My point was at the naysayers then and now. In the end the PPC transition wasn't bad and that's why I am not freaking out about the Apple silicon. I can't wait to get a MBP 16” with it. It should be amazing.
Last edited:
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.
Don't buy intel mbp now ?
- Thread starter Tankmaze
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I personally don't think we should be that scared. I think all this doom and gloom is a little over the top. I feel like i keep saying, or at least keep wanting to say, in a lot of threads that whatever new Intel Mac you buy isn't going to all of a sudden be bricked on ARM Mac release day. And that's how some seem to be thinking (and freaking out accordingly). Apple's still going to put out a couple OS updates for Intel Macs during/after transition and developers will still be updating softwares for those updates. The only real unknown is exactly for how long. I'm estimating a minimum of 3 years, max of 5 or 6.
Which is just enough for anyone who's buying a more entry level Mac now to be held over till they see something enticing on ARM once the transition completes. Or is a long enough time for people who got something spec-ed out to ride that machine for close to a normal full life span. Even after that, if someone really wanted to still hold onto their Intel Mac, they still could. You just would have to accept not upgrading software. The longer you held onto it though the more the re-sale value may be impacted, and to me that's the main thing i'd be concerned about.
[automerge]1593373725[/automerge]
I think we'll get all of that at the September hardware event in fall. WWDC wasn't really for consumers, it was for the developers to get started on the software aspect of this transition. So having all the hard specs and what not wasn't relevant and we shouldn't have been expecting to get those details at WWDC. They'll have more time to go into it at its own event when they have a consumer product to unveil. With the first Apple Silicon Mac scheduled to be coming end of this year, i'd assume we'll get all the details/info on the new chips then.
Well. Unless there's close session for royal Apple developers, they should have provided more information on their hardware roadmap at WWDC. You know, even for developers, Apple's future plan and degree of commitment is really important for future developing plan and resource allocation.
Let's consider the worst case scenario where Apple abandons any serious computing hardware development, such as Mac Pro Arm, and instead only focus on way ios like Mac with SoC only. (SoC will not cut it for mac pro level performance atleast thermally). Developers needs to know Apple won't do that and instead put their resources in serious computing power for Arm Mac.
Why introduce Arm switch withoiut any info? It will stop any serious development for intel platform, but gives no concrete roadmap for Arm development, just that Rosetta2 is great and universal wil help you that kind of stuff only.
Or, the best time to buy is when you need it, not when you want it.
If you love iOS games then you're going to love the ARM Macs. I love being able to go bootcamp on my MBP 16 and play the latest AAA titles like RDR2.
If you still want to able to play the latest games, then the current Intel Macs with a dGPU are your best bet unless the gaming industry changes overnight (which I highly doubt)
I don't know if you had Macs during the G4/G5 days, but Macs were definitely also ran then when they got games. They usually got them several years after Wintel boxes and performed horribly.
I do not agree. Again, this event was for developers. Developers don't necessarily need specifics on hardware, they need specifics on how they develop their softwares for Apples ARM architecture and how they port existing x86 programs over and Apple went over that both in the keynote and for 4 straight days after that directly to the developers in the following online events that weren't streamed. Developers don't need to know consumer product specifics like whether the first ARM Mac coming is a Macbook or whatever to get started on the software. The consumer product event with the unveiling of the first ARM Mac for consumers is later this year. The degree of commitment here isn't a question.
The notion that Apple will abandon development on their A series chips is just absurd. They've been working on these chips since the A4 a decade ago and have spent billions on R&D. They announced they are transitioning the entire Mac product line to these chips in over the next two years, including the Mac Pro level systems. They also said they will still be providing OS updates for Intel Macs over the next couple years (and even releasing a few more new Intel Macs). Which means Intel Mac development is not going to just stop overnight. You're kind of just pulling all of this out of nowhere just because they didn't release the whole line of products at WWDC. Everything you mentioned is a non-issue. Just wait another couple months for the consumer products announcements, it's not even that far away.
Last edited:
Long term, Apple might push ARM to be the new x86, and pioneer a better advancement in CPUs.
