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 Plans to Ditch Intel and Use Custom Mac Chips Starting in 2020
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Exaaactly. Apple is shipping 2015 processors in new computers. They are not exactly held hostage by Intel.
I get why some don't. many don't understand what the real differences are between CPU instructions and the difference in what computers vs handhelds ultimately do.
they think "my iphone feels super snappy, so put that in a desktop should be super snappy too!"
it's a bit of ignorance. sometimes blind faith. sometimes FUD. the hard part is recognising who cares to listen and whose just going to shove their fingers in their ears and believe they're automagically correct because they're them
If you have been in the ecosystem for a while, and have kept your eyes open, then there should be no doubt that is going to close ranks. No more intel, no MS office, no adobe, no "much of anything else".
You will have to by EVERYTHING from or else go to another platform.
At my age, I may have to jump back to Windows just like I jumped from Windows to
You will have to by EVERYTHING from or else go to another platform.
At my age, I may have to jump back to Windows just like I jumped from Windows to
Which highest end Intel CPUs would you put into Apple laptops and iMac Pros, what frequency would you clock them at, and how much fan airflow (pick a specific number) would you incorporate to handle the thermals. And/or, how much larger would you be willing to make laptops/desktops to handle the above?
It's not profit margins holding Apple back.
Hate to burst your Hatorade-bubble; but Rosetta was included in just ONE version of OS X: Snow Leopard (10.6). It was GONE in Lion (10.7) and thereafter.
High Sierra still has full 32-bit Support; but Apple has warned that it is the last macOS version that will support 32 bit Applications "without restrictions".
As far as ARM emulation of x86 goes, MS is already apparently doing that for 32 bit; and the way that ARM architecture works, 64 bit should be just as fast, once someone figures out how to do the JustInTime Compilier stuff.
Correct.
Apple is a vertically-integrated marketing company.
If you ask for something they don't make, they will tell you that you don't need it.
Just like apps on the iPhone -- not needed said Apple. And that worked out great.
Oh no wait Android ate their lunch and they are now an also-ran in a segment that they invented. Yikes!
Fortunately, with an Architecture-Level License from ARM, Apple can (and does) EXACTLY that!That was AFTER my timeThe difference there is volumes, and the fact that those are just SoC variations. They didn’t have to design new cores, which is undoubtedly what Apple would demand.
Thank you.
I never really understood the argument that Apple is always stuck "waiting" for Intel.
If they were... then that would mean all other OEMs would also be waiting since everyone uses Intel.
Are Dell or HP unable to update their computers because they didn't have the latest Intel processor?
I've never heard that.
In what way?
Certainly not Performance.
Certainly not in Face-Detection.
So in what conceivable way?
I think it also solidifies Apple as a more gadget oriented company than high end company. I think they know that most people who are using a MacBook Pro are not doing 4k renders of proteins folding or high end vfx, they are writing, writing emails, blogging and watching Netflix. My MacBook could definitely have an Arm chip in it and I wouldn't know the difference in speed, but I would if I was using a MacPro or iMac Pro. I assume they are going to do a hybrid OS, MacOiOS.
This is definite the end of the high end Mac Pro though. Not sure why someone would go an buy an iMacPro or new modular MacPro when you know they will kill all of those lines in 2020. Apple definitely telling us to forget about the high end for good.
Just like all modern pseudo-x86 Microprocessors do right now: Emulation.
There isn't ONE "classic" x86 CPU left on the planet. They are ALL crazy designs that can ACT like an x86.
Apple is planning to transition from Intel chips to its own custom made Mac chips as early as 2020, reports Bloomberg.
Apple's initiative, reportedly code named "Kalamata," is part of an effort to make Macs, iPhones, and iPads work "more similarly and seamlessly together" according to unspecified sources that spoke to Bloomberg. Apple already designs its own A-series chips found in iPhones and iPads.
The Mac chip plans are said to be in the early stages of development and the transition from Intel chips to Apple chips could involve multiple steps, starting with the "Marzipan" initiative coming in iOS 12 and macOS 10.14 to allow developers to create a single app able to run on both iOS and macOS.
With its own chips, Apple would not be forced to wait on new Intel chips before being able to release updated Macs, and the company could integrate new features on a faster schedule.Apple has already begun using custom designed T1 and T2 chips in its MacBook Pro and iMac Pro machines, and the company is said to be planning to integrate additional custom co-processors in Macs coming later this year. The custom chips will also be used in the upcoming Mac Pro, which is in development.
