First Arm-Based Macs to Be 13-Inch MacBook Pro and Redesigned iMac, Launches Coming in Late 2020 or Early 2021

[Randombilly]

Im curious what happens with intel MacBooks and iMacs and mac pros. Like, how long before we can no longer get new versions of software? I JUST bought a pretty well spec'd 16" and I figured it would be good for 4 to 5 years - but if all software has to changeover to whatever ARM uses (obviously there will be both for a time, but how much time?) will there come a day, soon, where my computer is basically useless and unsellable because who would buy one that doesn't work with new software?
I dont ask this to say Im against the change; change is good. I just think my computer buying timing was bad.

 

[CWallace]

45W Tiger Lake CPUs have also been announced.

I do see that there are alleged leaks of an 11th Generation Tiger Lake-H using a BGA1787 socket. Since 10th Generation Comet Lake-H just rolled, I am guessing this will not be a 2020 product, but maybe the 2021 MacBook Pro 16" will get it.

 

[chilly willy]

You're right about games on pretty much all Apple platforms are nothing like true PC games. But yes, Apple's just never been in the true PC gaming business. I've given this topic a lot of thought over the years, and I've come up with a few theories as to why...

I think a lot of it might be to do with how they're trying to get away from relying on others' tech (NVIDIA fiasco, and now all their Intel troubles), so they can control the entire experience, and (presumably) use that control to make it a superior experience. That's what Steve always wanted, but the vision was perhaps too far ahead of his time, and they're only now just finally getting there. Of course that "superior experience" is somewhat subjective, but let's say it's a superior experience for the people that appreciate Apple's priorities, which so far apparently seems to be plenty enough.

Apple are and always have been mostly focussed on general purpose consumer and (except for a dry spell most of this past decade) "pro" (ie. high end video, etc. etc.) computing. They want to build machines that users want to buy, use out of the box for what they want it for, and NOT mess with it. More than anything that's their focus and always has been. Other markets like gaming, enterprise, and others. require meeting very different sets of needs - needs that are significant deviations from Apple's past and current focus.

One might argue that gaming really isn't that special as far as the needs go, but I don't think that's a good argument. So few serious PC gamers just buy a computer, leave it alone, and just play on it. No, the gaming community, more than any other group of users perhaps, want to pull their machines apart and tinker with them - or even build them from scratch - and the vast majority of serious gamers (in general*) don't care for the other factors that Apple prioritize and make a Mac a Mac (the "I don't WANT to mess with it I just want to use it" user "experience", for want of a better word).

Apple just doesn't want to go near the gaming crowd, and even if they decided they did, I just don't think they'd have a hope in hell in putting a dent in it anyway, without putting a huge dent in their philosophies and priorities. Is it possible to make a serious "I don't want to mess with it" gaming computer? If Apple tried to make a serious gaming computer to try to compete with PC gaming machines, they'd have a hell of a job getting developers on board, and they'd have a hell of a job coming up with anything that's going to please enough of that community to make it worthwhile - back to how gamers more than anyone want to customize, customize, customize: Apple just doesn't want a bar of that... (except I seems in the really high, expensive, end of the "Pro" market).

And then there's this: People are complaining that Apple's already spreading themselves too thin. Throw in another (difficult) market to contend with?

So then...



The question begs, how do you define a "loyal" customer? If you've been a "loyal" Apple customer for years, despite your concerns about Apple's upcoming direction, what's really changing? Apple's never catered to the gaming community (as described above) so it's not like they did and now they're abandoning it...? Even running bootcamp, a Mac has never been the best gaming machine. The options:

1. If you want a serious gaming machine you buy a powerful tower PC you can customize up the wazoo for a fraction of the price of anything but the cheapest Macs.
2. If you want/appreciate what a Mac brings to the table, outside of gaming, then you buy a Mac.
3. If you want both and don't mind some compromise, then you can get a Mac for both, with bootcamp for the serious PC games, but let's face it that's a compromise.
4. If you want both without compromise then I can't see how there's ever been any option other than to buy both - separately: Get the best Mac for what you want a Mac for (which most likely costs a lot less than the Mac you'd buy for what you want a Mac for PLUS serious gaming), and then go buy the serious gaming PC as well for what you saved.

