It is going to be closer to an iPad Pro than a Mac. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/apple-arms-stefan-brunner
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's Path to Arm-Based Macs Could Start With a New 12-Inch MacBook
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Xcode with 8GB is terribly buggy and slow. 16BG just barely workable. My development station did not start working acceptably until 40 GB.
Not at all.
When Steve came back, I think one of the smartest early decisions he made was to radically simplify the Mac line-up. Sure, there were other factors at the time, like Apple not having the money for such a broad line-up. But part of it was also to avoid the paralysis of choice. A 2x2 grid. You want a desktop or a laptop? You're a pro, or a consumer? Done.
Nowadays, Apple has many more products, but some aren't necessary. The 13-inch MacBook Pro with 2 ports probably shouldn't exist. It's an alibi product to say, "hey, the Pro starts at $1299", but really, the Air configured to the same price point is a better product for most people, and the $1799 is the "real" Pro. Almost nobody should get the two-porter.
But it was way worse than that three years ago. Do you get the Air? Oh, but it has no Retina Display. Or the MacBook, that's kind of like an Air? Oh, but it's much more expensive, yet slower. Or the two-port Pro, which was introduced by Phil as Air-esque? Well, that one's even more expensive. And despite being Pro, it lacked many of the things of the other Pros, such as Touch ID.
I was happy that they simplified and consolidated the line-up in 2018 and 2019, and I hope they're not going to step back from that.
I've actually written a ton about this subject.
I do! Because it matters that I can tell someone who wants a Mac "oh, what are your requirements? Alright: this is the one you should get". Right now, I can do that. For almost half a decade, it was hard, in part because of the above, and in part because of keyboard reliability issues. "Oh, I guess just get the old Air; at least it has a good keyboard."
Those don't overlap much, so I fail to see your point.
That is exactly what they did both with the 68k to PowerPC and PowerPC to Intel migrations, and it wasn't a big issue, so yes, I think they should replace products rather than add to them. But that's also way besides my point.
[automerge]1592077497[/automerge]
Maybe, but I don't think "we have a great transition plan for developers: buy two Macs!" is going to be a popular message.
Its very unfortunate that they continued to use the butterfly design. However, of all the peoplewho I know who bought Butterfly KB macs (~10 or so), none of them have had a problem, including several owners of the 1st gen 2016 MBP. But regardless, its also more expensive to manufacture the butterfly (specialty mfgrs) so it makes sense all around for Apple to use the conventional design. I guess they got lucky. I still hate the way it feels, though. I think if they used the Magic Keyboard, though, it would come too close to the MBA, and at that point Apple may not have an excuse for having only one port, even if they do choose to use Thunderbolt, which I would think would be possible since it uses a discrete controller.
I have two current butterfly machines (2016 MBP and the 12” MB), and had an air with it. All three have had keyboard issues with keys failing. The MBP and the MB have had it happen multiple times.
And typing on them sucks. Not enough key travel. (I like the key stability, but I type 90+ WPM and I need tactile feedback and some shock absorbancy).
T1 is unclear I'd guess is A5 variant so iPhone 4S performance. T2 is an A8 variant so iPhone 6 performance.
T3 that runs apps could be A12 variant so imagine having an iPad Pro inside your MacBook for catalyst apps on your main screen instead of on the touch bar like they are now.
i forgot about Cyrix, which i think is the license that VIA owns. at any rate i was taking the word of my colleague with whom i worked at AMD. i guess he was wrong
i forgot about Cyrix, which i think is the license that VIA owns. at any rate i was taking the word of my colleague with whom i worked at AMD. i guess he was wrong
When did you work at AMD? I was there 1996-2006/2007.
he was around yeah but at the time focused on trying to find a buyer and didn't spend too much time in the office. it was late in the game.
If they really fix the concept and wait 2 years maybe. But don’t call it butterfly, and have an upgraded version of whatever computer that is available with their standard keyboard at a higher cost. Some people will buy the cheaper model because is cheaper and if there aren’t any problems most people will eventually accept it. Call it butterfly and every piece of bad press gets rerun and all computer sites will talk about is how stupid Apple was to bring it back even if it is fixed.
If you are a developer, you already have one or more suitable development Macs. What one might be missing is yet another test device for some hypothetical new brand configuration. Many developers already have a shelf and/or box full of regression test devices (multiple A chips, performance levels, and display sizes, multiple iOS and macOS versions, and etc.). If the cost of one more test device is significant, that developer is probably doing far too little testing.
Buying one more test device may not be popular, but it is a sign of competency.
Sure, if those are current enough.
For iOS apps? Maybe. (Even then, no, most developers can't afford that.)
For Mac apps? That'd be extremely pricey to keep around, and also not as useful. For iOS, part of the appeal of physical test devices is that you get to test the app with different fixed resolutions, interaction methods (home button vs. notch, e.g.), etc. Doesn't apply as much on a Mac.
Most of the stuff relevant to test on a Mac can be virtualized anyway. Say you want to support Mojave and High Sierra — just add two VMs for that. These days, you don't really need to run those yourself; just rent them at e.g. MS.
I'm cautiously optimistic about the ARM transition, but concerned Cook will use this as an opportunity to eliminate whatever ports are left (save for a "Smart Connector") in order to drive iCloud subscription revenue. Hopefully Apple won't pursue this path.
The T1 is based on a TI microcontroller, while the T2 is an A10 variant, which means most likely a quad-core (2+2) with a modified GPU (Less 3D and more compute) and of course additional security features. I'm not sure if an upgrade to a T3 is necessary yet.
On a side note, does anyone here think its possible that Apple would include an atom-based x86 cpu (Celeron or Pentium Silver) to maintain computability, while also crippling performance, to help with and force the transition?
Nope don’t think they even considered that for one minute.
I've seen Intel refuse to sell parts because they don't like the other parts being used in the product. Intel won't help ease the transition pain here.
Yep. Though after a bunch of antitrust action they may be behaving better nowadays.