classic MacBook Pro - often used as shorthand for unibody generation, particularly to differentiate the 2012s where you had both unibody and retina models
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
Seamless?? Man that's some rewriting of history right there. Were you even alive for it? Eesh.
Yes. Any PC retailer can have you parks picking to a £1200-£2200 that would cream the Mac Mini and iMac desktops.
Azrael.
Surface Pro X isn't material. Does Microsoft sell Windows on ARM off the shelf? It is not. So Bootcamp is very much in a problematical state. Apple as a certified Windows seller? I wouldn't hold my breath.
Bootcamp is one thing. Apple needing to be a full fledged Windows vendor is another.
More likely this will get "filled" with some x86 emulator running the widely available "discrete" x86 version in some kind of emulator. That will suffice for some. But for those who are used to native and hardware virtualization it probably won't be sufficient. For that submarket Apple probably is willing to "walk away" ( similar to other submarkets they have walked away from ).
That's pretty small minded of you to write off an entire processor architecture just because the one, small, $40, single-board computer you used wasn't as powerful as an actual laptop or desktop computer. RPis aren't supposed to be replacements for powerful laptops and desktops.
Apple is basically doing what Microsoft did with the Surface Pro X. But just because Microsoft released a device with an ARM processor doesn't mean they abandoned x86 processors. It's only one device. So people can stop panicking.
I expect Apple to release an ARM based laptop, most likely the Macbook Air, and slowly transition to a full line-up of ARM based products with the Pro models being the last to adopt this new processor. But I'm predicting a very slow transition.
Now, in my opinion, one key difference between Microsoft and Apple in this scenario is that when Apple starts to transition into ARM processors, developers will support this new architecture much quicker than what we are seeing with the Surface Pro X. Especially if these new Apple machines turn out to be popular.
The reason being that Apple fully controls the hardware that runs mac OS. So if developers want to continue to write mac OS software, they need to adopt the new architecture. There isn't another alternative. Whereas with Microsoft, even though they released the SPX, there are still hundreds of non-ARM based Windows machines being built. So developers really aren't pressured into porting their code to support it.
I'm personally excited to see Apple utilize their ARM chips in their Macbook and iMacs. This will also create better unity with their iPhones and iPads. Plus Apple has proven that they make exceptional processors.
I expect Apple to release an ARM based laptop, most likely the Macbook Air, and slowly transition to a full line-up of ARM based products with the Pro models being the last to adopt this new processor. But I'm predicting a very slow transition.
Now, in my opinion, one key difference between Microsoft and Apple in this scenario is that when Apple starts to transition into ARM processors, developers will support this new architecture much quicker than what we are seeing with the Surface Pro X. Especially if these new Apple machines turn out to be popular.
The reason being that Apple fully controls the hardware that runs mac OS. So if developers want to continue to write mac OS software, they need to adopt the new architecture. There isn't another alternative. Whereas with Microsoft, even though they released the SPX, there are still hundreds of non-ARM based Windows machines being built. So developers really aren't pressured into porting their code to support it.
I'm personally excited to see Apple utilize their ARM chips in their Macbook and iMacs. This will also create better unity with their iPhones and iPads. Plus Apple has proven that they make exceptional processors.
I think they will to start, but eventually start to phase some things out. It's tough, but companies eventually need to move forward. Apple likely wants to appease the many opposed to the few.
like the dongle situation, which completely cleared up after 1-2 years.. oh wait...
Which in few years might just be different names for different desktop themes....
As to a new "Rosetta" being needed and what performance penalty it will bring.
- no endian switches needed
- much more RAM installed (a JIT approach eats that like nothing and early Intels had only 512MB in base configs)
- planned for years instead of buying in some 3rd party SW after IBM/Moto forced Apple's hand
- full control over the new CPU, emu benefits from bigger cache or heavily uses certain opcodes -> CPU can be optimized for that
Our systems run on x86 so our apps need to be compiled and tested on x86 versions. Saying "Well it worked on the ARM versions" isn't going to fly in that type of environment.