The thing is, all of that has always been the case, and this transition won't change that (with one possible exception**).

If you've bought Macs for PC gaming in the past, then you're in #3 above. What are they changing now that qualifies as "trying to drive a loyal customer" away?

All that said, the rumors are that these ARM chips are 50% to 100% faster than their corresponding Intel options, and so they should emulate Intel as fast as the Intel's run natively anyway - similar to how the first Intel Macs smoked the last PPC Macs natively and provided emulated PPC as fast as native PPC. It was a no-brainer then, and I think it'll be the same now.


* ...notwithstanding the people here and elsewhere who might be serious gamers and also appreciate Apple's priorities - otherwise why are they here? But I'd argue that's a pretty small percentage of the overall serious PC gaming market.

** The exception is that if these ARM chips are as fast as rumor says they are, then maybe that performance attracts serious gaming developers and consequently players anyway - I'm suggesting that if they're fast enough then a decent ARM Mac might smoke or at compare with similarly priced gaming PCs for performance anyway (which would be an improvement over the current situation). Of course that argument completely misses whatever impact all this is going to have on GPUs which are obviously a significant part of gaming specs too, but then those aren't changing. So I'd guess this transition isn't going to hurt PC gaming on Mac hardware as it is, and who knows, it may improve it.

Very thoughtful analysis. I dropped the idea of doing any intensive gaming on a Mac, even though I never stopped hoping it could happen. So instead of bootcamp, I just use a console and built a gaming rig for that specific role. Otherwise, I’m all Mac. System has worked fine for me, though maybe for some it’s too much. Again, I’d love an all Mac solution, but that ship has sailed and probably not swinging back into port.
I do worry about the walled garden becomzing even more walled in, though I benefit greatly from this with my I-devices. I also hope long-standing Apple loyalists who need bootcamp or such for their livelihood - even if a small percentage of users - are considered thoughtfully in any transition, and not just looked at as expendable. But I know, money talks and Apple knows how to make it.If ARM based Macs are the great step forward many people on here far smarter than me believe they will be, I’m sure they will sell.

 

[ipedro]

That would be bold, and maybe they even offer Logic as well.

What do you use for graphic design? I work on app designs, and it would be great to see Sketch or similar app for the iPad. Maybe Affinity Designer will enter this arena in the future?

Logic needs a UI remake like FinalCutPro if they’re going to port it to iPadOS. It’s definitely built for cursor use with small touch targets.

I use Photoshop for iPad and have been experimenting with Affinity Designer. Lightroom is better on the iPad than on the Mac. I can’t go back.

It’s inevitable that Final Cut will make it to iPad, specially since it’ll soon be an ARM app on the Mac. Whether they announce that tomorrow or when the first ARM Mac ships, it’s just a matter of time.

 

[Kalae]

Im curious what happens with intel MacBooks and iMacs and mac pros. Like, how long before we can no longer get new versions of software? I JUST bought a pretty well spec'd 16" and I figured it would be good for 4 to 5 years - but if all software has to changeover to whatever ARM uses (obviously there will be both for a time, but how much time?) will there come a day, soon, where my computer is basically useless and unsellable because who would buy one that doesn't work with new software?
I dont ask this to say Im against the change; change is good. I just think my computer buying timing was bad.

I think you’ll def have 4 or 5 years of OS releases, etc (based on the Intel transition)

More than that is unknown

 

[KPOM]

The transition between power pc to Intel CANNOT be comp

The transition from PPC to Intel was fast only because there was a very efficient translation layer created between the two architectures. However, this is not the case for Intel -> ARM. This is evident from all the ARM Windows laptops and tablets we've seen lately. Really powerful chips, but the real-world performance in x86 emulation is lackluster at best. I honestly think that Apple won't put the ARM chips in their pro-line-up anytime soon, maybe they'll have two versions or something.

