Well, appleOS can be modular — scaleable, like I said earlier. The Watch component of the OS will only load Watch-related assets, runtimes, etc., and the Mac portion will contain all Mac-related runtimes, etc. This is already possible, as iOS/iPadOS/watchOS are all variants of the macOS code. They all run the same kernel, it'd be a naming simplification and perhaps easing up code-sharing and asset-sharing.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Expected to Announce Arm-Based Mac Plans at WWDC, Transition Away From Intel to Begin in 2021
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Of course. It hasn’t been released yet. Then you’ll see it.
Intel hasn’t substantially increased performance in years. Mac on a 5nm TSMC ARM will blow away Intel on a 14nm++++ (or even 10nm) node. And that’s not even taking into account that Apple’s cpu designers blow away Intel’s.
Apple will sleep easy. As corporations do when they take your money.
Steve Jobs buried Mac OS 9. PPC was also buried. Intel? They're up next. And Apple won't bat an eyelid.
1 billion iOS devices say so. This has been a long time coming. INtel chips are on fire. And the G5 was spared no mercy for not fitting inside a laptop.
Performance for watt is coming for you, Intel. Your hubris has failed Apple for the last time...
Ergo: Those who bought the Mac Pro 'last hurrah' Intel...
Those 'pro' customers keep saying...they've got the money to buy kit like that and replace kit like that 'easily' with their 'pro' work.
It's the Quad Core P.P.C G5 all over again, with knobs on.
Azrael.
LOL. You think Apple is going to be using some off-the-shelf ARM?
People thought it was impossible when Apple came out with 64-bit ARM for iphone that was 50% faster than any competition, too.
Look where the puck is going, not where it’s been.
[automerge]1591714742[/automerge]
If they lose every MP purchaser as a customer, that’s not a lot of lost customers.
Curious how this will impact the lifespan of Intel Macs from this year.
I've been waiting until WWDC to upgrade my 2015 rMBP, to see what happens with this potential announcement, iMacs, and the rumored but essentially confirmed Apple Card financing. I've been back and forth on the $1999 13" MBP, or going back to an iMac/Air combo with whatever new iMac meets or beats the current $1299 model at the same or lower price point and the base i3 Air.
But (barring any catastrophic issues, of course) an MBP would be a 5+ year machine for me again easily. iMac would ideally be 7-10, with the Air good for at least 5 as basically a couch, coffee shop, and travel machine (iPad doesn't always get the job done for my on-the-go needs). I don't necessarily care about waiting until my next round of upgrades for ARM, but wonder if even expecting 5 years on an MBP would be unreasonable, let alone 7+ on an iMac.
Looks like I may be waiting it out another year.
I've been waiting until WWDC to upgrade my 2015 rMBP, to see what happens with this potential announcement, iMacs, and the rumored but essentially confirmed Apple Card financing. I've been back and forth on the $1999 13" MBP, or going back to an iMac/Air combo with whatever new iMac meets or beats the current $1299 model at the same or lower price point and the base i3 Air.
But (barring any catastrophic issues, of course) an MBP would be a 5+ year machine for me again easily. iMac would ideally be 7-10, with the Air good for at least 5 as basically a couch, coffee shop, and travel machine (iPad doesn't always get the job done for my on-the-go needs). I don't necessarily care about waiting until my next round of upgrades for ARM, but wonder if even expecting 5 years on an MBP would be unreasonable, let alone 7+ on an iMac.
Looks like I may be waiting it out another year.
ARM advantages will likely be short term. Intel has hit a roadblock and TSMC will soon follow. There's a limit to how far a CPU can be miniaturized
This is already the case. All of Apple's operating systems run Darwin under the hood, and things like iOS and watchOS and tvOS have been this way since day one (macOS has been this way since OS X but prior to that it was a different situation).
Darwin (operating system) - Wikipedia
And they've been released on schedule with each other for years now.
And the concept of Universal Purchases basically means all the App Stores are the same now - you can buy an app and get the iOS, tvOS, watchOS and macOS versions all at the same time.
So... done and done. This is why a lot of people aren't even going to notice this change.
