Well I hope this rumor stays a rumor. Probably would be done with Apple for good if it ever ends up happening. One architecture switch was enough for me
Last edited:
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 to Move from Intel to ARM Processors in Future Laptops?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
I would like it.
ARM is the better architecture IMHO. Knowing both x86 and ARM assembly I really started to hate x86. The RISC vs CISC war is finally getting a bit more heat with the iOS devices being ARM. ARM is less power consuming and can do many things in less time than x86 (assuming same clock speeds). And those processors are getting more and more powerful which makes them able to compete with x86 processors.
One downside would be that x86 programs would be unable to run on those machines, but Apple will sure think of a way to manage that. They managed the PowerPC to Intel transition and they would manage this, too. If they wanted.
I don't necessarily believe this rumor, but I think that it would be the right direction. This would probably be something like a new device, preserving the old ones. After all, those two architectures can coexist together, can't they?
ARM is the better architecture IMHO. Knowing both x86 and ARM assembly I really started to hate x86. The RISC vs CISC war is finally getting a bit more heat with the iOS devices being ARM. ARM is less power consuming and can do many things in less time than x86 (assuming same clock speeds). And those processors are getting more and more powerful which makes them able to compete with x86 processors.
One downside would be that x86 programs would be unable to run on those machines, but Apple will sure think of a way to manage that. They managed the PowerPC to Intel transition and they would manage this, too. If they wanted.
I don't necessarily believe this rumor, but I think that it would be the right direction. This would probably be something like a new device, preserving the old ones. After all, those two architectures can coexist together, can't they?
Not much Info has been released about it, some saying Microsoft might offer Virtualization for x86 Apps for Windows running on ARM. Others saying that x86 Apps would require a rewrite.
But in one press release, Microsoft did say "We won't have one version of Windows for Intel, and one version for ARM, we'll have 1 version, that will run on both"
This would be a bad idea as Intel is currently the biggest innovator when it comes to microchips. But then again, the move from Nvidia to AMD GPU's was interesting and surprising, to me at least.
This issue as noted by another poster is the applications and having to pay for the new ARM application. Plus there is the issue of Windows compatibility. I bought into Mac because it was based on Intel. I guess if Windows moves to ARM support, well O.K., that's half the battle. The rest is waiting for applications to support ARM, the cost of upgrading to the new applications....yikes! And for what?
Sun Microsystems, now Ocacle did. Although not really a switch because they continue both lines using Intel for the low and mid level and SPARC for the higher end servers. It is seamless because you really don't know which you are one.
After the trouble with 8600 gpus and the nvidia/intel thing it was easy. Amd chips nowadays are better than nvidia ones.
I think ARM chips would have to offer a very very convincing advantage over Intel processors for Apple to invest the effort, particularly when Apple are far more focused on iToys anyway. This feels like somebody spreading something to make a fast buck on the markets to me.
Still, anything's possible.
Still, anything's possible.
What for? One might be able to get dramatically better performance for the same size battery. What matters in the notebook is "CPU power per watt" and ARM has that. In end user speak maybe you'd get an 8-core notebook
THere would be no reason to discontinue Intel. They might have two lines. Which woud you buy? An Intel Mac that could run Windows or an ARM that was twice as fast and twice the batery life that could not run Windows. I'd take the second one in a minute but others might be forced to go with Intel.
Not at all. Before the PC Era there was much more inovation with many different CPU architectures on the market and then everyone standardized i Intel X86 because it was low cost and "good enough". I think Ultra SPARC is most inovative. Intel pretty much killed inovation and made for a static couple decades.
They don't get it. For most people having 8 cores is crap, they won't use them. 1 really fast core might me more useful.
Thank you. After all the uninformed and reactionary posts on this thread, this is ALL that needed to be said on the issue. It's simple and most likely the case.
If Apple stays like it is now in 2-3 years if/when a transition like this happens it will be for good, demonstrable reasons.
maybe this is just a negotiating tactic by Apple. You know, they let it slip that maybe someday they want to move away from Intel...and Intel panics, gives them better and more exclusive deals etc etc.
Dunno....
Or some mole is going to get fired
Apple aren't going to put us through another architecture switch, too soon and too troublesome. I also imagine it would annoy developers who would feel like they were always having to rewrite their apps.