The T1 chip, included in the MacBook Pro, powers the Touch Bar and authenticates Touch ID. The T2 chip, in the iMac Pro integrates several components including the system management controller, image signal processor, SSD controller, and a Secure Enclave with a hardware-based encryption engine.
Previous rumors have suggested Apple is interested in creating its own ARM-based core processor chips for its Mac lineup in order to reduce its dependence on Intel. Apple is also rumored to be pursuing development of its own modem chips to also reduce reliance on both Intel and Qualcomm.
A move away from Intel would have a major impact on Intel, with Apple providing approximately five percent of Intel's annual revenue. Intel stock has already dropped following the news.
Article Link: Apple Plans to Ditch Intel and Use Custom Mac Chips Starting in 2020
Sometimes Apple cannot see the forrest for the trees. Intel capability was a great advancement and made Apple more compatible with the world. I run Vmware and I actually need Windows. There are and always will be things that are not available for the Mac. Windows has many more hardware drivers. I also could not run Solidworks. Though I prefer using Mac OS for Adobe and many other things plus integration with iPad and iPhone, a chip change will keep me from upgrading to a new Mac or cause me to use a Windows laptop instead. A VERY BAD MOVE.
Apple is planning to transition from Intel chips to its own custom made Mac chips as early as 2020, reports Bloomberg.
Apple's initiative, reportedly code named "Kalamata," is part of an effort to make Macs, iPhones, and iPads work "more similarly and seamlessly together" according to unspecified sources that spoke to Bloomberg. Apple already designs its own A-series chips found in iPhones and iPads.
The Mac chip plans are said to be in the early stages of development and the transition from Intel chips to Apple chips could involve multiple steps, starting with the "Marzipan" initiative coming in iOS 12 and macOS 10.14 to allow developers to create a single app able to run on both iOS and macOS.
With its own chips, Apple would not be forced to wait on new Intel chips before being able to release updated Macs, and the company could integrate new features on a faster schedule.Apple has already begun using custom designed T1 and T2 chips in its MacBook Pro and iMac Pro machines, and the company is said to be planning to integrate additional custom co-processors in Macs coming later this year. The custom chips will also be used in the upcoming Mac Pro, which is in development.
The T1 chip, included in the MacBook Pro, powers the Touch Bar and authenticates Touch ID. The T2 chip, in the iMac Pro integrates several components including the system management controller, image signal processor, SSD controller, and a Secure Enclave with a hardware-based encryption engine.
Previous rumors have suggested Apple is interested in creating its own ARM-based core processor chips for its Mac lineup in order to reduce its dependence on Intel. Apple is also rumored to be pursuing development of its own modem chips to also reduce reliance on both Intel and Qualcomm.
A move away from Intel would have a major impact on Intel, with Apple providing approximately five percent of Intel's annual revenue. Intel stock has already dropped following the news.
Article Link: Apple Plans to Ditch Intel and Use Custom Mac Chips Starting in 2020
Here we go again. Shades of dropping PowerPC architecture for Intel except this time the effects upon the Mac user will be far reaching. What will come of Bootcamp which many Mac users rely heavily upon. Vendors that produce virtualisation software the likes of Parallels and VMware Fusion will need to completely rewrite the code from the ground up not to mention software such as Apple's own iLife and other software will no longer be compatible and was expensive to purchase by the consumer. Perhaps there will be something similar to Rosetta which allowed PowerPC apps to run on Snow Leopard but Rosetta was phased out in Lion the following OS X release so it would indicate if a similar approach is taken Apple intend a wholesale ruthless departure from Intel if this article holds any weight.
There was a valid argument for dropping PowerPC architecture as Apple could go no further with it. They were struggling to incorporate the G5 in to the whole Mac range
The same argument however cannot be made in the case of Intel. PowerPC was a niche architecture whereas Intel along with AMD is the standard. Thats the major difference. Such a decision to ditch Intel architecture has the potential to catapult the whole Mac range back to the dark ages.
The consequences of ditching Intel architecture are far reaching for all Mac users with Intel based machines. No longer will any third party vendors be developing software for Intel based Macs. In other words the Intel Mac owner will have no other option than to run outdated software.
Apple have already crippled the Mac with their obsession of USB-C at the expense of Thunderbolt 2 and USB 3.0 the latter of which the vast majority of peripherals are. Anyone who purchases a modern MacBook needs to make an additional purchase of an unsightly docking station to enable them to work with any of their existing peripherals. Apple are entirely out of touch with the consumer and ditching Intel architecture could well be the nail in the coffin.
