Yep, I switched back to windows already in terms of buying new hardware. I might keep a mac running for kicks but even if this works out for Apple it'll take a long time before it's worth looking at.
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.
Bloomberg: Apple's First Arm Mac to Launch by 2021 With 12-Core Processor
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yep, I switched back to windows already in terms of buying new hardware. I might keep a mac running for kicks but even if this works out for Apple it'll take a long time before it's worth looking at.
This will be awesome for consumer MacBooks. It will absolutely crush Intel in both performance and battery life.
Most people don’t need dual boot or VMs, but for those that do, they will obviously still be able to go with Intel Macs.
Most people don’t need dual boot or VMs, but for those that do, they will obviously still be able to go with Intel Macs.
It's largely down to single core performance - and it seems Apple's latest A series chips are at least on a par, if not even ahead of both Intel and AMD's mobile offerings on that score (more in line with the top desktop chips!). Given a higher TDP and active cooling, it's quite possible they could put some real distance between their own silicon and the generic chip producers.
Somewhat true, and for those people there's little reason not to just get a cheap Chromebook.
Or it could end up killing the platform
Microsoft and Apple are two totally different animals. Apple watched and learned from Microsoft's blunders and will have great emulation or something in place to negate the issue. Bank on it.
Overall, this development should allow for great apps to exist across all devices. Or developers could abandon the platform which is doubtful.
So are we looking at an ARM Mac with a higher core count than anything seen in an Apple product thus far, will Run MacOS, Windows AND iOS (although without touch due to iPadOS now being mouse compatible), be backwards compatible with existing software and run more efficiently and (dare I say it but in light of the MacBook Air price shift) a little more price competitive? As a platform, it sounds like a lot to ask for, but more exciting than anything we have at the moment.
Yeah, about that.....
Did you like having to purchase a new copy of Adobe CS because your installers wouldn't run on Intel?
I'm pretty sure people who want to run windows in some form or another will be less likely to consider a Mac. My thinking is that with the move to the ARM platform consumers will not be risking their money on buying something that Apple won't be continuing.
classic MacBook Pro - often used as shorthand for unibody generation, particularly to differentiate the 2012s where you had both unibody and retina models
Thanks a lot for taking the time to explain.
Looks like my guess was right:
Leaker: Apple Planning iPad Air With Under-Screen Touch ID, ARM MacBook, Game Controller, and More
I knew they were going to use A series on low hanging fruit first. Interesting that they are bringing back the 12 inch MacBook. It’s less risky, especially since the MacBook Air has restored some sanity and affordability to Apple’s family of MacBooks. But I knew the recent iPad update was really...forums.macrumors.com
I likely won’t be buying, if and when I do upgrade, I will be going for another Intel based MacBook Pro. The A-Series on Mac will still need some time to mature. It will be certainly faster than it took for the Intel transition and even that was a smooth one.
Apple likely has been testing macOS on A series as far back as 2012 or 2013. When Phill Schiller described the A7 as having desktop class performance and the first 64 bit chip in an SoC. Part of the heritage of macOS too is its portability. Remember, NeXT had it running on Motorola processors, then Sparc after a deal with SUN, then brought it to Intel. It appeared to have been little effort to bring it up on Intel as proper OS X back in the 2000’s when it was called Marklar.
This is exciting though. I wonder if they are gonna use the opportunity to make any alterations to macOS desktop or to make the transition familiar and easy, maintain the traditional macOS Finder Desktop Experies: Dock, Global Menu Bar etc. Apple should use the iPad style dock in the new macOS on A series.
If they aren't updating their programs then in a year or two's time those programs will be unusable anyway because either:
- They'll have been broken by a MacOS update (as many have been by Catalina)
- In some cases they'll be unusable due to unpatched security vulnerabilities
- They'll be obsolete because they lack support for new technologies, compatibility with newer versions of other software, new file formats etc.
- With a lot of modern software, the web services that they depend on will get shut down.
- If they're App Store apps they will have vanished from the App Store so you're stuffed as soon as you switch machine.
Politics sometimes tend to change when they no longer seem fruitful. What politics is holding them back from working with them?
I don't care about the price, as long as my Mac does what I want from it.
Good for you. I don't care about the price. the RPi is sh*t, couldn't go further than just an home app to open/close my garage door or turn on/off an lightbulb in my bedroom. "how exciting!". NOT.
Thing is: I do not want to switch, end period. I've been using it for ten years and I want to use for another ten years.
I've seen their iPad port and I've laughed miserably hard at this. It's terrible. Pixelmator and Vectornator does a little better - but does not match my desktop stupidly quick and painless workflow.
