Apple Plans to Ditch Intel and Use Custom Mac Chips Starting in 2020

[Heineken]

There is always some overlap in things people use, you will never find a solution for everything in between. A line has to be drawn somewhere and that's what Apple is doing.

 

[RedWing512]

Those are annoyances to you but not the average customer. There is this myth that Apple only should cater to the “pro” market which is tiny compared to the average consumer.

I hope they wind down the focus on pro devices also.

Let's not forget, though, that the "pros" are what helped keep Apple afloat in the early-to-mid nineties when things were looking bleak. They're the group that has invested a lot in Apple over the years--piss them off and Apple may come to regret it.

 

[EdT]

There are plenty of games that run on OS X.

P.S. Games is the worst rationalisation you can come up with.

Few of them, if any, run at a FPS as high as a middle of the road Windows machine. If you’re into PC games then Mac is already a very poor hardware choice performance wise and something like this will just emphasize that deficiency. Games probably only account for a small percentage of users on any system but they spend more money.

 

[TsMkLg068426]

When the stock not doing so well why not develop your own parts.

 

[Cloudkicker]

What's windows?

Oh, that's cute. /s

That's the platform that has over 90% of users... worldwide. Mac, meanwhile, still languishes in single digit penetration after 3 decades.

 

[tkatz]

"Dear Adobe, please recompile for a new architecture. Hundreds of millions of lines of code. Within a year because you'll want to start debugging".

Love,
The Accountants at Apple

PS The reason is that we noticed that we can get 5% better margins and REALLY lock our users down. Finally!

And knowing Adobe, they'll wait until the new hardware is released, discover none of their software runs on it and issue blogs telling you not to upgrade to the new hardware yet. A year or so later they'll finally release the first version of their applications that sort of support the new hardware, albeit with lots of restrictions.

After all, why should anything with them change.

 

[Regime2008]

Few of them, if any, run at a FPS as high as a middle of the road Windows machine. If you’re into PC games then Mac is already a very poor hardware choice performance wise and something like this will just emphasize that deficiency. Games probably only account for a small percentage of users on any system but they spend more money.

Games are a JOKE on Mac OS. They can run older games, sure. But not many graphical or physics rich games compared to PC. Their hardware is laughable as well to any modern gamers.

 

[rudigern]

I guess I should start making plans for my exit from the Apple ecosystem.

While I've been able to tolerate the closed nature of the iPhone and iPad, since I treat them mostly as appliances, I would not be able to tolerate the same thing on the Mac.

Using Intel CPUs maintains compatibility with the rest of the industry. I can run virtual machines on my Mac running Linux, Windows, or pretty much any x86-based OS. This is crucial to my usage of the platform.

It's unfortunate if this is true and I really hope it isn't.

While very true, and their experience is with ARM, there is nothing to say they won't make x86 processors. Keep compatibility, control releases more and would probably mean lower cost to Apple (not necessarily consumers). There has been a few times where Intel's delay has caused issues with new Macs and the recent security issues might be the nail in the coffin.

 

[clangers23]

Ultimately more competition for Intel should be a good thing in theory, it just depends what kind of devices Apple are planning around a new CPU architecture? I fear they'll be more mobile than desktop and usher in a generation of lightweight Apple Chromebooks which fits in with their mobile first direction. On the other hand an 8 core A13 powered Macbook Pro? There's little doubt that there has been a certain frustration with Intel across many PC manufacturers for several years. Many have breathed a sigh of relief that AMD with Ryzen and Threadripper have at least thrown Intel off guard over the last 12 months.

Who knows, would Apple sell these processors to other computer manufacturer's and rival Intel completely?

 

[Heineken]

Few of them, if any, run at a FPS as high as a middle of the road Windows machine. If you’re into PC games then Mac is already a very poor hardware choice performance wise and something like this will just emphasize that deficiency. Games probably only account for a small percentage of users on any system but they spend more money.

That is my point. If you have a Mac games are the last thing you will do on it.