There was a valid argument for dropping PowerPC architecture as Apple could go no further with it. They were struggling to incorporate the G5 in to the whole Mac range
The consequences of ditching Intel architecture are far reaching for all Mac users with Intel based machines. No longer will any third party vendors be developing software for Intel based Macs. In other words the Intel Mac owner will have no other option than to run outdated software.
Apple have already crippled the Mac with their obsession of USB-C at the expense of Thunderbolt 2 and USB 3.0 the latter of which the vast majority of peripherals are. Anyone who purchases a modern MacBook needs to make an additional purchase of an unsightly docking station to enable them to work with any of their existing peripherals. Apple are entirely out of touch with the consumer and ditching Intel architecture could well be the nail in the coffin.
Rosetta was a dog. And it preceded that fun moment when recent ultra-premium hardware was no longer eligible for OS updates. And you had to buy your software again. It was fun.
People played along because a) personal computing was still relevant back then, b) Apple was going towards better, more open hardware (yay x86), which was exciting, and c) modern smartphones and tablets hadn't been invented yet so people used their personal computer a LOT.
Now your personal computer is just one of many devices you own.
Will people throw away their $3000 iMac because it can't get OS updates, then buy another one just because they are brand loyal?
Some will but out of the billions of computer buyers only a few tens of millions will be Mac buyers. If that.
And that, friends, is why Apple just can't get ahead. They shoot themselves in the foot at every opportunity.
Apple only personal PC user for nearly 30 years. Just saw the new Lenovo Thinkpad in a store. 16 gig LPDDR3, 500 gig SSD, i7: $1599. Awesome design (I used Thinkpads for work for many years.) Despite the fact that Lenovo is incorporating ancient features like trackpad buttons, and the nib, it really is amazing how modern and "leading edge" the design was. Have also looked at the touchpad Macbook Pros a lot. Apple has to somehow breakout of the jony-induced death grip on design ideas. Weird that a re-release of a nearly 20-year old design is better than the current tbMBP, but that is the case for me. New Apple chips will likely not help the death-grip Jony has on design for the next few years. Maybe Jony or Tim will use the new Thinkpad a bit and contemplate where they are (but I doubt it - I doubt Tim even uses a PC any more).
Maybe I wasn't clear. I am certainly not advocating for ARM-based Macs; I have simply stated what I see coming in terms of a three-way competition for consumer services. Whether or not developers support software stores, I think this will be forced on them.
As to your point that Windows on ARM has been a failure--I agree. I still think x86-64 has a lot to offer, but at least for Apple, it is thinking in terms of profits and I believe it is underestimating the losses it might incur with an architecture shift.
Sales and market penetration. Global adoption. Any metric that a vendor would go by?
There is no metric in which apple is not suckling at the hind teat in a market that they created and had a multi-year head start in.
That's how.
my comment wasn't saying that Apple hasn't chosen a mix for a specific purpose. Just that intel's not holding them back. there ARE options that are more recent, up to date and available if Apple decided to actually get off a specific cycle they've defined for financial reasons on their devices.
Not a single Apple computer is available today with Intel's latest CPU's.
Bit of a breakdown with current Mac lineup vs what Intel has available:
MacBook Pro i7-7820HQ replace by i7-8650u or 8550u (released in August 2017)
MacBook Air i5-5350u replaced by i5-8350u (released in Q3 2017)
iMac i7-7700k has been replaced by i7-8700k (released Oct 2017).
(i didn't include the Mac Pro because that's just laughable at this point)
Apple is slow at updating their computers. The poster I was saying claims it's intel holding Apple back. and that is not true. (It was about 3-4 years ago when Intel DID get stupid slow, that is not true today. AMD really kicked Intel into high gear again. Competition is a great thing. Anyone who follows Computers saw tremendous change in 2017 due to competition returning to the field.)
Last edited:
If they want to appeal to mainstream consumers I don't think that will matter either. Apple is not in the business of making computers (as most technical people know them) as much as they they are in the business of making whatever combination of hardware and software is as easy to use as possible for mainstream users.
I hope they don't leave power users behind but I am not confident.
I remember it, along with 68K -> PowerPC, as well. It will be interesting to see how Apple handles backward compatibility with software designed for the Intel architecture as well as if they keep Bootcamp.
[doublepost=1522707918][/doublepost]
IIRC, one of teh reason the are able to run well is teh underlying architecture is based on Intel chips; unlike earlier VM's that had to translate to the PowerPC chip.
Windows and those x86 software were either ported or run on heavy emulation. No virtualization and emulation will ever match the speeds of native operation.