Lies, lies. ARM aren't energy efficent. Look at the iPhones, the main complaint is always "it drains my battery too fast". And it does drain the battery faster than COVID19 is killing people. I cant use my phone for straight 4 hour without draining the battery.
Thank you. I have more faith in x86/x64 than the ****** ARM and I do not want to put it on emulators like WINE (I know the name is "Wine is not an emulator" but frankly, IT IS!). And I will keep using the last Intel Mac until the end of my life.
It's not a confusion, it's a pretty firm belief. ARM is sh*t. x86 is a GOD. I'll keep my last Intel based Mac, but I'm more than prepared to be switching to AMD based PCs with Linux for work and laugh at the ARM based PCs failing when it happens. I can live navigating between Linux on x86/x64 and macOS Intel. I just do not want to have anything to do with the terrible ARMs. It has potential to be worse than PPC/Rosetta days. And boy, these days were a nightmare I will never want to relive.
I won't lie, those chips certainly sound like they could be impressive... (particularly) in a Macbook or Macbook Air...
But, as I've said before, I honestly just can't see the long term merit of moving the entire Mac line up away from x86-64 to ARM unless (and really even if) Apple's got an absolutely massive lead in both single core and multicore performance vs desktop x86 parts as well as the expected power consumption advantages that would enable them to stuff a 12 core CPU in a ~5W laptop.
Had Intel gotten fat and lazy by 2017 when they'd had absolute dominance in the high end CPU market for almost a decade? Yep. Did Apple and the rest of the industry suffer because of it? Absolutely. Thankfully Intel's no longer the only game in town for high performance x86 CPUs since AMD's 2017 Ryzen comeback, and now, with Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000 desktop, 4000 laptop parts) AMD has managed to take a lead in desktop, laptop and server parts. If they can execute Zen 3 and 4 as well as they've executed Zen 2 (and if there's any truth to the whispers about Zen 3 it looks like they will), we could be looking at an x86 industry that will be almost unrecognizable by the end of 2021.
I'm not surprised that Apple can design a low power laptop CPU that's better than Intel's 9th and 10th gen offerings. Heck, they may even have AMD's Ryzen 4000 laptop parts beat in the 5~15W range. The important question however, is can they design a chip that competes in the desktop space and can they continue to do so for as long as desktop computing is a thing?
Remember, Mac volumes (AKA Apple's marketshare) could double or even triple and they'd still be shipping far less high performance CPUs than either AMD or Intel. And no matter how many Macs they sell, unless they're looking to branch out into the server business (doubtful) or replay the 90s in a new war with Microsoft, the Mac business will likely always be small potatoes compared to their other businesses. What this means is that Apple's chip design philosophies and priorities will ALWAYS be rooted in what mobile (AKA the iPhone) needs and not what the Mac needs.
With those kind of constraints, it's not a question of whether they can beat Intel and AMD today or even in 2021, but in 2023, 2025, and beyond. Remember, these companies, unlike Apple, live or die on the quality of their chips. You can bet your ass that sooner or later Intel's coming back with a vengeance and AMD, determined not to repeat its past failures, is going to try and hang onto that performance crown tenaciously. Can Apple really maintain a long term competitive advantage over these companies, particularly when they sell to enterprise customers who pay top dollar for high end servers and storage? I'm not sure and I think it's an awfully risky gamble, particularly when we don't know when the next paradigm shift in computing will be.
All of this is before we even consider the compatibility headaches a transition from x86 to ARM would bring. While it certainly wouldn't be as bad as the PowerPC days, owing to ARM having more market and mindshare than PowerPC ever did, it would still unnecessarily complicate things, and make Macs far less attractive for work that involves development, virtualization or any number of other things.
My hope is that Apple has more sense than to attempt a full on transition and will instead just announce that macOS will support multiple ISA's (x86-64 AND ARM) and that they will choose the most appropriate option between what Intel, AMD, and they themselves can offer for any given product. Only time will tell.
To end on a more positive note, I can't tell you how excited I am to see this site reporting on substanial MAC rumors for once
But, as I've said before, I honestly just can't see the long term merit of moving the entire Mac line up away from x86-64 to ARM unless (and really even if) Apple's got an absolutely massive lead in both single core and multicore performance vs desktop x86 parts as well as the expected power consumption advantages that would enable them to stuff a 12 core CPU in a ~5W laptop.