 

[sublunar]

And I thought they moved from their own chips to Intel because intel
Could offer better R+D with chip design and open as Apple chooses to more software development. It's like one big roundabout.

That was then, this is now. With Apple having much deeper pockets and able to fund this sort of CPU development themselves it does make sense to try and bring the in-house cost of CPUs down and make cheaper Macs - or at least Macs that could in theory go all SSD for pure performance. Intel profit hugely from their business with Apple, not least through the halo effect of having Apple on board.

Yes there will be apps that need rewriting but I can't see transition being as quick as it was from PPC to Intel but this leak effectively has given developers like Adobe upwards to 2-3 years to have a think about their codebase.

Could Apple even surprise early on by switching the MacBook or even the Mac Mini early on and use Gatekeeper to ensure that Apps for the next two years come exclusively from the Mac App Store?

 

[Number 41]

I'm glad this news leaked -- because I was planning on buying a new Macbook Pro soon. I'd have been furious to buy one right now only to find out they were transitioning away from the entire architecture in the next 2-3 years.

 

[JoEw]

Good. It doesn't make sense for IOS devices to have far superior benchmarks to $1000+ Macs.
I'd assume Apple will support emulation of x86 in some form for awhile but it's time to move on from this bloated legacy architecture, excited to see what Apple's chip team can do a form factor as big as a Mac. Imagine the battery and benchmarks...

 

[dvasa]

Not happy about this at all..
Shift from PPC was painful and a lot of software never made it. Will be the same this time.
Audio software and dependencies (plugins) will suffer.
Apple maintains compatability for 5 years max, anything beyond that is luck..

You’ll likely be able to run Windows Arm but see the limitations as a glimpse of what were about to endure..
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/arst...-confirmed-no-virtualization-no-opengl/?amp=1

Linux arm would run then too.. But how supported are these architecture today?

 

[bladerunner2000]

There are plenty of games that run on OS X.

LOL, most of them suck. And most AAA titles are not available on mac anyway; Battlefield being one of them. Even if they do make it to Mac OS, the port is terrible and the game runs like balls with terrible frame rates... and the performance is even WORSE if you're unfortunate enough to have bought a Mac computer since the dedicated GPUs are gimped garbage.

As much as Apple say they care about consumers, THEY DON'T. If they did, they wouldn't sell you an overpriced computer with shoddy components for gaming. The gaming industry is bigger than hollywood.. yet for some reason Apple ignores this fact.... although you do too.

 

[DaveP]

Let's not forget, though, that the "pros" are what helped keep Apple afloat in the early-to-mid nineties when things were looking bleak. They're the group that has invested a lot in Apple over the years--piss them off and Apple may come to regret it.

Apple is not going to make strategic decisions based on not hurting the feelings of a tiny number of folks who were dedicated users 25 years ago. Personally I'd prefer it if they did, but it just doesn't make sense.

 

[techwhiz]

I didn’t say RISC V was going to replace x86 tomorrow, but this is looking out 2-3 years from now. It’s early days but the industry doesn’t want to have lug around 40 years of baggage. As a security guy, its demise is already long overdue.

As for needing a fab, well, I hardly think it is beyond the wit of the worlds biggest and richest company to secure a decent arrangement. But I’m not sure it’s essential. Look at what Apple have done on mobile. Look at what nVidia have achieved (yes GPU’s not CPU’s but the premise still stands).

Just my 2 cents.

RISC V isn't going to replace Intel, ever.
It might replace ARM and other embedded processors but RISC V isn't an architecture that you are going to have someone start building laptop and desktop processors to compete with Intel. RISC V is an ARM license competitor at best.

For mobile, the playing field is pretty level.
Nobody has a real process advantage.

nVidia has driven performance but they, like AMD have wafer agreements.
AMD exists to keep Intel out of trouble. Granted AMD has now started releasing good chips again; but make no mistake, they exist to keep Intel out of anti-Trust court. intel could have crushed them a while ago. It's ill advised.
Intel is now packaging AMD GPUs (ATI) with Intel chips in the same package.
https://www.pcworld.com/article/323...md-ship-a-core-chip-with-radeon-graphics.html

Apple tried to compete with Intel. They had AIM; Apple, IBM, Motorola. They co-developed PPC processors.
Apple pulled out of AIM and dumped PPC to go to intel.
Intel and Apple are strategic partners. Apple gets Intel silicon before anyone else.
So Apple has been down this road and it didn't work.