However, AMD's current 4000 series is twice the efficiency of intel, and more powerful, meaning 20watt cpus beat 45watt intels.
I find the whole ARM deal is not superior as it limits what we can do with our devices.
However, maybe this will change the direction.
Maybe Apple will go to AMD on its high end macbooks and ARM on its lower end depending on sales. Apple killed gaming, and ALOT of software off with this ARM, getting rid of bootcamp was just a bad decision for professionals.
Keeping the Intel based mac for 3-4 years to see if Apple back tracks, like they did on the keyboards, Power PCs, Intels and now ARM.
Who knows, this whole ARM push might unify everything into a single platform which is okay. The main issue is IOS has limited apps and has lagging heavily behind Android in terms of superior apps and selection from my experience with Android and Iphones. Going from android to Iphone, i can honestly say IOS apps are clearly not the main focus of development for alot of devs i hope this changes things.
Perhaps having a heavily unified platform will advance IOS into a whole new level beyond android given this, from my experiance apple being a niche size, and split platform probably hurt developers.
Time will tell -- even though AMD 4800HS would have been a superior move while gaining 30-40% battery life.
However, AMD's current 4000 series is twice the efficiency of intel, and more powerful, meaning 20watt cpus beat 45watt intels.
I find the whole ARM deal is not superior as it limits what we can do with our devices.
However, maybe this will change the direction.
Maybe Apple will go to AMD on its high end macbooks and ARM on its lower end depending on sales. Apple killed gaming, and ALOT of software off with this ARM, getting rid of bootcamp was just a bad decision for professionals.
Keeping the Intel based mac for 3-4 years to see if Apple back tracks, like they did on the keyboards, Power PCs, Intels and now ARM.
Who knows, this whole ARM push might unify everything into a single platform which is okay. The main issue is IOS has limited apps and has lagging heavily behind Android in terms of superior apps and selection from my experience with Android and Iphones. Going from android to Iphone, i can honestly say IOS apps are clearly not the main focus of development for alot of devs i hope this changes things.
Perhaps having a heavily unified platform will advance IOS into a whole new level beyond android given this, from my experiance apple being a niche size, and split platform probably hurt developers.
Time will tell -- even though AMD 4800HS would have been a superior move while gaining 30-40% battery life.
I have been reading a lot about x86 and ARM, Intel owns x86 and AMD basically just a clone manufacturer of x86 and uses the same fabrication company (TSMC) to produce the processor, the same company Apple use to produce it's A series chip. I don't see Apple going to AMD processor as an option. But the GPU is a different matter, it was called ATI before AMD acquired them. It used to be ATI vs Nvidia in the GPU market.
Apple won't back tracks to intel or x86 in the foreseeable future, not like a keyboard. This transition is not something to take lightly and I'm sure Apple already has roadmap for the mac processor in the next 5 years otherwise they wouldn't bother to rewrite macOS for ARM and asked developers to rewrite their software for ARM architecture.
Oooh and notice Apple never use the term "ARM" in their press release or WWDC video, it always said Apple Silicon.
How long are you gonna keep it? IMHO go for the new one.
Apple was never a gaming platform to begin with in any sense, gaming has always been an afterthought. Anyone who does game on a Mac uses bootcamp, or is a casual gamer who is ok playing the few AAA or Indie games ported over.
That said, yes, it was a bad decision to kill off bootcamp, but who knows what Apple has in store for Arm. The majority of people buying Mac's could care less what is under the hood, nor do they care to understand how this change to Arm will affect them, they buy a Mac and at the end of the day, it'll still look like the familiar Mac with MacOS albeit some UI changes.
The more tech savvy user's (Mac Rumours members 😁) are a small group to Apple, and while they don't want to piss off their Pro user's, Developers, and people who did use bootcamp, Apple is more focused on their vision of one platform.
Apple wants people locked into their eco-system, they want to be the fastest for video and photo production, and unfortunately developers, virtual machine users including bootcamp, make up such a small portion of their user base.
