What would be the purpose of an A-series Macbook? I wouldn't have the capabilities of a 12.9" iPad Pro because of no multi-touch or Pencil capabilities and it wouldn't have the performance to run high-end desktop apps like a MBP. If someone is going to buy it just to run Catalyst apps, they may as well just get an iPad Pro.
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 Hires ARM's Lead CPU Architect Amid Rumors of ARM-Based Macs as Early as 2020
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple gimps Windows Bootcamp drivers to force you to use MacOS to keep it alive.
Windows is still an excellent platform for gaming, software development, creative professionals
[doublepost=1561582942][/doublepost]
Agree with points #4 & #5
Intel's 10nm is near TSMC's 7nm. The 7nm+ only increases the gap. The fantasy that Intel 10nm is TSMC 5nm is just bad physics or dream thoughts from others.
"AMD is ahead of Intel now."
Are they further ahead enough for Apple to risk shifting to AMD processors? AMD has a history of taking a quick lead but also quickly losing the lead. That's what happened with Athlon64
Personally, I feel the move to ARM is not beneficial. I use my macOS for work and then switch to Windows (via Boot Camp) to play games due to the x86 CPU. Not sure if games like DOOM 2016, Witcher 3 or many of the leading PC titles would run well on ARM architecture (or if they will be ported by developer for the future).
They could off-load certain tasks, which they're already doing, but it doesn't help that much. The operating system is running either on ARM or on Intel, not both at the same time. The problem is the CPU consumes power even while idling.
I don't think it would be easy to make new apps run on ARM, while old apps run on Intel, and make the switch seemless. You could always do it with a web service, using a bus or network channel to communicate between the different CPUs. But fluently running legacy apps? No. You cannot run a legacy x64 app on an Intel CPU if the operating system is running on ARM.
With careful design, I could develop a system where some components are running on x64, others on ARM. It wouldn't consume less power, it would consume more. And such a design has a tremendous overhead, both in development effort and at runtime. The two CPUs would have to constantly listen, communicate in an intermediate protocol, instead of just in-memory. Even if they shared the same RAM, they have different endians, so any number larger than 255 cannot be represented in the memory in a compatible way. One CPU would have to reverse the bytes before it could use the data. Operating system calls from Intel to ARM would have to be emulated or translated on-the-fly.
I would love to see his contract with apple. Xxx stock after X years? How many millions a year is he gonna make? Great to be such a top leader.
I know the teams. These guys aren't designing anything at the top. The teams are doing so and his ``expertise'' in AMD is not good.
None of these are for more than specialty systems like Billboards, Auto subsystems, etc. He'll add to the T2 team and where he can possibly extend the A-series or the W-series for iOS/WatchOS/tvOS/iPadOS will be the focus.
The Intel years were on an HPC product that went nowhere.
Athlon and Opteron chipsets were Keller's domain, just like the original A4 was, just like the original Zen was.
Apple has ZERO interest in needing to extend billions in Chip design for the Macbook Pro/Macbook Air/Mac Mini/iMac/iMac Pro/Mac Pro [roflmao] for the workhorse focus.
Apple already has Afterburner that is a beast for RAW video on the fly. They'll extend that to 16k triple stream support at 60fps and beyond, over time.
Yes, it would cost Apple billions to completely break the A-Series and architect it for Workstations.
There is a reason HPC systems have ARM in them for specialty data centers--they are there to offload the heavy compute to massive arrays of GPGPUs.
Apple pays no royalties for AMD and the all Zen processors which starting with 7nm+ Spring 2020 will see Zen2+ and it's Ryzen 4k going from 8-24 or 32 cores, and APUs from 4-16 cores with the successor to NAVI embedded SoC. The Threadripper going to 64 cores and the EPYC to 128 cores.
The new APUs from AMD have the same power curve as Intel mobile has, but far more capable GPGPUs on them.
Thunderbolt 3 is royalty free, or did you not notice the AMD Vega VII Duos on the Mac Pro with 4 Thunderbolt 3 ports on a custom designed board developed by Apple with AMD was a clue they are no longer co-dependent upon Intel?
Apple just bought an AI autonomous fleet company.
Mike will oversee all that and the mobile space. He can modernize the IP from this acquisition and extend Apple's future Automobile offerings.
Apple was in a huge decline with PowerPC. Microsoft saved them in 1997. Three years after the PowerMac was introduced. A simplified product line, lower prices Steve Jobs, a clear OS vision and shiny colored plastic turned them around. Both with consumers and investors.
Apple made their name with the Apple II and then the Mac. PowerPC was just what they were using during their rebirth. It slowed sales as x86 blew past them. Steve Jobs may have had an easier time turning things around if they had originally switched to x86 rather than PowerPC.
A-Series chips are Apple’s ARM chips. The point is that all future Mac and iOS app development would occur for the same architecture and Apple would have full control of their Mac update timeline rather than having to wait on Intel. A-Series Macs would still run macOS, not iOS.
If they haven't already resolved the problem, I'll bet his first task is to help "fix" the existing "fancy" Performance Controller design !
Off the Radar of most, but should NOT be !
Off the Radar of most, but should NOT be !
Windows 10 runs on PCs powered by ARM processors.
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/arm/
But I guess that means rewriting software for it, but at least Windows 10 runs on ARM.
And lost it WHILST being on PowerPC.
But I'm sure the G6 will be a beast when it comes out.
I find it weird (to be polite) that there are people out there who are in favor of a move away from Intel (and I assume AMD) CPUs, based on Geekbench scores.
Let's face it, all you need to know about performance of a CPU is how it deals with a short benchmark.
