apple offer ARM powered laptops with full desktop OSes, x86 powered tablets with limited functionality OSes, the Macs they already do and the iPads they also already do. But that's not going to happen obviously. The next best thing for me is something like the MacBook Air, and my step dad is stuck on Windows 7.

Have you done any development before and actually look at the technical differences between ARM and x86 cpus.. Yes it possible ARM could run a high end OS - but you may have notice with the Windows 8 ARM tablets - they had to strip it down - it just not a powerful enough CPU.

Even my Core2Duo MacBook AIR would runs circle around any of latest generations ARM including the future quad core ARM. It not the number of cores that make the difference - it power of cpu and it instruction set.

This in additional of application compatibly.

I would not doubt a 2011 maybe even my 2010 MacBook AIR could run iPad simulator faster than the actually iPad cpu. if simulator was written correctly to fully emulated the cpu.