Bloomberg: Apple's First Arm Mac to Launch by 2021 With 12-Core Processor

[Spungoflex]

Why not just get an iPad?

Seriously if Mac goes to ARM without the legacy software transitioned in then might as well use iOS 14 / Mac Catalyst apps. At that point it is really not much different now from using iOS apps.

iPad can't even manage 16:9 external monitor support. Granted, that's a pretty easy fix, but one Apple has been unwilling to make so far.

I think the point here is to move away from Intel permanently for the Mac, not to do away with MacOS. You'd be surprised at how few people (as far as percentage) use "pro" apps. The vast majority of Mac users would be fine with Chrome and Microsoft Office + MacOS native apps. They really don't need much else.

Apple wants to regain control of their update cycle (as they should). The only way to do that is to ditch Intel.

 

[dingclancy23]

Have you seen some of the ported iOS apps? Current macOS version are much better. macOS Mail is better than iOS Mail.

There will be no issue with Apple's apps.

However other developers that are Mac-first will either need to use the power of Catalyst or not port their apps at all and stop development, and who knows how much motivation does indie OSX developers have for the transition.

It seems easier to do a Catalyst app for the iPad that also targets the Mac. That will change how Mac Apps works and will lose what makes Mac Apps good in the first place.

Just imagine apps Photoshop and Office for iPad/iOS. Will they create a new app for OSX ARM from scratch, or use the codebase of what they have done for iOS and just Mac-ify them. I am sure they will try hard to have the same features as their old desktop apps, but in the process of developing it will work differently.

Look at Podcast and Music app for Mac which are catalyst apps.

The merging of iOS and OSX is forthcoming.

 

[Ursadorable]

You said it: IF THEY UPDATE THEIR PROGRAMS!

Because developers don't want to make money.

 

[Bruno Castelló]

iPad can't even manage 16:9 external monitor support. Granted, that's a pretty easy fix, but one Apple has been unwilling to make so far.

I think the point here is to move away from Intel permanently for the Mac, not to do away with MacOS. You'd be surprised at how few people (as far as percentage) use "pro" apps. The vast majority of Mac users would be fine with Chrome and Microsoft Office + MacOS native apps. They really don't need much else.

Apple wants to regain control of their update cycle (as they should). The only way to do that is to ditch Intel.

Then go for AMD. Not silly, underpowered, ARM.

 

[randian]

If they want software developers to jump in on such a major change, Apple is going to have to provide plenty of swag: t-shirts, keychains, fidget spinners, worry balls, fake tattoos, whatever it takes. No expense should be spared.

For well-written software (doesn't include Adobe and Steam) this is no change at all. Flip the compiler switch and go. Ten minutes max. I simply don't understand the claim this change is problematic from the developer side. What's more likely is somebody's favorite app has been abandoned by its developer and thus can't be transitioned to ARM. Unless you're running Windows VMs I don't know why you'd care about x86 as such.

 

[dingclancy23]

iPad can't even manage 16:9 external monitor support. Granted, that's a pretty easy fix, but one Apple has been unwilling to make.

I think the point here is to move away from Intel permanently for the Mac, not to do away with MacOS. You;'d be surprised at how few people (as far as percentage) use "pro" apps. The vast majority of Mac users would be fine with Chrome and Microsoft Office + MacOS native apps. They really don't need much else.

I agree. External monitor support is trivial at this point. Now that they have added trackpad support, which is a prerequisite to controlling the OS on larger screens.

And that is precisely why iPad/Catalyst apps are so close. It does not take much at this point for apps like Safari/Chrome and Office to have feature parity between iPadOS and MAcOS. So at that point, you can converse with the non-techie crowd and say, the iPad Office works exactly the same as a MacOS. There is not much distinction then.

 

[dogslobber]

Wouldn't be surprised if both a 12-inch MacBook and the rumoured "low cost" 23-inch iMac are both running on ARM.

This. Additionally, Apple doesn't need to convert their entire range to ARM; they can still keep some systems on x64 CPUs for those who want to run advanced software. Most people don't care about the CPU type but prefer not to pay an ARM and a leg for a Mac.

 

[Bruno Castelló]

There will be no issue with Apple's apps.

