Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Wait, if NO design changes, what's the point of changing architecture? I thought it was to gain smaller sizes...I mean, fan, no fan? If it doesn't look different I see it a big opportunity to make statement about the change missed.

There will be design changes.

But the purpose will be much higher performance, much more security, and longer battery life, as well as new functionality achievable by incorporating all sorts of special-function blocks on the SoC or in the MCM.
 
Wow, so far I haven’t seen the standard “If I can’t use boot camp, I won’t get another Mac” comment.. I’m not sure that we will see an ARM based MacBook yet, I think that Apple is pushing the iPad Pro as the portable computer. In my opinion, the iPad Pro with magic keyboard is the first ARM powered “Mac”
 
It was a mistake. It's been fixed. Leave it in the dustbin of electronics history, where it belongs.
There were issues with the butterfly keyboard but it's still my favorite keyboard to type on. This is my opinion and experience. I know others have other opinions. Granted, I only had a MacBook for a couple years and never had any problems but I like the typing experience. I was faster and more accurate typing on it than any other keyboard in the 35+ years I've been using keyboards.

I'm not saying Apple should go back to butterfly keyboards again but if they really can solve the issues people are having, I support the move (meaning I’m not going to complain about it).
 
Last edited:
This is what I’ve been saying for years. They’ll start with their thinnest, lightest laptops, which will suddenly be twice as powerful and have way better battery life. The higher end Macs have powerful 8-12 core Intel i9 processors already, they’re doing great. It’s the thin and light Macs that are held back by Intel.
 
As someone who only jumped to Mac in 2011 after 15 years of using Windows/x86 exclusively i am really concerned about application compatibility with this ARM move.

When i first got a Mac running Lion 10.7 (2011 Air 13"), PowerPC compatibility using Rosetta had just been removed so i missed out on running some of my favourite Windows games with ease as there was PowerPC versions of those games . I did find work arounds using WINE or buying Parallels but i just wanted the native Mac version to work :( .

Slowly since owning one i had noticed the amount of programs for Mac had become the strongest it had ever been, and even games were slowly but surely becoming available more on Mac. Then Apple kill 32bit in Catalina and half the games no longer run and other old apps have been killed, so now thats all the Power PC software and all the 32 Bit gone.

Now we move to ARM what happens to the apps? Will the 64 bit apps i run today still be allowed to be run in years to come on ARM using emulation or will Apple pull the equivalent of the Rosetta engine for x64 emulation out in 4 years time and even worse with their new OS every year make holding onto the older OS that can run them even harder.

It does not matter how amazing an OS is to use , and MacOS has had a crisp clean consistent UI for 20 years that is very reliable, but if there are no apps to actually run i'm going to have a big problem.
 
That was important once upon a time.

Much less so these days.

Azrael.
it still matters a lot, on windows side, is pure garbage...i had surface pro X and every app that wasnt arm based written was....untouchable ...emulation is like in the 90
So thats why , i think Apple makes this transition smooth, they offer everything from time
 
I think a much better approach than just a switch is to have dual processors. An ARM and an Intel CPU over the next five years. That way, tasks that only run on Intel allow the Mac to use more power and turn on the Intel processor. In all other cases, it would use a much lower power state of a twelve-core A-Series ARM SoC. This, if implemented well, could allow Apple and developers a path to ensure customers get the best of both worlds. Apple can show its prowess and SoC capabilities without leaving out Intel/x86/Windows and etc.

This scenario has never been offered but it seems to me to allow the best of both worlds. Apple could run its own graphics which would probably destroy anything AMD has available. The SoC can do certain things much faster and better than Intel. But for those Intel-only apps that are power hungry not alienate them.
It’s truly the best of both worlds. It requires some advanced code and a rosette model to emulate all possible for running as much as possible on ARM CPUs. At the same time, when it just isn’t feasible like with Adobe Premiere Pro or other intensive apps, allow Intel to shine.
This strategy would allow a win-win for Apple, customers, developers and etc. as Customer will not be left out in the cold and developers will have time to implement a new instruction set.

anyone want to give their thoughts?

Apple's done this before, but I doubt they'll do it again, if for no other reason than most of their machines shipped today are laptops and they've been running as close as they can to a low power budget for a while as it is on laptops. It's also a lot more complicated, still leaves them tied to intel's cycle, removes incentive for devs to quickly update to arm/fat binaries, and is generally counter to Apple's strategy since the days of the G3 iMacs of just ripping off the band-aid at once on major changes
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.