There is absolutely no logic behind Apple spending billions of dollars to make a desktop class processor.
An embedded mobile processor is one thing. A desktop processor to compete with Intel is another ball of wax.

I've been doing silicon for about 30 years and the analyst don't understand much of anything silicon related.

 

[Regime2008]

Good. It doesn't make sense for IOS devices to have far superior benchmarks to $1000+ Macs.
I'd assume Apple will support emulation of x86 in some form for awhile but it's time to move on from this bloated legacy architecture, excited to see what Apple's chip team can do a form factor as big as a Mac. I think we will see battery life and specs that are as far ahead as Apple is in mobile at the moment.

Do you really think an A-series processor could really beat a desktop grade processor? I really hope that people don't truly believe this mess after seeing a geekbench result...

 

[bkaus]

Well, so it's beginning. I wonder how many people will choose to move on from Apple due to lack of X86 support. I for one will not be buying a Mac that I cannot run windows on

Sadly, I’d have to move back to Windows if it were not possible to run window programs in a Mac anymore.

 

[gkarris]

Try it out streaming, and then try the real thing. Night and day differences. Nvidia has gotten really good at prediction while streaming, but this will NOT replace the real deal. There is still too much latency for this to become something viable and mainstream. Not to mention the amount of bandwidth it uses.

I understand that.

But people that want to "game on their Mac" will have to settle for streaming because no way is any AAA or many Indie Titles will be written for Mac iOS (Macs with Axx processors).

The best Mac users can hope for is that iOS games will have Mac Compatibility (use of keyboard/mouse instead of a touchscreen).

 

[forerunnerg34]

so Mac will last the same as an iPhone, and Apple can slow it down with new versions of macOS.

 

[jasnw]

If this project ends up with a walled-garden desktop that won't allow me to install and use software from MacPorts that's the end of my Apple experiment. Of course, I'm probably exactly the sort of customer Apple would rather be rid of: buys computers to use as computers rather than content platforms, no iPad (all died), and recently switched from iPhone 5 (dying on me) to iPhone SE.

 

[clangers23]

Good. It doesn't make sense for IOS devices to have far superior benchmarks to $1000+ Macs.
I'd assume Apple will support emulation of x86 in some form for awhile but it's time to move on from this bloated legacy architecture, excited to see what Apple's chip team can do a form factor as big as a Mac. Imagine the battery and benchmarks...

Apple aren't defying the laws of physics with their CPU's. They are well designed for their specific purpose but they aren't close to a desktop CPU. Coffee Lake and Ryzen wipe the floor with them. I'm hoping Apple are going for their own range of fully scaled CPU's but if it's ARM based I'd be concerned.

 

[garirry]

Seems to me that Apple clearly sees Macs as consumer toys like iOS devices. I don't necessarily mind an ARM processor on a laptop, if everything is perfected, but the circumstances show me that these Macs could become locked in the same way that iOS devices are; no downgrading, SHSH and APTickets, strict boot policies, and most likely an even further locked macOS.

If they upgrade their professional Macs to ARM, they're shooting themselves in the foot. I keep debating whether to invest in a new Mac down the line but the clear answer to me if their new Mac Mini (assuming it ever gets made) or Mac Pro will have an ARM processor, I just can't justify it. Even without the locked down features of iOS it means I have to resort for emulation of x86 apps and Windows. I cringe at just the thought of it.

 

[AngerDanger]

Dude, you dropped a pencil! You just spilled the beans on the Apple Pencil 4 in development!! Now we all know it's being concealed inside a hollowed-out Dixon Ticonderoga #2 pencil...

Holy ****!!!1!! It's not even hollowed; it's like a weird decal you can pop off!1!!!!1234567