Are ARM Macs going to get older quickly like iPads and iPhones?

[ondert]

In iMac section of the forum you can bump into many posts, users telling that they are still using decade old iMacs. I wonder how will this thing change with the arrival of ARM based Macs? Are they going to age much faster like iPhones and iPads? Is Apple going to make us replace them every few years by limiting OS support on older devices? These are the dangerous questions I asked myself at first. I'm also sure the performance gain will be higher with Apple Silicon chips per watt. It's completely another thing.
I'm afraid of Tim Cook's ideas lurking in his mind? Those might be the same ones I'm worried about. Consequently we're talking about a complete salesman who just cried after an Apple TV+ ******** on stage to rob us also on monthly basis, always hesitated to spend on redesigning the products, also made ****** things to save a few cents more over a highly priced products i.e. flexgate, 480p webcam, intentionally underpowered MacBook Air.
I simply do not trust this man, what are your thoughts?

 

[maflynn]

Here's my thought, Apple has long moved to make the Mac a disposable commodity. Its virtually impossible to replace memory, storage or even the battery, so repairing the macs is more about replacements and less about fixing the failed part. I don't know what's in their mind, but I do believe they'll want the consumer to buy instead of repair and Tim Cook as lamented in the past that people were repairing the phones instead of replacing them.

It came as no surprise that they (apple) then disabled touchid if the screen was replaced by a non-apple party. They want to penalize people for going the repair route, especially the non-apple repair route

 

[frou]

The usual scenario is getting the latest Apple OS updates for say 6 years, then being stuck on a fixed version for the rest of the machine's useful life (which can be pretty long, given how mature personal computing is).

I don't see any particular reason why that would change now.

 

[leman]

I don’t think so. One reason why Apple is now moving to ARM is that their chips have sufficiently matured. You got rapid advancements when they were staring out, that’s why there were huge performance differences in between their iPhone releases. This will most likely slow down now as Apple is also approaching the limits of what is physically possible.

 

[bluecoast]

It’s a very good point. I have a feeling that they’ll plan for their Apple silicon computers to last ~5 years.

And who knows - given the similarity they’ll have to iPhones and iPads, they may offer advantageous trade in deals for machines that are 1-3 years old to encourage upgrades.

Or maybe they’ll launch a similar system to the AppleCare+ Monthly payments programme where you get a new machine every 2 years.

 

[serpico007]

Wonder what will happen once they slow down and don't get updates. Currently with Intel, some users can install Linux as an option. But thinking these devices will be locked down, I can't imagine alternative operating systems will be an option. My iPad 3 is running iOS 9 and didn't get the 10 update and it is slow as molasses.

 

[aevan]

It came as no surprise that they (apple) then disabled touchid if the screen was replaced by a non-apple party. They want to penalize people for going the repair route, especially the non-apple repair route

This had nothing to do with penalizing and everything with security.

 

[ChrisA]

I don’t think so. One reason why Apple is now moving to ARM is that their chips have sufficiently matured. You got rapid advancements when they were staring out, that’s why there were huge performance differences in between their iPhone releases. This will most likely slow down now as Apple is also approaching the limits of what is physically possible.

So if this is correct an Arm-based Mac Pro would be impossible. The Arm chip is mature and the one they put in the MacBook Air is already about as fast as it can be. So what goes in the Mac Pro?

I know the answer: "More Arm cores" But some kinds of jobs can be done with multiple cores, some can't.

That said, it just might be possible to make a very fast Arm core if you are not so concerned about power usage. And you don't have to be on a desktop machine

But I still will bet that the single-core performance of Apple's Arm chips will not match Intel's.

 

[leman]

But I still will bet that the single-core performance of Apple's Arm chips will not match Intel's.

Oh, I am sure it will exceed Intels. Apple CPUs are already more superscalar by design and have more execution units. In terms of IPC, current iPhone CPUs outperform Intel by almost 40%. The big question is whether Apple can deliver higher clocks.
[automerge]1593339130[/automerge]

So if this is correct an Arm-based Mac Pro would be impossible. The Arm chip is mature and the one they put in the MacBook Air is already about as fast as it can be. So what goes in the Mac Pro?

Not necessarily. What I am trying to say that we probably won’t be getting 5x speed ups within a couple of years as it was the case with earlier iPhones.

 

[maflynn]

This had nothing to do with penalizing and everything with security.

That was the official excuse, but few people actually believed them, it was clear they were looking to penalize people for not paying apple for a repair (or replacement.

 

[leman]

That was the official excuse, but few people actually believed them, it was clear they were looking to penalize people for not paying apple for a repair (or replacement.

Regardless of what people believe, if biometric data is stolen because people had shady shops do modifications to their devices, it would be Apple who will get the blame. These are serious privacy concerns, not some random tantrums Apple is throwing. A chain of responsibility is in place for a reason.

