Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Considering Switch From Intel Chips in Future Macs

nuckinfutz said:
It has everything to do with this thread topic.

LLVM is essential to Apple being able to straddle ARM and Intel architectures without too much developer strife.

https://twitter.com/d0k/status/228224463710326784 (Mountain Lion first OS release compiled with CLANG/LLVM)
Click to expand...
Another important side benefit of switching from GCC to Clang/LLVM is the freedom from aspects of the GPL that aren't compatible with the way Apple operates. Also, the license Clang/LLVM is under just "jives" better with the BSD foundation upon which OSX and iOS are both based, IMHO ;)

Due to the speculation that performance gaps between Intel and ARM chips will not be closing any time soon, I think Apple is serious about this, but they'll spring it on us in a way we haven't thought of. Here's an example: Imagine something resembling the 2012 iMacs in physical dimensions, but with a unique Apple twist: The main system board is Intel-based just like Macs of the past. What makes this one different is the 48- to 64-core ARM "daughtercard", based on a derivative of the A-series chips powering Apple's iOS family, installed in one of the expansion slots. Just imagine the possibilities this would open up - you get the best of the Intel and ARM worlds in one device. :D
 
jontech said:
Intel makes a Generic CPU that is good at some things and poor at others.

Apple has Shown with the A6 that they can make chips that blow competition away.
Click to expand...

Ivy Bridge pretty much wipes the floor with any other x86 offering, I'm not sure what you refer to when you say "poor at others".
 
FluJunkie said:
While I doubt this is anything other than idle speculation or Apple hedging so that there *is* a ARM-capable version of OS X running if Intel pulls an IBM and fails to deliver what's needed for new Macs, I can't think of anything that would make me walk away from Apple as a platform faster.

I don't want or need a hamstrung desktop.
Click to expand...

Let's say this is true, do you think they are idiots to ship something that doesn't perform like for example QC i5?
 
aristotle said:
I see a lot of whining and handwringing over a "rumour". Give me a break.
:rolleyes:
If they do start looking into ARM then they would most likely resurrect the Universal Binary and just start encouraging developers to target both architectures. Not a big deal. They would continue to sell both side by side for a while and let the market decide.

Stop panicking. Microsoft is testing the waters with the ARM based surface right? Are you panicking over that?
Click to expand...

And nothing is going to happen this year, or in 2013. By then, Macs are completely 64 bit, ARM processors will be 64 bit, and code written for the Mac will run unchanged on a 64 bit ARM processor. It will take quite a bit for ARM processors to reach the speed of a current MBA 11" (I suppose that's the slowest Intel processor Apple sells today), but plenty of cheap laptops out there make do with a lot less today.

Whether this makes sense, that's another question.
 
This is too soon. Apple has only had what? 3 transitions over almost 40 years? We've only had intel macs for 6-7 years.
 
nuckinfutz said:
Apple's moving there but will be 5x larger when it's all said and done.
Click to expand...

Everyone knows and hates the old "Steve would never have let this happen" line people keep throwing out, but if that situation were to come to pass, it'd be pretty justified. An absolutely massive Apple blowing millions and billions on fab plants and the thousands upon thousands of employees to run them, simply to produce chips, screens, and mobos exclusively for their own products would make them totally unwieldy, and would eventually spell the end of Apple as we know them.

You want to talk about company bloat? That would be some company bloat.
 
Windows 8 runs on the ARM architecture. So, future Apple computers may be able to dual-boot Windows RT.
 
ogee said:
I dont give a monkeys about what the processor is, but having to replace all my software again horrifies me. Now if they go universal binary and/or make the App store download the other type binary free of charge then its not so bad, except for windows support.

I cant however, see it happening so soon if at all.
Click to expand...

The software transition will be easier than the "Carbon" affair. Apple's ensured that the next transitions won't be so difficult for developers.

jontech said:
Intel makes a Generic CPU that is good at some things and poor at others.


Apple has Shown with the A6 that they can make chips that blow competition away.
Click to expand...

Indeed the clues are becoming more obvious with the hand laid out A6.

wrldwzrd89 said:
Another important side benefit of switching from GCC to Clang/LLVM is the freedom from aspects of the GPL that aren't compatible with the way Apple operates. Also, the license Clang/LLVM is under just "jives" better with the BSD foundation upon which OSX and iOS are both based, IMHO ;)

Due to the speculation that performance gaps between Intel and ARM chips will not be closing any time soon, I think Apple is serious about this, but they'll spring it on us in a way we haven't thought of. Here's an example: Imagine something resembling the 2012 iMacs in physical dimensions, but with a unique Apple twist: The main system board is Intel-based just like Macs of the past. What makes this one different is the 48- to 64-core ARM "daughtercard", based on a derivative of the A-series chips powering Apple's iOS family, installed in one of the expansion slots. Just imagine the possibilities this would open up - you get the best of the Intel and ARM worlds in one device. :D
Click to expand...