We’ll see tomorrow, but I’m guessing there won’t be an emulation layer. Apple probably wrote a quick recompilation path for x64 apps. If they demonstrate 64-bit Final Cut Pro, Numbers/Keynote/Pages, GarageBand tomorrow outperforming their x64 equivalents that would be great. Hopefully they also have Adobe and/or Microsoft ready to demo something.

 

[ipedro]

Im curious what happens with intel MacBooks and iMacs and mac pros. Like, how long before we can no longer get new versions of software? I JUST bought a pretty well spec'd 16" and I figured it would be good for 4 to 5 years - but if all software has to changeover to whatever ARM uses (obviously there will be both for a time, but how much time?) will there come a day, soon, where my computer is basically useless and unsellable because who would buy one that doesn't work with new software?
I dont ask this to say Im against the change; change is good. I just think my computer buying timing was bad.

PowerPC Macs were supported with new operating systems until Snow Leopard in 2009. They announced the move in 2005 and the first Intel Mac came out in 2006. If you had just bought a Mac in 2005 just before the announcement, you’d get close to 4 years of use before you stopped receiving macOS updates.

But I suspect that the Mac Pro is going to retain an Intel option for a while. Probably as a coprocessor. If so, you’re likely to get the same number of OS updates you’d get before your Mac is obsoleted anyway.

 

[Woochoo]

Pros can't Count On on the Arm-based computer to get their work done.

Care to elaborate? ARM can do exactly the same tasks as x86, just compiled in a different instruction set but that's a compiler job not a developer/user job. If developer has to worry about something is only about compiling for both archs, and if he/she used SSE/AVX intrinsics then using NEON/SVE instead.

If you say it because of software support, probably the first 2-3 years won't be good for professionals until all the big ones and devs jump on it. But you wouldn't be an early adopter anyway if you need your machine for a living.

If your worry is the performance, there are already supercomputers using ARM. Even Amazon offers their own designed ARM alternative to Intel and AMD Epyc on AWS. What I mean is if ARM couldn't deliver performance it wouldn't be used in those areas where performance is critical.

I think people should start getting out of the "it's a mobile architecture" mentality. It's just another architecture that happened to be used in smartphones due to its efficiency, but there's nothing in it preventing to reach high performance if it's designed for so.

 

[cmaier]

I do see that there are alleged leaks of an 11th Generation Tiger Lake-H using a BGA1787 socket. Since 10th Generation Comet Lake-H just rolled, I am guessing this will not be a 2020 product, but maybe the 2021 MacBook Pro 16" will get it.

If it’s not until mid-2021, unlikely it ends up in the 2021 MBP 16” - by then any new models will be Arm.

We’ll see tomorrow, but I’m guessing there won’t be an emulation layer. Apple probably wrote a quick recompilation path for x64 apps. If they demonstrate 64-bit Final Cut Pro, Numbers/Keynote/Pages, GarageBand tomorrow outperforming their x64 equivalents that would be great. Hopefully they also have Adobe and/or Microsoft ready to demo something.

I am worried about that. On the other hand, they’ve always made it work before, and without emulation it’s a much harder sell and a chicken-and-egg problem for software developers. Tomorrow we’ll know, I suppose.

 

[transpo1]

All I know is I’m going to rely on second hand market to buy Intel Mac from now on. I don’t really “need” VM support but 32 bit is huge (locked behind High Sierra), and some Windows action would be nice too.

As for ARM Mac, I still believe Apple will phase out Mac lineup entirely once iPad Pro manages to catch up with professional use of some more occupations. I just don’t see the point of maintaining a Mac lineup that’s based on A-series chip when iPad Pro also has A-series chip (albeit less powerful) and equally powerful in practical use.

Nah. Macs will be here for a bit.

 

[R3k]

But maybe the “new form factor” is not an all-in-one, but a two piece: 24” display that wirelessly connects to a portable hub unit tinfoil hat, which can be popped in a backpack and taken to a coffee shop and be controlled from phone or laptop with your mind.

ftfy
[automerge]1592790301[/automerge]

PowerPC Macs were supported with new operating systems until Snow Leopard in 2009. They announced the move in 2005 and the first Intel Mac came out in 2006.