Might as well rely on Ghz numbers. (sarcasm)
As for thermal issues with some Intel CPUs on Apple computers, perhaps just perhaps it has also something to do with the taboo of Apple and the fear of having something which isn't as thin as possible.
Meh.
I was hoping on buying a new Mac some time later this year, but if they actually plan on abandoning the architecture, might as well just at best wait or perhaps consider abandoning macOS.
I don't know. They can't be that stupid, can they?
Let's face it, all you need to know about performance of a CPU is how it deals with a short benchmark.
Might as well rely on Ghz numbers. (sarcasm)
As for thermal issues with some Intel CPUs on Apple computers, perhaps just perhaps it has also something to do with the taboo of Apple and the fear of having something which isn't as thin as possible.
Meh.
I was hoping on buying a new Mac some time later this year, but if they actually plan on abandoning the architecture, might as well just at best wait or perhaps consider abandoning macOS.
I don't know. They can't be that stupid, can they?
Sophie Wilson offers strong evidence that just adding more and more cores will not be worthwhile in this (slightly outdated) YouTube video.
Maybe, maybe not. Until they had to play the "Megahertz Myth" card with the G4 they were clearly superior.
It was/is a bad idea nonetheless. If you have a USP, the OS, it's just stupid to take bets that could cost you everything instead of just playing it save as far as the hardware is concerned.
There will be two lines of Macs: one line is ARM-based for the prosumer and the other one is Intel-based for the professionals. The x86_64 Intel-based Macs will start at $3,000 and will be geared to the real pros. The ARM-based Macs will be for the prosumers and students and will cost between $1,000 and $3,000 depending on the specs. They will be able to leverage the hundreds of thousands of apps made for the iOS that can easily be ported to macOS with the help of the Catalyst framework (formerly known as Project Marzipan).
I'd really love to know what percentage of Mac users run Windows or Linux, either through Bootcamp or using a virtual machine, and what percentage would be lost as customers if that wasn't possible.
[doublepost=1561587550][/doublepost]
Just saying: Porting iOS apps does absolutely NOT require an ARM processor. On the other hand, many macOS apps would just need recompiling to run on an ARM Mac.
Well, at the very least, we should all take everything said with a grain of salt.
From Cult Of Mac in 2011 on why ARM will never be in a Mac
David Kanter, principal analyst and Editor-In-Chief at Real World Technologies
“Apple won’t use ARM in the MacBook Air or any other Mac laptops anytime soon, because by the time you’re done making compromises, you’d end up with an iPad,” says Kanter.
.....
“By 2014, Intel will have gotten their power management ahead of everyone else and be using their manufacturing muscle as a major advantage in the mobile landscape,” predicts Kanter.
......
And when that happens, most of ARM’s advantages over Intel will go away,
.....
More importantly, Intel has the resources and expertise not just to catch up, but to blow the competition out of the water in the next few years.
....
If Intel plays its cards right, come 2015, we could all be talking very seriously indeed about whether or not Apple will be putting Intel’s new mobile chips in the iPhone 8 and iPad 6.
From Cult Of Mac in 2011 on why ARM will never be in a Mac
David Kanter, principal analyst and Editor-In-Chief at Real World Technologies
“Apple won’t use ARM in the MacBook Air or any other Mac laptops anytime soon, because by the time you’re done making compromises, you’d end up with an iPad,” says Kanter.
.....
“By 2014, Intel will have gotten their power management ahead of everyone else and be using their manufacturing muscle as a major advantage in the mobile landscape,” predicts Kanter.
......
And when that happens, most of ARM’s advantages over Intel will go away,
.....
More importantly, Intel has the resources and expertise not just to catch up, but to blow the competition out of the water in the next few years.
....
If Intel plays its cards right, come 2015, we could all be talking very seriously indeed about whether or not Apple will be putting Intel’s new mobile chips in the iPhone 8 and iPad 6.
This is exciting to me because it’s reminiscent of the way Commodore would design and fab their own chips with MOS. Just for the nostalgia. Humor me, a broken old relic.
Lack if Intel x86 microprocessors in Mac is a deal breaker for us. We love the Mac and hate Windows interface. But much more important than that is our workflow. And for that we need full Intel x86 compatibility.
For instance, when we use Microsoft Office for Mac (including track changes in documentes when collaborating for manuscripts, PhD dissertations, PowerPoint presentations with animations, video, special protein fonts, transitions, etc), Clarivate Analytics EndNote for bibliographic management or other applications like DNAStar Lasergene or Molecular Biology Insights Oligo, among many others.
I am not talking here only about Boot Camp or VMware Fusion to run Windows (which is also a must for us to electronically sign some documents for research project grant application, etc), but mainly for working on Mac with Mac native applications that are fully native with 90% of the world that use Windows in x86. We also need the power of Mac desktops, including Mac Pro on x86 for bioinformatics. If Apple switches Mac to ARM, we will be forced to switch to PC with Windows. A shame for all!
For instance, when we use Microsoft Office for Mac (including track changes in documentes when collaborating for manuscripts, PhD dissertations, PowerPoint presentations with animations, video, special protein fonts, transitions, etc), Clarivate Analytics EndNote for bibliographic management or other applications like DNAStar Lasergene or Molecular Biology Insights Oligo, among many others.
I am not talking here only about Boot Camp or VMware Fusion to run Windows (which is also a must for us to electronically sign some documents for research project grant application, etc), but mainly for working on Mac with Mac native applications that are fully native with 90% of the world that use Windows in x86. We also need the power of Mac desktops, including Mac Pro on x86 for bioinformatics. If Apple switches Mac to ARM, we will be forced to switch to PC with Windows. A shame for all!
Windows 10 on arm will run, iirc, “win32” applications without recompiling. Applications that are not win32 compatible will require a rewrite and recompile.