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
...and I think that will be the time to free myself from Apple bondage and return to the Windows fold. Especially if this is a sign that Apple are moving away from "proper" computers and pouring everything into iOS.
I jumped back to Windows recently after being Apple-exclusive since 1997 precisely because of the iOS direction everything is taking. Honestly? Not that hard of a transition.
As for the ARM thing, Apple has proved its mastery of the architecture with its mobile devices, so however radical it may be, the migration it seems plausible to me. Considering I'm just getting comfortable with x64 Assembly I wish it didn't.
Might piss off the developer base though.
Or maybe its because they want to take another stab at a market that never full caught on with windows 8. Remember MS was using ARM based cpu in theri Windows CE and Windows Mobile devices for years, and Win8 will just be a newer, and more finger friendly version of Windows CE, but in tablet form instead of 5in screen mini pc form.
My thoughts exactly. Even more so, when Apple left PPC they had huge problems getting faster processors from IBM. PowerBook G5 anyone? Windows based Intel systems were crushing Mac's like crazy and Apple couldn't do anything about it. Hence, the switch to Intel. Now we have zero problems so why switch to something that makes no sense.
Lets face it: The intel transition was NOT painful. Most PowerPC apps that still exist, will run fine on snow leopard, and by now, every app still being maintained has been recompiled for intel CPUs. That really isn't so hard to do so long as all the libraries your app needs to run supports the architecture you're trying to compile in... Just a small settings change. Assuming you don't use assembler code, but nobody with dreams of porting their app uses assembler code, so... Anywho, if apple did make this transition, it wouldn't be as painful as you people seem to think it would be. PowerPC apps run quite well via rosetta.
Does anyone think that this could possibly be about having OS X running on ARM..... i.e OS X iPads etc. With the type of convergence we are seeing in Lion, it is only a matter of time before iOS and OS X become one and the same.
This really doesnt make any sense
I can see apple maybe putting an ARM chip in the macbook so it can run in low power tablet mode, but to complete replace the CPU really makes no sense. However lots that the do seldom makes sense, so who knows. The reason I won't be buying a mac again is simply because they are severly underpowered, gaming really sucks on them compared to what you can get on a PC.
I can see apple maybe putting an ARM chip in the macbook so it can run in low power tablet mode, but to complete replace the CPU really makes no sense. However lots that the do seldom makes sense, so who knows. The reason I won't be buying a mac again is simply because they are severly underpowered, gaming really sucks on them compared to what you can get on a PC.
This has to be one of the topics on macrumors with the highest ********-per-post ratio.
Seriously guys, didn't you learn anything from the PPC->Intel move?
Go learn something about ARM, the industry and Apple itself and then have an informed and imaginative opinion.
Seriously guys, didn't you learn anything from the PPC->Intel move?
Go learn something about ARM, the industry and Apple itself and then have an informed and imaginative opinion.
Or they want Windows phones on ARM... which they already are aren't they?.
Just like Apple put OSX on ARM 5 years ago (aka iPhone OS).
I'm surprised by the amount of resistance I'm seeing to this idea. I've assumed for a while that this move was inevitable. ARM procs will be fast, relatively cheap, cool, and energy efficient. Apple already has an OS for it which will see considerable convergence with the Mac OS in the near future. This will be a great move for Apple and for consumers, as was the move to Intel.
Apple needs to replace the optical drive with another AMD GPU, and Crossfire them sexy beasts up. Gone will be the days of Macs that can't run every game in existence at max settings.
I agree. Like i stated earlier, the transition from PowerPC to Intel was... Uncomfortable, but it was not painful in any way. There was a slight performance hit from running things via rosetta, but remember, rosetta is not wine. Wine's performance issues stem from the fact that it's having to implement an entire OS. All rosetta does is translate PowerPC instructions to Intel instructions and not much else. If Apple made the transition, the majority of users wouldn't even notice, because all their intel apps would continue to run for many years to come. The transition would be almost entirely transparent to the average user, just as the PowerPC/Intel transition was.
Also, knowing Microsoft, if they ever made the switch to ARM, they would provide TWO versions of windows, one that works with ARM, and one that works with intel, creating the severe fragmentation that exists with 32-bit windows vs 64-bit windows, but for Intel/ARM. It's the main reason MacOS is so far ahead in terms of 64-bit deployment. No 64-bit macs are running 32-bit only OSes, and the devs know it. Not so with the windows world. I think the transition would be extremely painful for Microsoft if they don't at least try to implement universal binaries.
Last edited:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)
Not gonna happen. Just isn't.
I can't even see them switching to ARM for their ultra portables like the Air.
UNLESS...
Apple already a running version of OSX working on existing ARM like the secret version of Intel OSX they 'announced' at switch.
I'm more inclined to believe that Apple have a back up version of ARM compatible OSX working in their labs and this the reason for the rumour of a possible change.
But I'd put money on Intel keeping the gig.
Not gonna happen. Just isn't.
I can't even see them switching to ARM for their ultra portables like the Air.
UNLESS...
Apple already a running version of OSX working on existing ARM like the secret version of Intel OSX they 'announced' at switch.
I'm more inclined to believe that Apple have a back up version of ARM compatible OSX working in their labs and this the reason for the rumour of a possible change.
But I'd put money on Intel keeping the gig.
Yes, hmm... You bring up an interesting point of view here.
Windows 8 do currently run on ARM, yes:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft/ces-microsoft-shows-off-windows-8-on-arm/8339
Not sure if MS decides to ship it for ARM or not (working in a controlled tech demo doesn't imply a finished stable release in the Windows 8 timeframe), but what matters here is that Microsoft is absolutely moving to support ARM either in Windows 8 or later.
A beefier CPU and High end GPU would be more beneficial than a second GPU. Even modern game engines still don't properly utilize two graphics cards unless the individual developers do custom optimisation.
I wonder if removing the optical drive would provide the room needed for proper ventilation of a dual-CPU laptop... Dual-CPU MBP anyone?
You could put a lot of ARM cores in the same space one x86 uses, and I think ARM is the superior ISA. Intel had a chance in Itanium to dump x86, but it was a half-hearted effort (current version arrived 3 years late and uses an obsolete 65nm process) and spent all their money improving x86. I have no doubt that Microsoft's refusal to support Itanium had something to do with it.
Intel's advantage is in its manufacturing, not its CPU design. x86 is a hack, but combine it with billions of dollars in semiconductor research and there's no way ARM competes with x86. Intel might fab ARM cores, but there's no way they let their best tech (22nm, 3D) be used on ARM unless they intend to dump Atom.
Intel's advantage is in its manufacturing, not its CPU design. x86 is a hack, but combine it with billions of dollars in semiconductor research and there's no way ARM competes with x86. Intel might fab ARM cores, but there's no way they let their best tech (22nm, 3D) be used on ARM unless they intend to dump Atom.
So many saying this makes no sense, without specifying why.
It makes less sense to develop two converging operating systems for two incompatible (on a low level) architectures.
It makes less sense to develop two converging operating systems for two incompatible (on a low level) architectures.
Not possible with current laptop architecture. The only x86 CPUs AFAIK that are capable of multi-socket systems are Opterons and Xeons.
I'm off to start a new 'Dell in negotiations with Apple to license Mac OS X' rumor with a popular analyst. Story should be appearing on MR on Monday or Tuesday next week. Stay tuned.
- Status