I’m about to buy a new Mac and really it’s a tough choice; Shall I go with the new & immature, or the seasoned but last of a kind?
Too hard to resist the new one for me, but that’s me; the better choice is probably the “peaked” INTeL version.
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 Filed for 'Apple Rosetta' Trademark in Japan Earlier This Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I’m about to buy a new Mac and really it’s a tough choice; Shall I go with the new & immature, or the seasoned but last of a kind?
Too hard to resist the new one for me, but that’s me; the better choice is probably the “peaked” INTeL version.
Then how do you explain the $329 iPad?
Regardless, most, if not, all margins on all major Apple projects have been averaging above 30% which is pretty fat.
[automerge]1592821885[/automerge]
No I fully understand what cannibalizing means and both Steve Jobs and Tim Cook has mentioned many times in many interviews that they would rather cannibalize themselves. I can probably find you links of them saying that. So far, they've lost the education market to Chromebooks which is a huge market. There are many plays they could make from being the leader in the education market regardless of slightly lower margins.
Tim has positioned themselves as being a service company in the long term so whatever devices they can self-cannibalize now will be better off in the long run. Plus their family of products in the ecosystem becomes very attractive once you try an Apple product.
I simply think your posts are wrong and/or I disagree. Why are you so worried about how your old posts are doing?
Last edited:
I can't say that I have. I can see Microsoft are working on it. I imagine that due to the small number of computers running it, device drivers could be an issue. The world is probably full of x64 device drivers for Windows.
So, this confirms they are really moving to ARM, with Intel becoming just software emulated. I guess people whose work (or part of it) depended on Bootcamp will move. It really looks like Apple is 100% focused in having an iOS-like business only.
AutoCAD is available for macOS... and iPad.
the first gen ipad didn't use an apple designed chip
Have been on Macs forever and these tectonic shifts come with the territory. 680X0 to PPC to Intel had its bumps but Apple used bridging tools like Rosetta to ease the transition, pacing deployment along our normal hardware upgrade cycles. We like Apple for being intuitive, self-contained and innovative so we go along for the ride, expecting them to either make things as painless as possible or respond quickly when there is pain. Frankly I'm looking forward to seeing what they can do now they'll no longer be tethered to Intel. Felt the same frustration with Moto and IBM. If they misfire we'll just complain, an in-the-family activity Apple users love to do.
Integration of OS X to ARM as tight as iOS to ARM won't be a bad thing. I remember the OG shift from PPC to Intel, and wondered why they didn't go with AMD at the time. Then the Core architecture was unveiled, and AMD had no answer.
I was skeptical then, and Apple proved me wrong. I think they'll do the same here.
I was skeptical then, and Apple proved me wrong. I think they'll do the same here.
PPC->Intel make sense since Intel CPU's were much powerful than IBM/Motorola making "rosetta" working like a breeze.
I don't see this coming with ARM. Many people are busing Mac's for Bootcamp only and others (like me) are using Parallels to virtualize Windows which can use only limited resources to gain 1:1 performance anyway. Making the ARM decision Apple may loose lot of users who value virtualization/Windows compatibility. I still hope those CPU's will not be fully ARM but perhaps x64/ARM hybrid which would make more sense anyway
I don't see this coming with ARM. Many people are busing Mac's for Bootcamp only and others (like me) are using Parallels to virtualize Windows which can use only limited resources to gain 1:1 performance anyway. Making the ARM decision Apple may loose lot of users who value virtualization/Windows compatibility. I still hope those CPU's will not be fully ARM but perhaps x64/ARM hybrid which would make more sense anyway
I would imagine that the percentage of people running Windows on Mac devices is a tiny figure that is statistically irrelevant to Apple and further that a large percentage of that small figure will be happy with the emulation.
We have a preview of how the transition will run, thanks to the MS Surface X:
As much as I delight in bashing microsoft, their OS programmers are as good as they come (vs the low status role of OSX engineer at Apple).
Emulated software will run like molasses. Intel chips are behind, but not so far behind that they can be emulated in ARM at a tolerable speed.
Certainly your Steam library will no longer work, if that's something you care about.
Emulated software will run like molasses. Intel chips are behind, but not so far behind that they can be emulated in ARM at a tolerable speed.
Certainly your Steam library will no longer work, if that's something you care about.