I believe it was actually until Lion in 2011.

 

[Tozovac]

Wouldn't bother me a jot if they 'phased' out the Mac. Eventually.

...

The old Apple II had to give away to Mac. It's just the way of things. The Mac has still got some way to go yet, though.

The Mac is giving way to iPad, iPhone and Watch.

One day, all you will need is a giant screen and 'an' input method.

Whether it's Mac or iPad is semantics in the future sense.

Azrael.

Not that simple. Multi-tasking (especially with multiple windows in view on multiple screens) can never be replaced by the current iPadOS arrangement. Trying to multi-task or do complex work on an iPad w/keyboard is excruciatingly frustrating and inefficient. Each OS on the iPad and Macs have their advantages for certain task types, but neither “wins.” Like a spoon vs. fork...motorcycle vs. car...shower vs. bath...

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I really wish the MacBook people would just move to iPads so the Mac can get back to power and cases than can accept upgrades.

If the MacBook people moved to iPads, there goes 80% of Mac sales. Think the remaining 20% or less would be able to see ANY improvements before being sunset?

clearly demonstrate a desire to merge their platforms.

I don’t think it’s a merge, more of a “less pain as it ramps down macOS” because the CPU’s are cheaper and you can target the same special features of A series chips on both.

my feeling is that the Mac user base isn't really growing. I think Apple's Mac sales are mostly to existing Mac users. Mac unit sales have been flat for years.

For a number of years, half of Mac sales have been to folks new to Mac. With every year, Apple’s depending less and less on the same group of folks that buy Macs. And these new folks are fine with soldered memory, storage, etc.

The switch to Intel wasn't a surprise.

Then, by the same token, the switch to Intel isn’t a surprise. No one KNOWS, but Intel has been underperforming for years, etc.

the first iPhone, while revolutionary, was NOT a great product and neither was the iPad.

the first iPhone and iPad were great products in that they sold in enough numbers to warrant the continuation of the lines. Apple stated metric for success for the iPhone was 1% of the current market at the time. They blew past that in a major way.

 

[Tozovac]

....the first iPhone, while revolutionary, was NOT a great product and neither was the iPad. The first MacBook Air was a dog, the first (and only) redesigned Mac Pro 2013 was a completely waste of components...... I could go on, if you'd like.......

😳 Tough customer.


Not great?? Compared to what? Compared to today they weren‘t great.

At the time vs. the competition, they were stupendous products.

 

[cmaier]

😳 Tough customer.


Not great?? Compared to what? Compared to today they weren‘t great.

At the time vs. the competition, they were stupendous products.

“But if everyone had just waited a few years they could have had something better”

I guess is the pointless point.

 

[Bearxor]

ARM-based Mac’s will probably be the end of my time with Apple for a bit. I’m really excited about the shift and think it needs to happen but I’m too reliant in the Windows world to get a Mac I can’t dual-boot or run x64 VM’s on properly.

Hopefully in a couple of years the Windows piece will catch up and we can install the ARM version of Windows.

 

[damphoose]

My first generation Tesla Model S is awesome. First generation Athlon 64 was pretty rad. First generation iPhone was great. So was the first generation iPad. And AirPods.

not familiar with Athlon 64 but the rest of that list reinforces exactly what they were saying about first gen products That a buyer beware list if there ever was one. Second generation worked out the bugs. Thats undeniable.
[automerge]1592794992[/automerge]

My question is how long will Apple keep supporting and updating MacOS for Intel. If they can make sure it runs parallel (no pun intended) in 4 years that would be good. You don’t want your 2020 MacBook or worse Mac Pro not be updated next year. They have a history of doing that before but I hope it won’t be the case this time.

Well if we look at recent history thats not the case. It was 4 years after the switch to x86 that they released an OS that didn’t run on PowerPC at all (Snow Leopard). Things are different now. Back then Apple sold the OS so not releasing versions that support the bulk of the user base would have cost them lost revenue. Still for at lease the next 3-4 years the bulk of the user base will not have ARM macs. I don’t see Apple not supporting those machines in the short to medium term until some internal tipping point.