Just put nVidia GPUs... and stop thinking of changing the processor architecture.
15 years ago they went to the mainstream architecture. No they want to go always from the mainstream architecture?
15 years ago they went to the mainstream architecture. No they want to go always from the mainstream architecture?
Last edited:
History is a set of lies agreed upon.
OS9 was a dead man walking. Yet people argued tooth and nail about it. I had fond affection for it. But it was dead in the water.
The last PPC transition burned me alive (using your presumptive snippy.) I bought the Adobe suite at the wrong time.
The last transition was seamless. It was very impressive. Technically. You got to run PPC apps until Apple switched off the 'life support' (as they tend to) through future OS updates. And M$ and Adobe...(who took their time...) finally got on the Intel train. (They're already on ARM iOS though...)
The next transition will be more impressive as Apple have laid down far more train track. I doubt we'll notice beyond the technical semantics.
Azrael.
Raspberries are <50$ devices based on an GFX-chip that also has (an) ARM core(s) onchip all powered by an USB wallwart, yeah sure thats what the performance of an ARMBook will be !!!
Then why people keep trying to run Windows 10 on it? Why people keep trying to emulate it on iPads? Not because "they can". ARM is a terrible experience.
millions of developers code for ARM, using x86 machines. You can test on a different machine than you develop on. It will be fine.
The fourth revision of this model probably in 2025 is going to be the solid one to get lol
One of the reasons of Apple's success with the Mac is not windows, or Microsoft, or Intel. It's because it has a OS that runs circles around Windows and has the applications to support it.
If that OS runs on Intel or ARM processors make zero difference, as long as the application performance is on-par or superior to the previous generation model, that's all what die hard Mac fans care about.
Apple has proven again and again the processor in their computer is largely irrelevant.
Software isn't generally written for a processor, it's written in a high level language, and then the compiler works out how to make it run on the processor. Sure the API might change a bit, but developers are smart enough to figure out what/if any changes they need to make. And Apple has always provided an intermediate solution to get over the hump while applications become native.
Worried? Don't be.
If that OS runs on Intel or ARM processors make zero difference, as long as the application performance is on-par or superior to the previous generation model, that's all what die hard Mac fans care about.
Apple has proven again and again the processor in their computer is largely irrelevant.
Software isn't generally written for a processor, it's written in a high level language, and then the compiler works out how to make it run on the processor. Sure the API might change a bit, but developers are smart enough to figure out what/if any changes they need to make. And Apple has always provided an intermediate solution to get over the hump while applications become native.
Worried? Don't be.
I have a few ifs/ands/buts, however, my takeaway is mostly positive, so __assuming__ the things we have to about moving forward with this ... a 12-core ARM Mac Mini with a stout GPU? I'll be first in line
Did you say Mac Mini with a stout gpu? :O
Still, we can't say iPad/iPhones have crap gpus. GPU has been a strong part of iOS for some time now. By default, the Mini would see a vast improvement in the move to ARM.
Azrael.
I'm curious what percentage of current Mac owners actually boot into Windows. It certainly is a very convenient feature, but if only 10% use it, it's not a big loss. I'm guessing Apple must have some metrics on this before 'walking away' from this.
They got greedy. Missed the iOS iPhone gravy boat too.
Asleep at the wheel for about 6 years, Intel.
AMD were on the canvas and they allowed them to get back up.
Azrael.
Surface Pro X? iPad Pro? Two powerful Arm machines running optimised OS versions quite successfully. The Raspberry Pi seems like a 'toy' because it basically is one for youngsters to mess about with coding. That's it's raison d'être, not to be a full computer replacement.
the Rasberry Pi is primarily meant to be inexpensive. Anything that gets in the way of affordability is dropped. High performance tends to cost something "extra". The version 3 and the '+' aren't going to add mega performance back in ( the whole system still costs less than a the mid-high range x86 processors. Cost less than high end server ARM processors too ).
It isn't really a starting place to ground a discussion of what Apple might do with completely different ARM implementation . The instruction set and the implementation of the CPU to run the instruction set are two substantively different things.