I wasn't a Mac user back in the PPC days, and so I can't remember if Apple had a solution for running Windows, but to my knowledge they didn't... (correct me if I'm wrong), but if they didn't, I'm guessing Apple's attitude for the small user base that need's bootcamp would be to keep a PC around then.
Android has more apps in the their Play store because they let so much crap in, with so much of it being infected with malware. There is no control over Apps, it's the wild west, and while it's true there are some really great and superior apps available, I'll take quality over quantity any day. Also, keep in mind I believe Android has the largest market share so it would make sense they have more apps, but again a lot of them are crap. (And I do like Android so I'm not trying to knock it, it's just the cold truth) At least Apple keeps their App Store in some form of check.
Battery Life is not one of AMD's strong points, and as amazing as the AMD Ryzen 4000 chips are, Intel still has them beat hands down in the battery arena.
[automerge]1593488192[/automerge]
Apple doesn't mention the word ARM because technically, it's not a ARM CPU in it's entirety. AFAIK, Apple is using the ARM Instruction set only, and maybe a few other pieces of the ARM Cortex CPU design (I forget the Cortex version number). It's called Apple Silicon because it's literally just that, a built from the ground up CPU which was designed in house, using the ARM Instruction set, and borrowing concepts from the ARM Cortex CPU.
To further this, it's also called Apple Silicon because while the "main" part of the CPU is the ARM instruction set and again pieces taken from the ARM Cortex CPU Design, the other area's of the CPU, that surround the ARM portion are what Apple built themselves. Eg: the Neural Engine AI, Storage Controller, Secure Enclave, Video Processor, etc... etc... and all these other area's are on the CPU Die, and so combined the entire Chip is called "Apple Silicon".
Last edited:
People on this forum always said don't buy first gen Apple product because it usually cause for trouble.
I'm thinking the current 16" MBP is a first gen product from Apple, and the next 16" Apple Silicon MBP could be rev. b product but using proven A series chip from Apple albeit much more faster and improve.
I'm certain on waiting for the 16" Apple Silicon MBP now.
I'm thinking the current 16" MBP is a first gen product from Apple, and the next 16" Apple Silicon MBP could be rev. b product but using proven A series chip from Apple albeit much more faster and improve.
I'm certain on waiting for the 16" Apple Silicon MBP now.
How do you know that? Single core performance on the a13 on the phone already matches top end desktop Intel processors.
We can see it scaling to a faster core (a14 based) with more cores and higher frequency because of more thermal headroom. Apple has stated higher performance plus lower energy usage as a benefit to moving at WWDC.
No concrete numbers yet but leaks are that the first Apple silicon chips will be 50-100% faster than existing intel chips. I image 50% is referring to single core and 100% is the Multi-core speedup.
we will see at end of the year if they meet those rumored performance
i Know a couple Apple engineers who studied engineering with me, the only reason they went arm is to increase profitability. It will not provide a superior experience when it comes to compatibility for power users.
their testing a unified OS for phones, macs and iPads, which hasn’t been announced yet. It’s a hybrid OSX similar to windows 10 tablet mode along with using your phone to airplay or video out to a monitor for a full desktop like experience.
big sur and arm are the first step in enabling this in the near future.
basically they have had to dumb down OS X with arm but currently it is far from being superior to what intel / dedicated gpus do, cutting windows off was a side effect of this choice, a poor one.
just wait for the graphics benchmarks on the new devices, you’ll see what I mean.
there Is no reason to be a first gen beta testing for Arm, wait 3+ years its a huge mess at Apple atm with this, and its going to take awhile to correct it.
also, amd 4000 series does have intel beat for battery life, drastically.
no idea where you’re getting your info but it’s not accurate.
Last edited:
Yeah, let‘s wait and see.
Don‘t believe any of this.
In particular, C. Federighi and others categorically denied on multiple occasions that iOS and macOS are going to ever merge. Same is true when it comes to your assumptions on Arm vs Intel, parts of which are not even true today with the A12Z, let alone with upcoming Apple Silocon chips.
