The operating system that 90% of the world's computers run on, and the software that is used the most for business.
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
There's already Linux/etc for the Raspberry Pi, surely there would be distros targeting those new ARM-based Macs.
15-year enterprise IT Manager here.
No doubt some iOS devs will come over and write SnapChat for Mac or whatever. And Pages. Good for them.
But the OS X that you know now will be done like dinner once Apple gets through "porting" it to a different architecture.
For the record I hope that I am wrong. And for the record I am super sad about it. I started loving the platform in 1999 and have been in denial since the Accountant King took over.
Do you actually, habitually, run Windows on your Macbook or iMac? Not trying to be snarky, just genuinely trying to understand what Windows applications are that important for you.
I run Excel, Word, and PowerPoint natively on the mac, and that's pretty much all I ever needed from Microsoft. I just never knew anyone who bought Apple hardware to run Windows on...
Was a major contributor. All part of the hubris by the ceos who thought the market would wait for them to catch up.
Passing off Apple at first was the momentum shifter. But the nail in their device coffin was the promise of incompatibility with their current platform. Nothing for bbos7 and 8 would port to bb10. Developers had to completely rewrite everything.
With iOS and Android becoming well established, they all said “**** it” so when BB10 DID finally launch, it was a barren platform.
I was a massive blackberry fanboy. I lost a part of me during this dark years
(Me cries himself to sleep with his playbook)
I will take that bet. The OS has nothing to do with the chip architecture. Switching architectures will not cause them to make it an iOS-like secure/locked system. In addition, Windows, Linux, FreeBSD and many others run on ARM, so you will still have your choice.
You don't think that their failure to keep BBOS current, but instead letting it languish while milking it for profits, was their downfall?
You don't see a parallel between that and Apple releasing OS X 17 or so years ago and just milking it for almost 2 decades?
Arm Linux exists, but is a far far cry from the available distributions available for arm.
arm and Linux really only exist for embedded devices right now. There are few full fledged desktops.
I’m not even sure if there’s a red hat/centos distro for ARm.
Edit: on hai, there’s a very limited centos for arm now. Wonder how stable and robust it is... time to get me a pi!
No. I think sticking to an inferior piece of hardware, or more accurately, hardware concept, is what killed them.
You're never going to have the apps on iOS and Android with half the screen taken up by a keyboard.
And I say this as a guy who LOVED BB in 2008. By the time they switched to BB 10 or whatever, it was too late.
People say this about iOS vs Android all the time. Why develop for 15% of the market (iOS) instead on 85% (Android)?
Except that devs still prefer iOS over Android because iOS pays the bills (much higher revenues for developers).
I don’t think it’s a stretch to think all those iOS developers who are starting to run out of ideas (the App Store has an App for almost everything) wouldn’t take their existing skills to the next frontier in Apps (Macs).
Windows on Arm has been available in the marketplace (to consumers) continuously since 2012. And it has been a disaster the entire time.
I have been supporting Windows 8 and 10 on ARM, deployed to users, for year.
Calling it "mobile" or "desktop" is not relevant since it was MS' attempt to blend the two -- exactly what Apple is doing here.
And it failed disastrously because people don't want a walled garden for their desktop. And devs don't want to have to rewrite due to an arbitrary architecture change.
We disagree but I can't see how you don't think that we are starting exactly the same cycle in Apple that Microsoft proved can't be done.
They'd be able to make more $$ developing on Mac. We're all Mac users. Do we pay for apps or what? I do.
[doublepost=1522712907][/doublepost]
BB 9000 (original Bold) was the best BB made. I loved that device. But once I used a 3G and that screen? I was done with BB.
I loved my torch. More screen, with sliding keyboard for when I needed it. The slider devices are an under utilized paradigm in this day of age.
The 9000 was fantastic phone. Coworker still has one. I have no clue how he uses it. Work had to buy him an iPhone just to get him notified with our tools.
Would you not be able to run fusion or parallels? I’m 99.99% sure you would, as that’s what they do...
Mobile apps are baby software.
How big is the team that Adobe has to mount to port CS to a new architecture on Mac?
How about Autodesk?
This is an up-front cost of untold millions to these companies before they see a single dollar of revenue.
That's one of 10,000 reasons why there is very little development for OS X. And a brutally vacant software catalogue including almost zero point zero enterprise software.
Because it was the result of a massive lawsuit and our government would likely step in. The agreement is for mutual benefit. AMD needs and requires x86 on their processors. Intel needs x86-64 AKA AMD64, which AMD owns the IP to. If Intel said screw you, then AMD could revoke Intel's license to use AMD64. This would effectively crippled the non-RISC CPU market and research.
Intel did develop their own x64 base one time. It was called Itanium. Need I say more?
No, you would not. Not well anyway.
Virtualized PLUS emulated? Might as well run it on a raspberry pi.
Been covered a lot already.
And no, that’s not what they do
Parallels is virtualization. What would be required is emulation.
Vastly different. Emulation has massive performance trade offs
Shaving off a few nanometers will make Joni feel so much better - so it will happen anyway
Torch was a nice piece of kit as well. A guy I worked with had one until about two years ago.
There is a reason why we do not live in this world anymore. The investment to build a CPU is prohibitively high and simply can't be justified by the amount of chips needed for just one computer vendor. One by one they all lost this battle to Intel (because they could not invest enough to compete). It's a little bit different in Apple case because this time the investment would cover CPUs for both computers and mobile devices. They may sustain it as long as the [mobile] margins stay high but this is a risky bet.