Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

ARM: Why!?

S

SegNerd

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Feb 28, 2020
308
308
It seems like a lot of people are excited at the rumors of a possible upcoming ARM-based Mac. I have to say, I'm finding it hard to understand why this is a good thing. Won't it just mean that we will lose the ability to run Windows, and we will have to migrate our entire software library a fourth time? Plus a lot of existing hardware could needlessly be made obsolete.

The previous migrations made sense because Apple was leaving behind technologies that had reached their end of life (680X0, Mac OS Classic, and PowerPC). In my opinion, Intel processors still have excellent performance and a bright future. They also seem to be very popular with developers. I just don't understand why we would abandon them now.

Even if Apple were insistent on making its own CPUs, couldn't Apple just start making x86 chips?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: BluefinTuna, windowsblowsass, Novus John and 2 others
A lot of people seem to (incorrectly) believe that it means they’ll be able to just magically run iOS/iPadOS apps.

as for making x86 chips, they’d need a licence from each of AMD and Intel I believe, to make 64bit x86 processors, and I doubt it’s worth the effort.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SegNerd
I also am unsure why people are so excited about the possibility of ARM-based Macs.

I also wasn't really happy about the switch to Intel, but there was clear benefits to the switch that I understood, such as the issues of G5 and the unclear future of the PowerPC processors.

I am paraphrasing, but Steve Jobs was said that the switch to Intel was to be able for Apple to make the best Mac for the customers. I believed that he believed this was true.

If Apple switch to ARM-based Macs, with today's Apple I would guess this had more to do with the bottom-line and profit margins than making the best Mac for its customers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vasim, T'hain Esh Kelch, Novus John and 5 others
My biggest concern is how locked down macOS will be after a switch to ARM. Are they going to use this vertical integration opportunity to iOS-ify it with new UX and less freedom for users to modify it (e.g., ability to install homebrew, 3rd party drivers, interoperability with Windows, etc)?

On one hand, I think Apple knows their “Pro” users, including CS people. But I’ve seen Apple make some poor decisions in the past in this regard.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Novus John, Jynto, ipponrg and 2 others
vertical smile said:
I also am unsure why people are so excited about the possibility of ARM-based Macs.

I also wasn't really happy about the switch to Intel, but there was clear benefits to the switch that I understood, such as the issues of G5 and the unclear future of the PowerPC processors.

I am paraphrasing, but Steve Jobs was said that the switch to Intel was to be able for Apple to make the best Mac for the customers. I believed that he believed this was true.

If Apple switch to ARM-based Macs, with today's Apple I would guess this had more to do with the bottom-line and profit margins than making the best Mac for its customers.
Click to expand...

Ok. Let me say this from 50 years in the computer business (When I started as a young engineer, the IBM 360 ruled the world.) Big companies are run to please stockholders. That isn't a cynical statement, just reality. Some outfits manage to keep both customers and stockholders happy, but the only firms that exist to please customers are those that have just sprung up and make enough profit to have that luxury. Dell, Compact, Amazon, Google and the early Apple come to mind. But, when a company gets to a particular size, they have to have professional guidance from within. They become way too complex for the original founder, genius that he/she might be with hardware or software, to run as if it were a startup. And that change brings on the MBAs, whose training is laser-focused on the bottom line.

Steve Jobs had the chaotic charisma to demand perfection for the customer and apparently had little interest for the financial side of the business. Tim Cook replaced him and is far more of a bottom line man. Thus, we no longer have Apple Monitors, Routers, and other items that were very popular with many customers, but were just a blip on the financial spreadsheet.

Elon Musk is another example. When he is gone, the Spacex and all the other associated businesses will be run in the standard mode - "...and we are spending good money to broadcast video of rockets into space for free??? Either turn it off or figure out how to charge for it!"

When Jeff Bezos leaves Amazon, say goodbye to your 2 day and 'free' shipping. "...add a dollar to the shipping on each order - no one will notice. Oh, and ask UPS what kind of break they can give us if we back up to, say, four days ship time. Slowly."

Nothing evil, just the way of American business. Reports to stockholders rule. Tim Cook certainly likes to keep Apple users happy, but he is bound by the unwritten rules that say, "Profits first, happiness second, or we will find someone who can."
 
  • Like
Reactions: secretk, Äpfelchen, kodama23 and 2 others
Higher performance at a lower cost, and Apple controls the schedule. No more getting screwed over by Intel’s inability to execute.

Also, tighter integration of software and hardware, giving Apple the ability to incorporate many specialized coprocessors into the SoC. Apple hardware will increasingly diverge from the current PC platform.

(In five years I think you’ll be amazed at how different the hardware offerings from Apple and the Dell/HP/Lenovo/gamer Intel-based PC platform will be.)