Yes, but AutoCAD is a generic CAD tool. Nowadays we are moving from generic CAD to specialized tools, such as BIM tools: Revit is not available on Mac. Nemetschek BIM apps are not available either. ArchiCAD is available (but you are not going to convince users to move from Revit to ArchiCAD if they wish to use Macs). Structural engineering apps are completely missing in Mac. No FEM tools either... the Mac is really lacking in engineering, but quite a few architects and engineers bought MacBook Pros and used Revit, SAP2000 and other engineering software through BootCamp. With the move to ARM, these customers are left out.
[automerge]1592827085[/automerge]
You will be closer to reality if you consider that what Apple cares about is not the number of users in each platform, but achieving the largest possible number of users in an OS highly friendly with subscription-based business models: They consider the Mac as a platform that is not important for long-term success, because the current Apple long-term strategy is based in having control over the user's device (and iOS shines here, contrary to MacOS). In other words, they want to turn the Mac into something that behaves just like a big iPad: don't let the user tweak the OS, don't let the user keep a version for software compatibility, favor subscriptions, etc, etc, etc... It's not a matter of how many users use BootCamp (they are consider not beneficial in the long-term), but on maximizing the number of users whose device can be controlled by Apple.
Last edited:
Actually, around 38%, which is not fat at all. Especially as that's GPM and not NPM, which is around 21%.
Yes it did...
It was an A4, which was also used previously in the iPhone 4. It was designed by Apple and manufactured by Samsung.
The simple answer is Money
.Increased profits for Apple and Apple could release a new single OS that can run on all Apple devices (replacing MacOS and iOS).
The worst one for me is no Civil3D, I use bootcamp mainly for this. At least Matlab works in MacOS though.
I see...(well I don't because I don't really understand)...but anyway: I need to maintain a Snow Leopard 10.6.8 virtual machine for legacy software/files. So, other that maintaining a stock of legacy Intel hardware, is there a solution that might work once Apple move to ARM?
Aswell as Adobe suite, and probably many others will follow if Apple goes full ARM.
I mean it's pretty simple, if you use your Mac for a living don't be an early adopter and stay with Intel for 2-3 more years until everything is polished and developers have moved. If you need Bootcamp, the same: an actual MBP/Mac Pro can last you 5-6 years and by then ytur Windows ARM (not the mixed emulated thing) will be a thing already, if not before. If none of those fit you there's always PC, it's not like users don't have any alternative nowadays.
People here complain like if they are hoping Apple will read them and suddenly change their mind
Are instruction sets like AVX proprietary? If so, will Intel license those to ARM, or will ARM have to invent their own version? I’m speaking of the logic itself, as obviously the transistor layout would be unique (or at least I would expect that).
I’m not convinced that a translation or emulation of instruction sets would be efficient but I guess it’s better than nothing.
AVX-512 has been instrumental in my line of work. I can’t imagine any translation or emulation not taking a ~10x drop in speed. It would be awesome if ARM (or literally any company) started making instructions just as powerful.
I’m not convinced that a translation or emulation of instruction sets would be efficient but I guess it’s better than nothing.
AVX-512 has been instrumental in my line of work. I can’t imagine any translation or emulation not taking a ~10x drop in speed. It would be awesome if ARM (or literally any company) started making instructions just as powerful.
I would imagine trademark extension. One thing I have been wondering about Rosetta, has Microsoft developed its own version to play Xbox 360 games on Xbox One? Or did Apple provide the framework?
I would imagine Apple and Microsoft are still trading technologies at this point, so I knew emulation of Xbox 360 was very possible on Xbox One. Not PS3 for PS4 since Cell isn't the same PowerPC as the Xbox 360. Microsoft has developed Windows for ARM, so... maybe?
I would imagine Apple and Microsoft are still trading technologies at this point, so I knew emulation of Xbox 360 was very possible on Xbox One. Not PS3 for PS4 since Cell isn't the same PowerPC as the Xbox 360. Microsoft has developed Windows for ARM, so... maybe?
Unless someone releases a highly compatible (and performant) x64 emulator for Arm, there's none. So far, this has not happened, and who knows what the future brings. But I would not expect such a solution in the short or even mid term.
I am hoping that Apple at least splits the cost savings with us. They have shown some signs recently of being a bit more aggressive on pricing, so I don’t think that’s an unreasonable hope.