Two points, I want to raise,
First, is the appearance/customer support. How would you feel, if you spent 40,000 dollars a computer from Apple in the beginning of June, to only have Apple announce that they're dropping Intel and shifting to a brand new platform? While its reasonable to expect continued support, its clear that someone who spends just as much money on a single computer as a car, would be very disappointed. Just look at the uproar that occurred a few years ago, when Apple rolled out a new iPad in the Fall, after announcing an iPad in the spring. A device that only cost a few hundred, now we're talking several thousand.
Second point, is that we have to sit and wait to see how the performance will be in a real world situation. I don't believe Apple would shift to a new platform that markedly slower, but its way too early to say that the ARM will beat Intel hands down, or even vice versa.
I don't need bootcamp to be compatible with INtel. I'll just buy a PC tower.
I can enjoy Mac ARM for it's own unique qualities.
I'm going dual platform. I can enjoy both. Work wise.
Azrael.
Feels premature. Catalina quality was bad. They don't need to release a new laptop with all kinds of problems right this second.
You raise a good point, its very likely that Intel has hit rock bottom, and they're already on the path to significant performance gains - time will tell for sure but I believe the early misteps will be fixed soon.
Another question can Apple's ARM compete with what AMD is presenting
True, but most people avoid spending money on two computers when they don't have too, and in all likelihood will decide on Apple OR PC. I think you're in the minority where you want two platforms, which is fine, its just not something that we'll see with most consumers or even tech enthusiasts imo
Pour one out for AltiVec and the old Maikido blog. I got into Macs as the "alternative" to the Pentium-dominated world way back in the G3 era. When the future looked like Steve and Co. were aiming for RISC chips over the Pentium CISC design philosophy.
It seemed like they were going that very way when they bought NeXT. The WSJ pointed out, enthusiastically, that Apple was likely aiming to have a small, stable kernel that would lead to a future of devices over full computers. And this was a prediction before the iPod had come out.
Sadly, it all seemed to stall at the G5 era. They were never able to really build small Macs with performance beyond G4's AltiVec co-processing, IIRC.
I remember not thinking much of where Windows was until I saw the first Core chips which were putting multiple processors on the die. That's when I said, "oh, man, I can't buy a Mac until they can do this." And voila!
The ARM chips are incredibly impressive with what they can do in the iPad Pros. I suspect any ARM devices will give Apple users performance which they expect to have with few downsides and no discounts.
It seemed like they were going that very way when they bought NeXT. The WSJ pointed out, enthusiastically, that Apple was likely aiming to have a small, stable kernel that would lead to a future of devices over full computers. And this was a prediction before the iPod had come out.
Sadly, it all seemed to stall at the G5 era. They were never able to really build small Macs with performance beyond G4's AltiVec co-processing, IIRC.
I remember not thinking much of where Windows was until I saw the first Core chips which were putting multiple processors on the die. That's when I said, "oh, man, I can't buy a Mac until they can do this." And voila!
The ARM chips are incredibly impressive with what they can do in the iPad Pros. I suspect any ARM devices will give Apple users performance which they expect to have with few downsides and no discounts.
Intel hit the roadblock in around 2015.
And what’s the limit to how far a CPU can be miniaturized? When I started designing CPUs in 1992 they told me “in the next couple years.” Any day now, right?
And assuming we hit that limit, aren’t you better off with (1) better designers and (2) a better architecture with less cruft? If so, ARM will beat Intel even after we hit that limit.
I hear what you're saying maflynn.
But we have to look at Apple's track record on transitions. It's timely. And at times. Brutal. They give you 'a bit of time.'
OS9. That got put in a funeral casket. :O
PPC. Our beloved Mac chip? Left behind.
Ports on the Macbook? Buried legacy. No remorse.
Affordable Mac tower? Dead. And buried. 6k.
Apple will sell you a bendy iPad and leave you to chase the problem after.
But it's like pass the parcel. Sometimes the music stop and you're left holding an a PPC Adobe suite for £1k that you just bought. And you're only option is buying legacy hardware.
40k. That's gotta hurt...
But the new Apple didn't mind running the sword through their gpu supplier on iPhone and iPad to get TeH moAR profits. I highly doubt they'll pass the savings onto us.
The ARM chip is already breathing down Intel's neck. And the proof is in the pudding. No doubt. But I'd expect Apple won't release any Mac ARM chip unless it can humliate Intel.
My mouth is watering at the prospect. 12 core Mac ARM chip? Somebody is in for a hell of beatin'.
