Correct - They don't *have* to be, but currently, often are due to (1) hardware constraints of the iPad, and (2) AppStore requirements.
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
Correct - They don't *have* to be, but currently, often are due to (1) hardware constraints of the iPad, and (2) AppStore requirements.
We know the design cycle for chips is long.
To have something that competes with Intel by 2020 would take a massive army that Apple has not hired.
I work in Silicon Valley and design chips for a living.
I haven't seen the scale of hiring of silicon professions it would take to make a processor to replace an Intel processor.
I have friends at AMD, Intel, Qualcomm, Broadcom, etc. They aren't getting called from Apple.
Broadcom cut a group of 400 a year ago that were doing a server class ARM processor.
So where are all the people that would be required to do this?
Where are the PCIe people needed to do a root complex along with all the other infrastructure needed around PCIe?
The folks I know at Diode, ex-PLX (Broadome) and Pericom haven't been getting called.
Where are they hiring the memory people from.
Where are they hiring people that do DDR controllers and memory schedulers?
What about the additional people needed to to all the interconnect to get this thing wired up.
You aren't going to do it with ARM's CHI (ring) or ACE (X-Bar) architectures.
The story makes no sense when you look at the logistics and details.
Do I think Apple will make more custom chips to reduce cost?
Yes.
Look, there were rumors about Apple replacing Qualcomm and Intel and doing their own modems.
A modem is a lot easier to do than a multicore laptop/desktop processor.
Still no modem.
No doubt it will eventually happen, however I stand by my first impression - I can't see Apple's ARM chips closing the gap with powerful X86 chips like the latest i7/i9 processors in the next two years, so either Apple intends on keeping pro models on Intel, or they're willing to sacrifice their pro users to pursue this ARM dream of theirs.
Nothing personal, but do you understand that you are just general software user case and your work can be done in a secure web app? Actually iOS is generally optimized frontend with closed hardware and software. There is no Magic in this decision, there is only pure Greed. Every business ecosystem has a bone structure. The Bone of Apple is creative professional, the skin and make up are regular users. This happens when marketing and sells departments take over design and development. Change is not innovation. Ask what drives the change. And if my words don't ring a bell listen to this man saying it clearly:
Current Apple is not even in the same neighbourhood now.You can't apply this.
[doublepost=1522772275][/doublepost]
How do you know? Maybe they will introduce one with the next iPhone?
I've designed many x86 chips. They are really CISC. Not sure what you're trying to say. I've also designed PowerPC and Sparc chips and am familiar with the ARM instruction set. It's really RISC. Every x86 chip I designed had microcode roms, a complex instruction decoder, and special hardware to handle the annoying x86 addressing modes. This hardware took up at least 20% of the die area. If we ran the native micro-ops instead of having to deal with x86 instructions that's 20% less chip we'd need, meaning wires would be smaller, and there would be fewer of them toggling.
iOS is a platform from Apple. Android is a platform from Google.
Both platforms consist of hardware, software, and services.
Neither company manufactures hardware (Apple uses FoxConn, Google uses LG and others.)
Apple does not license its' OS but Google does.
In 2007 Apple had a multi-year head start as the only competitive entrant in a category that they essentially created -- the modern mobile OS.
Today it's fighting for the scraps from that table. Google dominates the segment with most of the sales and most of the users.
Apple squandered a multi-year lead despite superior technology. Because of hubris and bad strategy.
They did the same with MacOS in the 80's and relegated themselves to single-digit penetration forever.
Now they are going to stick their fingers in the eyes of the few remaining developers and the few remaining customers that they have?? Ridiculous.
Can't or want? Last i checked Apple is very rich. This means that marketing over innovation approach is a joke. This thing is clearly predicted outcome for Apple. Mac OS is killed before our eyes, only semipro user with self delusion cannot comprehend what it means for professional users. Apple wants only money. At current time money is iPhone, mister accountant is dreaming that iPad will be the new Desktop. May be they will ship a display with ports for extended computing, oh wait i forgot iMacIAMPro. Ignorance is a bliss. There is another thing. In the beginning of App Store 30 percent commission was a right choice, now with so many apps and so much marketing noise is clearly a steal. The important part in this video is relation of Monopoly and stagnation of innovation. Apple is crumbling under its weight. And i like it.
By the way, I also know a few things about MMUs, cache coherency, and the like, and your point is still not well taken because x86 is as complex or more so in each case. (For work I've done see, for example:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/641683/
https://www.ecse.rpi.edu/frisc/theses/MaierThesis/
I was also one of the designers of AMD's first 64-bit opteron/athlon 64, UltraSparc V, and Exponential x704, among others.
and for giggles https://www.law360.com/articles/784676/lg-gets-amd-graphics-patent-claims-axed-by-ptab)
Their move then was successful and wise. Move to faster chips that are more compatible.
Today they are moving to slower chips (nobody is more sophisticated than Intel) that are less compatible. While forcing developers to rewrite and recompile and users to buy different hardware and different software. Insane.