 

[Realityck]

I'm afraid of Tim Cook's ideas lurking in his mind? Those might be the same ones I'm worried about. Consequently we're talking about a complete salesman who just cried after an Apple TV+ bullsh*t on stage to rob us also on monthly basis, always hesitated to spend on redesigning the products, also made sh*tty things to save a few cents more over a highly priced products i.e. flexgate, 480p webcam, intentionally underpowered MacBook Air.
I simply do not trust this man, what are your thoughts?

When a computer company worships smart phones, over computers, years go by and you see examples of computers not seeing performance updates such as with how many years between Mac Pro, you begin to sense that Apple is all about making money rather then its roots. Personally I am not against exploring all the products that can work off ARM processing, but I sense rather than provide a continuation of a unique hardware/software computer model they just want to dumb down what a desktop is.

"Under Cook’s tenure, Apple has more than doubled its market value, briefly pushing it above $1 Trillion, sold hundreds of millions of customers more expensive lines of iPhones and iPads, wireless AirPods, and subscription services like Apple Music. Yet after a period of astonishing sales growth, unit sales of the iPhone, which have long accounted for about two-thirds of Apple’s revenue, have been largely flat for years, and the company has struggled to compete in fast-growing markets such as China and India." - Bloomberg

Does that sound at all like a company that is focused on computers?

For so many years I thought, such wonderful advances to their MacOS, but the hardware was always costing more the competition, and niche with business usage. Even now I think back to Alan Kays knowledge navigator and think how crappy Siri is. What would Alan think about a world of Apple products centered around behavioral addiction such as iPhones, instead of showing the world that Apple computers can be used by anyone to achieve many great things?

 

[leman]

When a computer company worships smart phones, over computers, years go by and you see examples of computers not seeing performance updates such as with how many years between Mac Pro, you begin to sense that Apple is all about making money rather then its roots. Personally I am not against exploring all the products that can work off ARM processing, but I sense rather than provide a continuation of a unique hardware/software computer model they just want to dumb down what a desktop is.

And yet in the last couple of years Apple transitioned from being a software + industrial design company to a capable hardware component manufacturer. I think your are focusing too much on the negatives here. The fears of "dumbing down" the desktop have been repeatedly expressed since iOS appeared, but so far, nothing practical has happened to actually confirm those fears. Apple desktops today are more capable and more flexible than hey were 10 years ago.

 

[Falhófnir]

Get older more quickly? Maybe in the early days with the A4 and A5 based devices in particular not ageing gracefully, but I don't think that's really been the rule post A7, with one or two exceptions. Currently iPhone 6S, iPad Air 2 and mini 4 all still supported on i(pad)OS 14, that's a good 6-7 years of OS support, at least, and on iOS 13 most of these devices are still humming along quite well I gather. And these were made before Apple's chips were fully mature (only dual core CPUs, only 2GB RAM, much weaker graphics) who knows how long the massively overpowered A12/X/Z based devices could go on for?

 

[nothingtoseehere]

Get older more quickly? Maybe in the early days with the A4 and A5 based devices in particular not ageing gracefully, but I don't think that's really been the rule post A7,

I agree with Falhófnir. Have an iPad Pro 1st gen, presented in September 2015, with A9X. It is still up to date, speed and snappiness are absolutely fine. Until now, it has aged very well.

In fact, it is snappier than the MBP 13“ 2020 that I returned after a week! Snappiness score (to the right is better):

MBP 13“ early 2015 -> MBP 13“ 2020 -> iPad Pro 1st gen!

 

[Realityck]

And yet in the last couple of years Apple transitioned from being a software + industrial design company to a capable hardware component manufacturer. I think your are focusing too much on the negatives here. The fears of "dumbing down" the desktop have been repeatedly expressed since iOS appeared, but so far, nothing practical has happened to actually confirm those fears. Apple desktops today are more capable and more flexible than hey were 10 years ago.

Only because their phones were becoming less the stars and they badly needed to focus on their other products lines did we finally see some processor/gpu revisions with iMacs as a example. Is the new configurations about every two years working? PC's get new processors, Mac owners sit twiddling their thumbs. Those Power Mac 2006, 2013, 2019 model revisions sure have large gaps.

 

[Falhófnir]

I agree with Falhófnir. Have an iPad Pro 1st gen, presented in September 2015, with A9X. It is still up to date, speed and snappiness are absolutely fine. Until now, it has aged very well.

In fact, it is snappier than the MBP 13“ 2020 that I returned after a week! Snappiness score (to the right is better):

MBP 13“ early 2015 -> MBP 13“ 2020 -> iPad Pro 1st gen!

I have the same model and agree 100%, it's still a fantastic device and handles everything with aplomb! Before that I had the iPad 3 which didn't fare so well, iOS 6 and 7 ran ok, 8 bogged it down badly and 9 made it practically unusable (keystrokes took over a second, sometimes several to register!). Apple willing I don't see any reason the first gen Pro can't last out a full ~7-8 year Mac support cycle too.