Apple has an emulator, Rosetta 2, for those who need x64 compatibility for running apps that haven’t yet been (or won’t be) recompiled.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hobowankenobi, windowsblowsass, Nightfury326 and 3 others
It was only a matter of time really, the CPU on Macs was the last real leap for them to consolidate control over what they do and I totally get that. Personally I think it will work out. Yes, it is going to cause issues and there will, of course, be bumps in the road.
 
  • Like
Reactions: windowsblowsass and Queen6
It's a very Trumpian move. They easily could have developed accelerator hardware for all these applications he demoed and still ran on x86. That would have been the capitulation to interoperability and user-friendliness.

throttle gate was a mofo. I lived through 68k -> PPC, OS 9 -> OSX, and PPC -> Intel.

Tim Cook is right, the Mac was better off but THOSE TRANSITIONS BLEW because apple pays all of their attention three or four major vendors and does nothing systemic make all the fun 3rd party apps available going forward.

I had a few grand in photoshop plugins. GONE.
I had a few grand in 32 bit VSTs and AudioUnits. GONE
I spent time downloading all sorts of beautiful innovative cutting edge software developed in academia. GONE

There was even a lot of super cool stuff you could do in OS9 that hasn't been replicated as far as I know... although it's been so long I forget what it was but I definitely remember getting super angry when it disappeared.

This is also going to be a new age where the price for developers to go cross platform is going to go up.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: windowsblowsass, Novus John, robes1 and 2 others
romanof said:
Ok. Let me say this from 50 years in the computer business (When I started as a young engineer, the IBM 360 ruled the world.) Big companies are run to please stockholders. That isn't a cynical statement, just reality. Some outfits manage to keep both customers and stockholders happy, but the only firms that exist to please customers are those that have just sprung up and make enough profit to have that luxury. Dell, Compact, Amazon, Google and the early Apple come to mind. But, when a company gets to a particular size, they have to have professional guidance from within. They become way too complex for the original founder, genius that he/she might be with hardware or software, to run as if it were a startup. And that change brings on the MBAs, whose training is laser-focused on the bottom line.

Steve Jobs had the chaotic charisma to demand perfection for the customer and apparently had little interest for the financial side of the business. Tim Cook replaced him and is far more of a bottom line man. Thus, we no longer have Apple Monitors, Routers, and other items that were very popular with many customers, but were just a blip on the financial spreadsheet.

Elon Musk is another example. When he is gone, the Spacex and all the other associated businesses will be run in the standard mode - "...and we are spending good money to broadcast video of rockets into space for free??? Either turn it off or figure out how to charge for it!"

When Jeff Bezos leaves Amazon, say goodbye to your 2 day and 'free' shipping. "...add a dollar to the shipping on each order - no one will notice. Oh, and ask UPS what kind of break they can give us if we back up to, say, four days ship time. Slowly."

Nothing evil, just the way of American business. Reports to stockholders rule. Tim Cook certainly likes to keep Apple users happy, but he is bound by the unwritten rules that say, "Profits first, happiness second, or we will find someone who can."
Click to expand...

I’ll bet you a dollar that Amazon goes to same day shipping before it goes to four day shipping. Everyone else is moving to match two-day. It’s moved the market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: seezar, Breaking Good, radiologyman and 1 other person
There's not a lot I bought from Amazon lately via Amazon prime that I have gotten in 2 days.
 
endlessike said:
I’ll bet you a dollar that Amazon goes to same day shipping before it goes to four day shipping.
Click to expand...

Already happening, well for me at least, I would say I get about 15% of my deliveries same-day on prime providing I order early enough.
 
This, plus low noise and heat. I sold my gaming PC cuz I was sick of the fan noise and pipes all coming off the CPU to keep it cool, this makes it even cooler and quieter now. I think even gamers can appreciate that, if all Windows games announced ARM versions tomorrow they'd only see upside to switching I would think...unless they like the heat and noise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nightfury326
Oirectine said:
* Total control over the design of their own processors (not really a direct benefit for end users, but a big benefit to Apple)
Click to expand...

Have you noticed some machines get frequent upgrades, and others don't? Sometimes thats because intel doesn't release a cpu with features that apple wants to use.

Apple: we want n cores, this power profile, and Iris Pro graphics.
Intel: How about UHD graphics instead? Or partner with nvidia this time round? Or you could design a proper case...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nightfury326 and chabig
I would just like to clarify that when I started this thread, ARM was still just a rumor. I feel like it makes my tone sound a bit different now that it is a fact.