However other developers that are Mac-first will either need to use the power of Catalyst or not port their apps at all and stop development, and who knows how much motivation does indie OSX developers have for the transition.

It seems easier to do a Catalyst app for the iPad that also targets the Mac. That will change how Mac Apps works and will lose what makes Mac Apps good in the first place.

Just imagine apps Photoshop and Office for iPad/iOS. Will they create a new app for OSX ARM from scratch, or use the codebase of what they have done for iOS and just Mac-ify them. I am sure they will try hard to have the same features as their old desktop apps, but in the process of developing it will work differently.

Look at Podcast and Music app for Mac which are catalyst apps.

The merging of iOS and OSX is forthcoming.

I'd rather not have that merge. iOS apps are pretty much like "toys". For example, the HomeKit app on macOS has nothing useful and is pretty badly designed. As an UI/UX designer, I find these "Catalyst" converted iOS apps to macOS appalling and half baked. Not all iOS counterparts are as good as their macOS versions so I see no point in doing that.

Leave iOS apps where they belong, and leave macOS apps where they belong.

 

[randian]

Then go for AMD. Not silly, underpowered, ARM.

A desktop ARM is (or should be) an entirely different beast from the mobile version. High clock rates and deep pipelines.

 

[Bruno Castelló]

A desktop ARM is (or should be) an entirely different beast from the mobile version. High clock rates and deep pipelines.

I want the same drugs you are using to have a such unrealistic dream. A Desktop ARM will never beat a Desktop x86.

 

[theluggage]

This is not running on native way, you are basically emulating it. I want a native way and iPad can't do that. It's Qemu who is doing that for you. And with UTM you can only max 1GB RAM, not enough.

The only reason the iPad can't run that sort of software is the completely artificial and arbitrary "security" restrictions that Apple places on iOS. It's nothing to do with the processor. Heck, I was running a website from an ARM-based machine (Acorn R140) in the early 90s... it isn't exactly heavy lifting.

You can run Apache, MySQL etc. natively on Android phones (with ARM chips) - and if the process is a bit obscure that's just because there are very few use cases for actually wanting to do that when you can just spin up a web/apache/docker instance in the cloud for $5/month (actually, I think there's a "free" option on Amazon AWS...)

 

[Spungoflex]

This. Additionally, Apple doesn't need to convert their entire range to ARM; they can still keep some systems on x64 CPUs for those who want to run advanced software. Most people don't care about the CPU type but prefer not to pay an ARM and a leg for a Mac.

They could always do standard Mac on ARM and Pro editions on x86.

iMac Pro (x86)
iMac (ARM)

Macbook Pro (x86)
Macbook (ARM)

Mac Pro (x86)
Mac (ARM)
[automerge]1587684250[/automerge]

I want the same drugs you are using to have a such unrealistic dream. A Desktop ARM will never beat a Desktop x86.

Huh? ARM chips already completely obliterate several Intel chips.

 

[DNichter]

I've posted this in a couple of other semi-related threads, but I'm hoping that this will also result in the iPads getting dual-OS capability. In tablet mode it would run iPad OS. When used with a keyboard it could run OSX.

I can’t see Apple ever going in this direction. iPadOS will just become better over time, no use forking macOS in there. macOS will remain with laptops and desktops, but I think it will become even more like iPadOS.

 

[Bruno Castelló]

The only reason the iPad can't run that sort of software is the completely artificial and arbitrary "security" restrictions that Apple places on iOS. It's nothing to do with the processor. Heck, I was running a website from an ARM-based machine (Acorn R140) in the early 90s... it isn't exactly heavy lifting.

You can run Apache, MySQL etc. natively on Android phones (with ARM chips) - and if the process is a bit obscure that's just because there are very few use cases for actually wanting to do that when you can just spin up a web/apache/docker instance in the cloud for $5/month (actually, I think there's a "free" option on Amazon AWS...)

Thanks, but cloud based and paid plans are not of my interest.
[automerge]1587684502[/automerge]

Huh? ARM chips already completely obliterate several Intel chips.

These drugs must be really, really good. ARM chips can't even be used for gaming.