 

[TiggrToo]

I have the same model and agree 100%, it's still a fantastic device and handles everything with aplomb! Before that I had the iPad 3 which didn't fare so well, iOS 6 and 7 ran ok, 8 bogged it down badly and 9 made it practically unusable (keystrokes took over a second, sometimes several to register!). Apple willing I don't see any reason the first gen Pro can't last out a full ~7-8 year Mac support cycle too.

Same here for me and my 9.7" Pro. Battery's a tish on the weakened side but aside from that it runs like a champ.

 

[Falhófnir]

Same here for me and my 9.7" Pro. Battery's a tish on the weakened side but aside from that it runs like a champ.

Yes I think I'm starting to notice a bit with the battery now too, I wasn't sure if it was a bit of drain from iOS 13s slightly janky optimisation, but it doesn't seem to have improved with subsequent . releases, and I guess the battery is a good 4 years old now so it's expected.

 

[leman]

Is the new configurations about every two years working? PC's get new processors, Mac owners sit twiddling their thumbs. Those Power Mac 2006, 2013, 2019 model revisions sure have large gaps.

I think this is primary reason why Apple has invested so much in their own chip. The suppliers they rely on have been stagnating. Intel is a couple of years behind their roadmap and has been unable to come up with architectural improvements in the last 6 years. AMD only now managed to catch up with Intel. You are complaining about lack of upgrades, but it’s not any different in PC world. All are using the same components. My 16” MBP single-threader performance is virtually identical to the 2017 15” MBP. And it’s not Apples fault.

 

[Realityck]

I think this is primary reason why Apple has invested so much in their own chip. The suppliers they rely on have been stagnating. Intel is a couple of years behind their roadmap and has been unable to come up with architectural improvements in the last 6 years. AMD only now managed to catch up with Intel. You are complaining about lack of upgrades, but it’s not any different in PC world. All are using the same components. My 16” MBP single-threader performance is virtually identical to the 2017 15” MBP. And it’s not Apples fault.

I do see the progress made, I'll wait and see how their MAC ARM chips evolve.
related

Here’s how Apple’s Mac and mobile ARM chip roadmap looks through 2025

Apple's collaboration with Taiwanese chipmaker TSMC means that some elements of its chip roadmap for the next five years can be reasonably forecasted.

venturebeat.com

 

[jinnyman]

I’m pretty sure that Apple’s upgrade cycle for Mac will be slower than similar x86 chip generations... unless intel and AMD really do some wonderful stuff and can advance their ipc much faster. I highly doubt this though.

Otherwise, Apple can afford to hold the same generation of chips for longer. All my thoughts are based on an assumption that Apple’s silicone will beat the performance of i9 mobile chip.

 

[Mac Heretic]

App Store and iOS store in particular are one of tha main reasons for "feeling old". It is quite common, that software providers tend to limit support only to the newest one or two OSes there.

This is how it goes: One has a new device and then some cash to burn for nice sounding apps. Everything is fine at first, but one day (and not so late) it shows up: that hideous message will tell about having an unsupported system because of OS. After that first encounter, the message starts to appear again and more and more often. Quite soon it is not only a random inconvenience but also a real obstacle. For an old iPad or iPhone owner or buyer, it is truly bad, since one can not find apps for them through other ways.

 

[Jimmy James]

App Store and iOS store in particular are one of tha main reasons for "feeling old". It is quite common, that software providers tend to limit support only to the newest one or two OSes there.

This is how it goes: One has a new device and then some cash to burn for nice sounding apps. Everything is fine at first, but one day (and not so late) it shows up: that hideous message will tell about having an unsupported system because of OS. After that first encounter, the message starts to appear again and more and more often. Quite soon it is not only a random inconvenience but also a real obstacle. For an old iPad or iPhone owner or buyer, it is truly bad, since one can not find apps for them through other ways.

This is my concern. I’m using a 2008 MacBook (with upgrades, unthinkable, I know). It’s a bit slow. And it works. Most software I side load still works.

If Apple moves to a mandatory App Store only model it’s game over. Compatibility will have a much shorter lifespan.

 

[Mac Heretic]

This is my concern. I’m using a 2008 MacBook (with upgrades, unthinkable, I know). It’s a bit slow. And it works. Most software I side load still works.

If Apple moves to a mandatory App Store only model it’s game over. Compatibility will have a much shorter lifespan.

I feel you. Lifespan is a real concern.

Apple representatives did say after the event on an interview, that mandatory App Store model will not happen with the introduction of A-chips. A Mac will still be a Mac and thus open for experimentation and usable for user's own purposes.

Another thing is, that security, sandboxes, certificates and that stuff can and will be well controlled with Apple hardware. In other words, it may well be still possible to be App Store -free but will it be meaningful for a developer to continue to make and sell independent apps that are in a risk to be too complicated to set up properly: they just might need more and more knowledge and manual permission-hacking from the buyer.

On a side note, marketing people may also like app store more now, because nowadays real cost of an app can be well hidden and unclarified with In-App purchases and subscriptions and other hoover salesman-tricks. So, mandatory or not, more and more apps might be there and your fears about that short lfe-span may become real because of that marketing reason already.