I’m still not sure how I feel about this, but I’m definitely open to at least looking at benchmarks when the new models are actually released.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hobowankenobi, philosophree, LeeW and 2 others
SegNerd said:
It seems like a lot of people are excited at the rumors of a possible upcoming ARM-based Mac. I have to say, I'm finding it hard to understand why this is a good thing. Won't it just mean that we will lose the ability to run Windows, and we will have to migrate our entire software library a fourth time? Plus a lot of existing hardware could needlessly be made obsolete.

The previous migrations made sense because Apple was leaving behind technologies that had reached their end of life (680X0, Mac OS Classic, and PowerPC). In my opinion, Intel processors still have excellent performance and a bright future. They also seem to be very popular with developers. I just don't understand why we would abandon them now.

Even if Apple were insistent on making its own CPUs, couldn't Apple just start making x86 chips?
Click to expand...
Being able to run multiple VM's under a Unix environment makes a intel based Mac very attractive. Going the CISC to RISC and using a compatibility environment really destroys a good part of engineering usefulness. They could argue we will keep improving the ability of running legacy application with Rosetta 2. But would not this all turn into something similar of everything you use to run is akin to like running a VM and its performance? I understand perhaps Apple can churn out faster and faster ARMs, but compare the MacPro workstation to a multiple ARM desktop I really like to see them make things equal to intel server grade processors and GPUs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Infrared
Oirectine said:
* Possible huge boost to battery life
* Possible significant cut in heat
* Possible substantial performance boosts
* Total control over the design of their own processors (not really a direct benefit for end users, but a big benefit to Apple)
Click to expand...
This, but I’d say your last point is most important. I don’t believe “control” only means “not beholden to Intel’s schedules”. It’s more about the ability to put on-die ASICs for whatever “killer features” Apple decides they decide to bring out in software. Think things like TouchID, FaceID, Secure Enclave, Machine Learning, Image Processing, Native Codecs, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nightfury326, chabig, PickUrPoison and 1 other person
audiomatt said:
It's a very Trumpian move. They easily could have developed accelerator hardware for all these applications he demoed and still ran on x86. That would have been the capitulation to interoperability and user-friendliness.

throttle gate was a mofo. I lived through 68k -> PPC, OS 9 -> OSX, and PPC -> Intel.

Tim Cook is right, the Mac was better off but THOSE TRANSITIONS BLEW because apple pays all of their attention three or four major vendors and does nothing systemic make all the fun 3rd party apps available going forward.

I had a few grand in photoshop plugins. GONE.
I had a few grand in 32 bit VSTs and AudioUnits. GONE
I spent time downloading all sorts of beautiful innovative cutting edge software developed in academia. GONE

There was even a lot of super cool stuff you could do in OS9 that hasn't been replicated as far as I know... although it's been so long I forget what it was but I definitely remember getting super angry when it disappeared.

This is also going to be a new age where the price for developers to go cross platform is going to go up.
Click to expand...
The price of progress unfortunately. After 15 years, it’s time to make a change.

This one should last at least that long, but today’s software might not be usable in 15 or 20 years, regardless of whether you paid $10 or $10,000 for it 🤷‍♂️
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nightfury326
littlepud said:
This, but I’d say your last point is most important. I don’t believe “control” only means “not beholden to Intel’s schedules”. It’s more about the ability to put on-die ASICs for whatever “killer features” Apple decides they decide to bring out in software. Think things like TouchID, FaceID, Secure Enclave, Machine Learning, Image Processing, Native Codecs, etc.
Click to expand...

Yes. This. Absolutely. Stretching back to the 68k days, Apple has struggled with having its fate tied to the fortunes of another company. During the 68k period and PPC period respectively, Apple was hamstrung by Motorola's difficulties in scaling up the clock speeds of the 68040 and G4. When the first PPC Macs were introduced, there was a dearth of PPC-native software (dealing the Power Mac a considerable blow in mindshare and marketshare) because Metroworks hadn't updated CodeWarrior, the leading Mac IDE of the day. For years, Apple was reliant on Microsoft and Adobe to update their apps for the Mac because it was apps like Photoshop and Office which drove adoption of major hardware and OS revisions. And finally, Apple was effectively blocked from delivering on their vision for the future of the PowerBook due to IBM's inability/unwillingness to develop a G5 that was portable-friendly.

So Apple developing their own CPU is simply the logical endpoint of this, and given their history with ARM, it makes total sense. Apple has its own IDE. They have their own Office suite and suite of content creation apps. And now, they have their own silicon (which also isn't new; Apple was researching CPU designs of their own before going with PPC). Apple will finally be the master of its own destiny. They will not be reliant on another company. The fact that their ARM SoC designs are so good that they've gotten an iPad to rival a MacBook Pro is simply the cherry on top.

In the end, we'll see where this takes us, as Apple's customers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back