Last edited:
Based on what I am reading, holding off for a high end replacement for the MBP 16 could mean a long wait, maybe 2 years? Is it going to be such a huge improvement? Likely not in the initial versions. Graphics support still an unknown, as is the ability to leverage things like graphics acceleration for processing. That's a lot of unknowns for me.
ARM-based Macs will be coming out, but we do not know the specific models and time frames. I am very concerned on support for Windows, so I'm thinking my last purchase may be the final release of the MBP 16.
I sure do not want to be the first group moving to ARM given mission critical work.
ARM-based Macs will be coming out, but we do not know the specific models and time frames. I am very concerned on support for Windows, so I'm thinking my last purchase may be the final release of the MBP 16.
I sure do not want to be the first group moving to ARM given mission critical work.
Mac OSX will merge with iOS. Anyone can see how Mac is transition more and more to iOS.
Heck, the ARM MacBook Pro can run iPhone and iPad apps (and so the iPad and iPhone can also run Mac Apps then).
The ARM MacBook Pro is a joke and I picked up the 2020 13" MacBook Pro for this reason as it will be last great MacBook Pro. I will enjoy my better software support and ability to run other OS on the side. After that, I will switch back to Linux + Windows as I don't think OS X is a great OS anymore (since they constantly create compatibility problems for no reason).
I switched to a desktop for this (not sure if that's feasible for your situation). That makes a 16" ARM a great replacement for my early 2013 15" retina. I bought a used fully loaded trashcan Mac Pro for my testing / VM use at home (128gb ram, 12-core xeon, etc.). Got the trashcan for 2500 (I think the market was 3500). Already had a screen/webcam/soundbar I liked so I didn't want an iMac, and the new Mac Pro is too big (trashcan is so small and sleek, and I can't hear the fan at all despite a mod that runs it at full speed all the time)
Yeah I really need a laptop as my main workhorse otherwise I would probably have a mac mini.
Today I sold my 2019 refurbished 27" iMac on ebay.
Customer is well informed and he asked me if I am selling it because of the arm craze.
I told him that technically yes because as a developer I will probably have no choice at some point but also still have the 16" to help me in the transition.
He said that all his developer friends are rushing and buying them because they are afraid of no windows support in future devices and for what they use them for it's all they could ever ask in sub $3K price range.
I had 7 bidders that moved my price to the point of only being $167 in the hole for selling a used intel mac.
Hell yeah they are on demand. No wonder they fly off the refurbished store shortly after they appear.
So to answer the question of this topic... You clearly have no need for what intel has to offer. Just make sure to post progress from the arm machine as I need people guinea pigging them for me before I even consider buying one
Customer is well informed and he asked me if I am selling it because of the arm craze.
I told him that technically yes because as a developer I will probably have no choice at some point but also still have the 16" to help me in the transition.
He said that all his developer friends are rushing and buying them because they are afraid of no windows support in future devices and for what they use them for it's all they could ever ask in sub $3K price range.
I had 7 bidders that moved my price to the point of only being $167 in the hole for selling a used intel mac.
Hell yeah they are on demand. No wonder they fly off the refurbished store shortly after they appear.
So to answer the question of this topic... You clearly have no need for what intel has to offer. Just make sure to post progress from the arm machine as I need people guinea pigging them for me before I even consider buying one
If this is true, why did Apple bother moving macOS from 10.15 straight to macOS 11? Making it macOS 11 implies that they're wanting to stick with the macOS naming convention for a while now, especially as 11 is a brand new version, not 10.16.
Because many of us here went through PPC to Intel transition. Tim could’ve said “Don’t worry about buying an Intel Mac today, I guarantee Intel support for the next 5 major revisions of MacOS till 11.4“
Instead he said the vague “years”
As it has been repeated many times here, A new G5 model came out in late 2005 after Intel transition was announced and those poor saps only got 2 years of being able to run the latest version of OSX. After that, they just got Security and bug fixes.
I bought a G4 MacBook Pro and Mac mini around the end of 2004/early 2005 right before WWDC 2005 and of course I made a huge mistake and I just did it again with 2 loaded MBP’s in the last 8 months.