I also thought it sounded weird, and I am quite sure they meant to write 1-2 quad core processors, or 4-8 cores.
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 Testing ARM Based Mac Prototypes with Large Magic Trackpad?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But the problem is not technical. It would be a suicidal decision no matter what. Where exactly is the distinguishing line between the "pro" applications (needing an intel cpu) and the "consumer" ones (that might run on an arm processor) ? Or, in other words, which models are going to be running on arm and which on intel ? I just can't imagine apple maintaining two different platforms, that would be just insane. And 3rd party s/w houses are not so "forgiving" or agile in such changes.
I think it's reasonable that Apple would at least keep investigating ARM as a possibility, after all, they now have their own ARM expertise.
I do agree though that now is the wrong time; maybe in a few years if OpenCL takes off in a big way, we'll have less reliance on traditional CPUs and ARM will be perfectly capable of taking the place of Intel processors.
But personally I'm not sure I'm interested in another switch, not until we're ready to switch to quantum computing or something truly different.
Exactly. It will be like the transitions from PowerPC to Intel processors.
A good app written to the right APIs will run under emulation. Those that ported over Intel assembly are in for a long support cycle.
My concern is if they will have an ARM build of Xcode.
People keep saying this. Do you have any stats to back this up? I doubt the majority of users even know you can install Windows on a Mac. Most people don't even know how to install an OS...
People buy Macs because Windows sucks, not so they can run Windows on a more elegant machine...
Let me elaborate on this a little bit.
It is possible to write standard C code that would work on PPC but break on Intel x86. These architectures have different endianness and there are also subtle differences in the size and alignment on some data types. In addition, the PPC->Intel transition would often involve a rewrite of a Carbon app to a Cocoa app, which is a lot of work.
It is also possible (and actually, quite easy) to write standard C code that would work on Intel x86 but break on x64, often in some subtle way. Again, the reason for this are differences in the size and alignment of some data types, as well as function call conventions.
AFAIK, it is not possible to write standard C code that would work on Intel x64 but break on ARMv8, because the basic semantics (datatype sizes, alignment, endianness etc.) between the platforms is exactly the same(*). Basically, what this means is that the code written for Intel x64 will have exactly the same behaviour when compiled to the 64-bit ARMv8.
In the end, the difference between all the previous transitions and a potential ARMv8 transition, is that the developers had to make sure that their code follows a certain set of rules in order to be compatible with a new platform. But a modern OS X application which works under Intel x64, already complies with all the ARM rules. In the end, if your app is not doing anything crazy (like platform-specific assembly), you won't need to do any porting at all. Provided Apple does not mess up the compiler and the frameworks, of course
(*)There might be some subtle differences in how the CPUs handle floating-point operations, not sure about this.
----------
Windows RT is a failure because it a whole different version of Windows. What if an ARM-based Apple laptop would run the same OS X, with all (well, ok, most of) the same apps? Apple has the technology to make different platforms coexist seamlessly. I mean, you could copy an application from your ARM machine to your Intel machine and it will start and work in exactly the same way. And I am not talking about merely the potential of developing such technology they already have it, today.
If it is just a laptop or mini, like they ever were, just with hobby iOS software and purchase-your-perfectly-working-OSX-software-once-again-but-for-ARM-this-time, optimized for touch interface, why bother. Insanely …just insane.
If it were a device, challenging emerging surface pros and killing ignorant wacoms (in fact they should buy those suckers and the tech they just sit on to make some proper use of it) for pros who still know what a pen is, adding a support for existing displays, keyboards, mouses and touch and next-gen devices for the other work we already do, and then adding one more thing, like being completely wireless device everywhere every time. "Once we obsoleted buttons for the mouse, then we obsoleted keyboards for the phone, now we obsolete the last of physical connections for all of our devices." The technology exists even, it is not new but Apple is used to take exiting tech, make it usable in practice and market it like it was their invention in the first place. Or even better, it should be something else, they have dollars to make it happen. Then insanely great!
If it were a device, challenging emerging surface pros and killing ignorant wacoms (in fact they should buy those suckers and the tech they just sit on to make some proper use of it) for pros who still know what a pen is, adding a support for existing displays, keyboards, mouses and touch and next-gen devices for the other work we already do, and then adding one more thing, like being completely wireless device everywhere every time. "Once we obsoleted buttons for the mouse, then we obsoleted keyboards for the phone, now we obsolete the last of physical connections for all of our devices." The technology exists even, it is not new but Apple is used to take exiting tech, make it usable in practice and market it like it was their invention in the first place. Or even better, it should be something else, they have dollars to make it happen. Then insanely great!
Last edited:
It's already quite big. Anyone tried using a windows laptop after using a MacBook? Almost impossible to even see the trackpad
Another path that hasn't been considered (if the rumours are real):
It could just be that Apple is testing a new generation of quadcore ARM processors in MBAs that are meant for iPads that can run OSX/iOS.
It would be the perfect cover: while the industry is guessing if Apple is abandoning Intel for their computers...BAM! an Apple Surface 3 killer appears...
It could just be that Apple is testing a new generation of quadcore ARM processors in MBAs that are meant for iPads that can run OSX/iOS.
It would be the perfect cover: while the industry is guessing if Apple is abandoning Intel for their computers...BAM! an Apple Surface 3 killer appears...
Or Apple could keep MacBook pricing about the same and increase margins by around $300. That's even more huge and something that would help keep the Mac line of products sustainable for much longer.
----------
I think Microsoft is doing a good enough job of killing Surface on their own. There is nothing for Apple to kill here.
Its a different version of windows because its on a different chipset. Today's applications for OSX would not work on an ARM based Mac because they're not compiled of run on a different CPU. OSX would need to an emulator, much like they did when they went to PPC to Intel.
Microsoft did not create a different windows version, but rather create a windows version to run on ARM. Apple is rumored to create an OSX version that will run on ARM
This is the exact same thing that MS is doing, running a copy of their OS on a different chipset, apps have to written/compiled for that chipset and it produces different binaries.
Yep trackpads on Windows laptops are almost universally terrible. In fact, before I switched to Mac I would never use a trackpad for anything for this season. I would also plug in a small travel USB mouse.
They may have doubled the performance but does mean its getting near the performance of the Intel chips? What about performance under load. Right now the A7 doesn't have to worry about running many apps at once, where as the Intel CPUs are adept at such tasks. Just because the A7 is much faster then its predecessors doesn't mean its faster (or nearly as fast) then what Intel has to offer.
I think in this case it highlights the mistake apple is making. In my company its call lessons learned. We go through a project and see what worked and what didn't work.
In apple's case they can see how MS dropped the ball on RT and how the consumers are not buying it. I think the argument that an ARM based version of OSX is the same and Apple will be making a huge mistake to offer such a product $.02
Agree. It would be a huge mistake. Current software would have to be re-written (and a lot certainly wouldn't). And I wouldn't be able to run Windows on Bootcamp or on a Virtual Machine. No, thanks.
Don't discount that one aspect. Remember before Apple created bootcamp hackers were producing steps on getting windows to run on the newly released Intel Macs. Running Windows on a Mac is a huge draw and one major reason I think Apple has been so successful in increasing its marketshare.
I have to believe an ARM based Mac is set to be a low end product and they're not dropping Intel altogether - that would be insane.
The switch will still happen regardless. I suggest you start prepping for your next divorce from Apple.