And no, Windows as you think of it does not run on ARM.
There is an OS that looks like Windows and has the name Windows that runs on ARM, but it has almost no software. It's not the same thing and will not work for the people who currently run Windows on their macs. So those people are lost as customers too.
The Accountant King killed it. Say your goodbyes.
Excuse me:
1. Apple only had about a 1 year "head start" on the "Smartphone as reinvisioned by Apple". Samsung couldn't turn on their Copiers fast enough when the first iPhone came out.
The Samsung phone you see in the link below came out almost exactly 1 year after the first iPhone hit the streets:
http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/17/technology/apple-samsung/index.html
...and in fact, Google was already hard at work, ripping-off iOS' "look and feel" (and operability) no later than APRIL 2007, just TWO MONTHS after Jobs' unveiled the iPhone:
http://bgr.com/2014/04/14/android-before-and-after-iphone/
So, I'm not sure what this big "Multi-year head start" was for iOS came from; but it appears to be ridiculously-overinflated by you.
2. Picking up scraps? I'd hardly call 216.7 million iPhones sold in 2017 "Scraps":
https://www.statista.com/statistics/263401/global-apple-iphone-sales-since-3rd-quarter-2007/
Compare that with Samsung's Unit Sales for 2017 of 79.8 million:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/299144/samsung-smartphone-shipments-worldwide/
So now, Apple's "Scraps" don't look too bad, do they?
Apple cant get ahead? Hold that thought, now google the Most valuable company on the planet. Wait a moment .... Yup!! That reaction is outstanding.
A thought - Apple may do co-procs for a little while. Have an ARM and an Intel chip in the same machine (they kinda do already). The tricky part would be where the OS kernel runs. They *could* keep a kernel running on both procs and handoff between the two but that's a LOT of engineering work and corner cases.
You know what I would like? MacOS in an Apple TV housing. When I look at what I use my Mac Mini's for, I could do it just as well with an ARM based Mac running in a really tight form factor.
Well, first off we don't know that it will be ARM based. Apple could produce their own x86_64 chip and it wouldn't be a big deal. The real question is how would those chips stack up to intel or AMD. This is still years out, and it is just a rumor. No need to get too crazy just yet.
You can classify me as anything you want, I don't mind. I need a tool for my career and the best one for me is an iPad.
What is the modern way compared to the ancient way of the iOS, can you give an example?
Too bad all the Linux users would be left out in the cold if Apple switched all their Macs to ARM.
what?
what?
OS 7, in 1991 ("only" 27 years ago). Wiki Link
Where the "not tolerated" of this "different Apple" is being illustrated today in how despite there being reasonably suitable new Intel CPUs to choose from, as of April 2018, Apple hasn't been able to put together any product update whatsoever for the Mac Mini or Mac Pro, even though their last hardware updates were from 2014 & 2013 (1265 & 1566 days ago) respectively.
I'd be interested in seeing how they would change the A# chips to go into its Macs? More cores, higher clock speeds, etc.? Right now, the current A10 & A11s seem okay for low level things like iPads and iPhones, but not higher end iMacs, MacBook Pros, etc.
So now Apple can throttle the performance of old devices just like they do with iPhones - but now in your Desktop! They really are making throw away computers.
I meant that - scarily for me - the intel transition seems like just a few years back.
I remember the massive furore when it was announced at WWDC but then when developer intel iMacs shipped (I think it was iMacs) it all settled down.
(So if Apple has any sense, it’ll get a developer machine shipped as soon as it possibly can.).
My G5 iMac - shipping with Tiger originally - was then ok until Leopard, when finally, it burnt itself out. Just opening safari was enough for the (loud) fan to spin up.
I'm not talking about Windows RT. I'm talking about Windows 10. With x86 Emulation...
https://www.windowscentral.com/windows-10-arm-not-windows-rt
Yes, there are some limitations (the biggest 2 being no x64 Emulation (yet) and limited Device Driver support (mostly an issue only for legacy peripherals), but most of them won't affect "non-intense" Windows-use:
https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/19/...dows-10-on-arm-apps-games-limitations-support
..and it seems that the product is still somewhat VaporWare; but only "just". Here's someone installing it on a Windows ARM Emulator (Yes, an emulated ARM emulating an x86 CPU!)
https://winaero.com/blog/install-windows-10-arm-qemu/
...and on a Raspberry Pi:
https://www.windowslatest.com/2018/02/09/developer-installs-full-windows-10-arm-raspberry-pi-3/
...so it LOOKS like it might actually be "real" afterall...
Ryzen wasnt done in 2 yrs, it took 4+ yrs as told by the Current CEO
[doublepost=1522776026][/doublepost]
They still must be using something to host their own iCloud Infrastructure right?
This is what really concerns me -- the progressive iToyification of the Mac ("professional") line. Not what creative pros needing power or want or need. Don't need any more similarity and seamlessness between Mac and animojis, so this is not a good sign that Apple may be reversing course on their "pro" line trajectory. :/