No, I think we will be using x86 for a long time to come, or until Intel decides to move onto something else.
No, I think we will be using x86 for a long time to come, or until Intel decides to move onto something else.
I didn't think there were so many Anti-Intel people here. I thought Apple switching to Intel was a blessing for the new Macs. Sandy Bridge on the PC is amazing. Its an overclocking, folding, multi-tasking monster, so I can't imagine what it can do on an optimized OSX.
ARM is a mobile processor manafacturer am I right? What could they have that would possibly compete with Intel's highest chips? You may find it in something like a Macbook air that is driven towards the always on, internet life crowd. What about the video makers, musicians, and rendering people? I don't think anything ARM has now would have the power those people need. I don't think it could edit and render 1080p 3D video. I don't think it could play Shogun in full res.
Sure given the time period they could, but Intel will have something much more powerful by then.
ARM is a mobile processor manafacturer am I right? What could they have that would possibly compete with Intel's highest chips? You may find it in something like a Macbook air that is driven towards the always on, internet life crowd. What about the video makers, musicians, and rendering people? I don't think anything ARM has now would have the power those people need. I don't think it could edit and render 1080p 3D video. I don't think it could play Shogun in full res.
Sure given the time period they could, but Intel will have something much more powerful by then.
I can't realistically see this happening, even in 2013. Apple used PowerPC chips from (roughly) 1994 until 2005 when the last PowerPC Macs were made. I can see Apple being with Intel until at least 2016, maybe longer. I don't think they would make a switch that they didn't have to. There would have to be a huge reason or cause to do this, huge!
PowerPC to Intel was a no briner, better performance per watt, faster CPUs, dual-cores in ever Mac and BootCamp compatibility. For Apple to ditch Intel for something else, they'd have to have something pretty damn revolutionary and powerful. And it would have to run on sunshine and export cookies and rainbows.
PowerPC to Intel was a no briner, better performance per watt, faster CPUs, dual-cores in ever Mac and BootCamp compatibility. For Apple to ditch Intel for something else, they'd have to have something pretty damn revolutionary and powerful. And it would have to run on sunshine and export cookies and rainbows.
I welcome this change, if true.
I personally think that this might be a right move. It's pretty obvious that iMacs and Macbooks will be touch based pretty soon. 5 years seems to be good amount of time to slowly transition to that. Intel doesn't have any kind of core architecture for this, plus they are becoming a monopoly in chip space and that's not good for anyone.
I personally think that this might be a right move. It's pretty obvious that iMacs and Macbooks will be touch based pretty soon. 5 years seems to be good amount of time to slowly transition to that. Intel doesn't have any kind of core architecture for this, plus they are becoming a monopoly in chip space and that's not good for anyone.
I can't realistically see this happening, even in 2013. Apple used PowerPC chips from (roughly) 1994 until 2005 when the last PowerPC Macs were made. I can see Apple being with Intel until at least 2016, maybe longer. I don't think they would make a switch that they didn't have to. There would have to be a huge reason or cause to do this, huge!
PowerPC to Intel was a no briner, better performance per watt, faster CPUs, dual-cores in ever Mac and BootCamp compatibility. For Apple to ditch Intel for something else, they'd have to have something pretty damn revolutionary and powerful. And it would have to run on sunshine and export cookies and rainbows.
Remember that back in 1994 technology was pretty simple, comparing to today. Things like this don't have any rules for time frame. Technology innovation is happening faster and faster, so companies have to make changes faster and faster as well.
I can't realistically see this happening, even in 2013. Apple used PowerPC chips from (roughly) 1994 until 2005 when the last PowerPC Macs were made. I can see Apple being with Intel until at least 2016, maybe longer. I don't think they would make a switch that they didn't have to. There would have to be a huge reason or cause to do this, huge!
PowerPC to Intel was a no briner, better performance per watt, faster CPUs, dual-cores in ever Mac and BootCamp compatibility. For Apple to ditch Intel for something else, they'd have to have something pretty damn revolutionary and powerful. And it would have to run on sunshine and export cookies and rainbows.
yeah i agree... can't see the benefits being worth the hassle. All apps would have to run through emulation until they were rewritten, bootcamp would no longer work, what about compatibility with graphics cards? Sounds like a big rumor to me... guess we will see!
- Status