I totally forgot about GPL issues. I too think the segue into this could be hybrid Intel/ARM systems that eventually migrate to ARM only. Guys and gals ..if you love Tech...this is what you live for. Change. Hope.
 
One minute its "apple's getting predictable and is not innovating."

Apple decides to innovate...

"No apple no dont innovate."
 
This will happen eventually. Don't kid yourself. I've been saying this since the iPhone started using custom chips, people thought I was nuts of course.

FWIW, how many years was it from the time the switch-to-intel rumors started and the time it actually happened? Like 5 years? You have time guys. You have a few years at least.
 
Renzatic said:
Everyone knows and hates the old "Steve would never have let this happen" line people keep throwing out, but if that situation were to come to pass, it'd be pretty justified. An absolutely massive Apple blowing millions and billions on fab plants and the thousands upon thousands of employees to run them, simply to produce chips, screens, and mobos exclusively for their own products would make them totally unwieldy, and would eventually spell the end of Apple as we know them.

You want to talk about company bloat? That would be some company bloat.
Click to expand...

Steve was the one that said We've got 1000 engineers making chips

Steve was likely the biggest proponent of moving off of Intel. Steve only used someone until they were no longer beneficial. Intel's usefulness will be at its nadir in about 4 years.
 
Wah, wah , wah and did I mention wah?

about something that may or may not happen many years down the road.

Since Apple is so inept and can't make things work on any platform and anu of it's devices they are clearly in the final stages of shutting down!

Let's all pray that this is a definite maybe!
 
They need to stop moving everything into their own hands - look at how MAPS turned out. Please for the love of God just stop already.
 
sirozha said:
Windows 8 runs on the ARM architecture. So, future Apple computers may be able to dual-boot Windows RT.
Click to expand...

Oh great... SO i'll have to run windows 8 at a minimum ... No more Windows 7 .....


Nor XP for that matter......

On the plus side of all this, this will prevent hackintoshes, :)

... (that is, unless ARM is used in PC's too) :(


nuckinfutz said:
I know. These boards can be so Bi-polar.
Click to expand...

lol
 
Tech198 said:
Besides, didn't Apple switch to Intel, because its "more compatible" ?
Click to expand...

No, out of everything is most defiantly not true.

It was a glorious side benefit that helped push Macs back into being 'useful' machines because they Bootcamp and jump into Windows/Linux/Etc through virtualization.

Apple made the move for their Laptops, end of story. They needed cooler, faster, lower power use processors and Motorola with PowerPC wasn't able to make it happen. Intel could.

We're seeing it starting to happen again. The Intel Chips are starting to have problems meeting the lower power, cooler, and faster wishes of Apple so their eye is wandering again. ARM setups seems to be making it happen at least in the range where the average "consumer" needs. Certainly "pro" and "power" users won't find much in ARM to be happy about.

Now Apple could make this less painful if they were willing to open old code to 3rd parties like Parallels or VMWare to create emulation environments.
 
ChrisA said:
Already today Linux runs on ARM. Microsoft is moving to ARM then if Apple switched you woud still be able to run Mac OSX, Windows (8 or maybe "9") and Linux all on ARM.

Also seeing as Apple can design this any why they like, perhaps they put an x86 core in the ARM CPU? No reason all the cores have to be identical.

I've been thinking of years that non-symetric multi processing is a good idea.
Click to expand...

Except I don't run Linux to run Linux, I run it to support and develop for x86-64 Linux servers. I don't run Windows to run Windows, I use it to support and develop for x86-64 Windows machines. So running on a different architecture wouldn't be helpful.
 
AppliedMicro said:
Give me fanless operation on a MacBook Air which can run all day long (say… 12 hours) on a single charge, while providing comparable processing power to today's MBA, and I guarantee you I will.
Click to expand...

Intel will have the chips for this next year. More to the point though MacPro definitely dos not need to fanless. Is Apple going to have two versions of OS X - one for MBA and one for real computers?
 
Why Is This Reminding Me Of The Apple Of Old?

If Apple really is dumb enough to try and conquer x86 on their own maybe they should consider forming a closer relationship with AMD instead?
 
Purant said:
Please no.

I've been through the PPC to Intel transition. It wasn't pretty.

All software through rosetta was VERY slow and it took a couple of years until all the software I needed had a half-decent universal binary version out.

I don't want to go through that again.
Click to expand...

So am I to understand that you'd rather be using PPC?

I can still remember the angst that the rumours of a switch to intel generated.

It's crazy that there are so many Luddites on a mac technology and rumours forum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back