40k? Device? People running Apple are millionaires. They're now about making billions. They don't mind selling you out of date iMacs. £1k pound iPhones. Or two year old iPads with 'z's in them. And they'll give the Mac Pro buyers a respectful 1 year -ish before the Mac Pro goes ARM. And the legacy INtel code will survive several years.
Mac Pro on Intel customers could have seen this coming. The Mac ARM chip has been swirling for years.
And if the Mac ARM chip performs rubbish...they've got nothing to worry about, right? And anyone who can burn 40k on a Mac Pro can afford another with pro work if a Mac ARM chip burns it.
Azrael.
I mean I can't be wrong. I'm merely speculating on a rumours site.
And Timmy and Craigy-boy don't love the Mac. Every MacBook released since 2015 has been significantly flawed and badly engineered/designed. It's all about aesthetics to them, not what people actually want & need. Look at how Apple has neglected the "Pro" market for years. The Trash Can Mac was a joke. The current Mac Pro was teased for nearly two years & when it does arrive it's a piece of massively overpriced junk as well. It's out of range for most people.
They love the Mac and their Pro community so much they designed a $999 monitor stand and a set of $700 WHEELS that you have to pay extra for. We all laugh and joke AT Apple over these things, but it's taking the P quite frankly.
They have a chance to start afresh with the ARM based hardware and I'm hoping they take it. If it's just another premium priced range running a very stale looking macOS then it'd be disappointing. If on the other hand they take everything they've learned from the Mac & iPad and release something that runs a roided up version of iPadOS then it'd be interesting. I'd even pay a significant premium to own something like that.
What would be the point of designing their own CPU's to just shove them inside the same tired MacBooks? Why not go further than that? It's not like Apple are lacking the resources to do it.
I feel like the gigahertz wars are essentially dead. If you go to a retailer the vast majority of computers don’t even list the clock speed anymore.
So you are speculating about what ARM can do, telling those of us with qualifications that we are wrong, and you have no basis to do so.me? reporting off topic posts
ARM can do anything x86-64 can do.
No, but they do see the Intel generation and chip family. So how would they compare, for example, an intel i5 gen 10 to whatever they call the ARM one? It just muddies the water for comparisons unless you give people some solid and repeatable expectations. And then it becomes a marketing game to educate the public.
Because it’s impossible to compare anymore. 4 cores at x vs 8 cores at y vs 4 cores plus multi threading at z, etc.
Even back in the old days it was silly to compare AMD to intel clock speeds.
And certainly makes no sense for ARM vs x86.
Moreover, CPU designers were aware since the 90’s that increasing clock speed is probably the WORST way to increase performance, because power = cv^2 times frequency. In the old days the problem was dissipating the heat. Then came server farms where if you exceeded the power budget for the facility you needed to rebuild the entire infrastructure. Then came mobile and cemented it.
Yeah this unlikely. Transition from x86 to ARM will break a lot of software. Nobody has time for that.
Now if they put both into the same computer, so there is a low power mode, I will buy it; otherwise no more Macs for me.
Now if they put both into the same computer, so there is a low power mode, I will buy it; otherwise no more Macs for me.
Most companies don’t do the productions Apple does. They do announcements sure but not a stage show like steve did. Tim is doing that as it’s per of apples culture but it’s no surprise he can’t
So they should just not release products if they ever plan to make any changes then?
[automerge]1591716050[/automerge]
Things are differnet. Apple didn’t design the PPC chips and they had relatively smaller firms working on that. Now Apple is one of the largest companies in the world and their chip fab partner is the most advanced in the world.
The only inherent advantage Intel chips will have over ARM chips is running Intel code in VMs (whether that's Linux or Windows or whatever). For everything else, ARM is going to be a big win. Most everything else should recompile fairly easily for the ARM chips - Apple's been working on all the pieces of this puzzle for quite a while. I could see more point to an Intel co-processor in a high-end ARM-based Mac.
Given that the MP is by definition modular, what’s to stop them from offering a board that lets it run ARM MacOS?
[automerge]1591716148[/automerge]
Yes, not buying an ARM Mac is indeed a bad move.
[automerge]1591716201[/automerge]
IBM was a “relatively smaller firm?”
I think we’re hitting a point where the average user has more power than they know what to do with anyway. Sure the power users and professionals have plenty of cause for top of the line performance but most people buying a laptop or home computer aren’t going to have any problems doing anything they can think of with a middle of the pack machine.