Had Intel gotten fat and lazy by 2017 when they'd had absolute dominance in the high end CPU market for almost a decade? Yep. Did Apple and the rest of the industry suffer because of it? Absolutely. Thankfully Intel's no longer the only game in town for high performance x86 CPUs since AMD's 2017 Ryzen comeback, and now, with Zen 2 (Ryzen 3000 desktop, 4000 laptop parts) AMD has managed to take a lead in desktop, laptop and server parts. If they can execute Zen 3 and 4 as well as they've executed Zen 2 (and if there's any truth to the whispers about Zen 3 it looks like they will), we could be looking at an x86 industry that will be almost unrecognizable by the end of 2021.
I'm not surprised that Apple can design a low power laptop CPU that's better than Intel's 9th and 10th gen offerings. Heck, they may even have AMD's Ryzen 4000 laptop parts beat in the 5~15W range. The important question however, is can they design a chip that competes in the desktop space and can they continue to do so for as long as desktop computing is a thing?
Remember, Mac volumes (AKA Apple's marketshare) could double or even triple and they'd still be shipping far less high performance CPUs than either AMD or Intel. And no matter how many Macs they sell, unless they're looking to branch out into the server business (doubtful) or replay the 90s in a new war with Microsoft, the Mac business will likely always be small potatoes compared to their other businesses. What this means is that Apple's chip design philosophies and priorities will ALWAYS be rooted in what mobile (AKA the iPhone) needs and not what the Mac needs.
With those kind of constraints, it's not a question of whether they can beat Intel and AMD today or even in 2021, but in 2023, 2025, and beyond. Remember, these companies, unlike Apple, live or die on the quality of their chips. You can bet your ass that sooner or later Intel's coming back with a vengeance and AMD, determined not to repeat its past failures, is going to try and hang onto that performance crown tenaciously. Can Apple really maintain a long term competitive advantage over these companies, particularly when they sell to enterprise customers who pay top dollar for high end servers and storage? I'm not sure and I think it's an awfully risky gamble, particularly when we don't know when the next paradigm shift in computing will be.
All of this is before we even consider the compatibility headaches a transition from x86 to ARM would bring. While it certainly wouldn't be as bad as the PowerPC days, owing to ARM having more market and mindshare than PowerPC ever did, it would still unnecessarily complicate things, and make Macs far less attractive for work that involves development, virtualization or any number of other things.
My hope is that Apple has more sense than to attempt a full on transition and will instead just announce that macOS will support multiple ISA's (x86-64 AND ARM) and that they will choose the most appropriate option between what Intel, AMD, and they themselves can offer for any given product. Only time will tell.
To end on a more positive note, I can't tell you how excited I am to see this site reporting on substanial MAC rumors for once
Microsoft failed at smartphones and tablets before Apple tried too. You say Microsoft tried to transition to ARM, but that's not true, they have no plans to switch from x86 to ARM, their plan is to support both x86 and ARM. Apple has actually done a transition before, which it was successful at. Your "predictions" are based on logic that's just as reliable as a stopped clock.
All of that is a very good argument to abandon the Mac Platform completely.
None of my mission critical software is available on an iPad. If the Mac Platform spits into an ARM/iOS branch and an X86 branch - a LOT of software development houses will walk away - They aren't going to support 3 code bases (and anyone telling you that a simple software compile switch is going to make each product run native is just kidding themselves), especially when the Mac Platform is so small (in comparison) to begin with. They won't sell enough new copies to justify the development and more importantly, the support costs.
1.0 version Hardware with 1.0 version Software - are YOU willing to bet your company on that?
Surely a gaming PC is a good alternative. Apple probably doesn’t feel like they need to cater to bootcamp pc games anymore.
I'm curious about 64-bit performance. x86 emulation on ARM is solid right now, it's not exactly new. It will get better with more powerful processors. With ARM based Windows (with x86 emulation) and ARM Linux versions, it's finally time to let the old Intel and AMD crap die.
I've been developing software for both ARM and x86(-64) for years, along with others in my research group, and the problems are really when some of the hundreds of dependencies from some public github repo are causing it.
We already know Apple is working on their own emulation and virtualization software, based on what's been discovered in the Hackintosh scene, so I'm pretty sure they'll get this right.
Oh god no. please!!!! it would be hell if they locked the Mac down.
It cracks me up that so many people are assuming this will be a full migration away from Intel. Why all the histrionics?
It’s going to go like this: “You’re certain you need dual boot and/or VMs? Great, take a look at our Intel based computers.”
If someone is shopping for a MacBook Air or even a 13” MacBook Pro, they’re not typically looking to dual boot or run VMs. For those thin and light laptops, the 12 core Apple powered one is going to be 2-3x more powerful than a dual or quad core Intel one, and have maybe double the battery life.