 

[Spungoflex]

These drugs must be really, really good. ARM chips can't even be used for gaming.

Ok then...

 

[cmaier]

Thanks, but cloud based and paid plans are not of my interest.
[automerge]1587684502[/automerge]


These drugs must be really, really good. ARM chips can't even be used for gaming.

Except for the millions of people playing games every day on arm chips?

 

[chikorita157]

These drugs must be really, really good. ARM chips can't even be used for gaming.

ARM chips can't even be used for gaming, eh? Doesn’t the Nintendo Switch use an ARM chip and runs full video game experiences? I 100% think it does. 🤔

 

[movielad]

While certain operations could benefit from ARM design, I think this is completely irrelevant. Apple doesn't have any intentions whatsoever to be associated with data centers.

I think they realized that for every professional who needs a real Mac, there are 100 wannabes who also do "professional" video editing or whatever, like adding sound to youtube videos once a week. Apple wants to develop devices for this group as it is pretty easy to please.

Given their services division (iCloud, Apple TV+, etc.), I think Apple would very much be interested in datacentres - at least for their own use if not anybody else's.

 

[Bruno Castelló]

Except for the millions of people playing games every day on arm chips?

I said high quality games, not silly candy crush games.

 

[MikeZTM]

Yep. The use of multiple cores requires software that is written to take advantage of it but that still can not mitigate the need for higher CPU frequencies required by some software. AMD had to learn this lesson; Apple will too.

Mac got Grand Central Dispatch long time ago.
And A13 already reaching 9900k level single core performance based on SPECint and SPECfp.

You do not need higher frequency. You need better IPC (Instruction per cycle) and high enough frequency to utilize the IPC.

AMD CPU currently have 10% better IPC then Intel. a 4GHz AMD CPU is faster than a 4.4GHz Intel CPU.
And A13 @ 2.5GHz is even faster than that because of high IPC.

 

[Bruno Castelló]

ARM chips can't even be used for gaming, eh? Doesn’t the Nintendo Switch use an ARM chip and runs full video game experiences? I 100% think it does. 🤔

Does nintendo have graphics like F1 2019? No, it doesn't.

 

[MikeZTM]

I said high quality games, not silly candy crush games.

Nintendo Switch runs ARM.
It runs Witcher 3, and in upcoming month the Crysis.

It's doing that with a Tegra X1 chip. That is a 2015 chip with 20nm fab.

 

[Bruno Castelló]

I also can't see high profile professional video editing (Hollywood style) being done with an ARM based Mac. I have not seen high quality GPUs coupled with one of these.
[automerge]1587688377[/automerge]

Nintendo Switch runs ARM.
It runs Witcher 3, and in upcoming month the Crysis.

It's doing that with a Tegra X1 chip. That is a 2015 chip with 20nm fab.

It's Tegra doing the whole job, not the ARM chip.

And Witcher is a terrible to compare with F1 2019 high quality (almost real life) F1 cars.

 

[MikeZTM]

I also can't see high profile professional video editing (Hollywood style) being done with an ARM based Mac. I have not seen high quality GPUs coupled with one of these.

eMAG - Ampere - WikiChip

eMAG is a family of 64-bit high-performance ARM server microprocessors designed by Ampere Computing for the data center.

en.wikichip.org

This ARM CPU is sold with a NVIDIA Titan V or Tesla V100.

 

[AppleTools]

Apple has been trying to merge the Mac and iOS por a while... ARM processors on the Mac would mean that they might be able tu run iOS Apps which is a huge market right know and just might push the sales of the Mac that have been dropping slowly for years. Also, Apple has been relying on Intel for their processors for a long time and Intel has just became the same IBM became a few years ago. Now that Apple has successfully tested their own processors on extremely popular devices they are ready to start moving away from Intel with a "full" in house Mac. Having control of the whole design means that Apple can fine tune and improve their products faster and better than ever instead of depending on another company to supply integral parts. And finally, using in house processors mean that the final product can be potentially cheaper (less expensive, sorry ) and that will benefit the consumers too.

I truly hope the new A14 or A15 Mac is fast enough to compete with the standard Intel Mac because to consumer eyes, everything is about speed.