 

[cmaier]

not familiar with Athlon 64 but the rest of that list reinforces exactly what they were saying about first gen products That a buyer beware list if there ever was one. Second generation worked out the bugs. Thats undeniable.
[automerge]1592794992[/automerge]

Well if we look at recent history thats not the case. It was 4 years after the switch to x86 that they released an OS that didn’t run on PowerPC at all (Snow Leopard). Things are different now. Back then Apple sold the OS so not releasing versions that support the bulk of the user base would have cost them lost revenue. Still for at lease the next 3-4 years the bulk of the user base will not have ARM macs. I don’t see Apple not supporting those machines in the short to medium term until some internal tipping point.

Lol. Ok.

 

[locksmack]

It would actually make a lot of sense for Apple to release ARM in Pro machine's first.

If the ARM chips are indeed a fair bit quicker than the x86 chips, then releasing an ARM Air or 12" MacBook first would kill sales of the Pro machines. Pro users would either buy an Air or 12", or wait for the Pro machines to be updated. By releasing the Pro machines first, the Pro users are appeased, and the consumer level machine's will continue to sell fine because regular consumers wouldn't understand the difference.

 

[cmaier]

It would actually make a lot of sense for Apple to release ARM in Pro machine's first.

If the ARM chips are indeed a fair bit quicker than the x86 chips, then releasing an ARM Air or 12" MacBook first would kill sales of the Pro machines. Pro users would either buy an Air or 12", or wait for the Pro machines to be updated. By releasing the Pro machines first, the Pro users are appeased, and the consumer level machine's will continue to sell fine because regular consumers wouldn't understand the difference.

it also stops the narrative that Arm must be slow and weak.

If they released lower performance chips first, people would assume that the chips couldn’t possibly be made fast enough for the pro machines and thus the Arm transition will be a bust.

 

[R3k]

It would actually make a lot of sense for Apple to release ARM in Pro machine's first.

If the ARM chips are indeed a fair bit quicker than the x86 chips, then releasing an ARM Air or 12" MacBook first would kill sales of the Pro machines. Pro users would either buy an Air or 12", or wait for the Pro machines to be updated. By releasing the Pro machines first, the Pro users are appeased, and the consumer level machine's will continue to sell fine because regular consumers wouldn't understand the difference.

I dont think it makes sense at all. Professionals are the least fluid users. A blogger using word, mail, safari, and pixelmator wouldn't even notice the change to ARM so it makes sense to drop it on them first because they are ther least affected by teething problems.

However, A music creator using Logic, 15 x 3rd party pluggins..... their system will literally break until 15 devs port and test their software over. That would take alot of time.

x 1000% for graphic desigers, movie and video editors, photographers, etc. x 1000% more if they're using professional hardware in line with it (AVID Mediacomposer / ProTools / Fiberchannel cards, etc)

Apple re-worked Final Cut and dropped many features which too a couple of years to come back. Some video editors moved over to Adobe Premier permanently. Many kept using the old final cut for years.

Same with Tower Mac Pro's. I was on a dubbing stage last year, they're still all using Mac Pros from 2010 packed with ProTools cards.

Professional content creating mac users generally dont belong on the bleeding edge of tech.

So yeah, professional users are the absolutely last sector to move into new systems. They dont have time to be Guinea Pigs and are very locked into intricate production eco systems.

 

[locksmack]

it also stops the narrative that Arm must be slow and weak.

If they released lower performance chips first, people would assume that the chips couldn’t possibly be made fast enough for the pro machines and thus the Arm transition will be a bust.

Absolutely.

 

[cmaier]

I dont think it makes sense at all. Professionals are the least fluid users. A blogger using word, mail, safari, and pixelmator wouldn't even notice the change to ARM.

However, A music creator using Logic, 15 x 3rd party pluggins..... their system will literally break until 15 devs port and test their software over.

x 1000% for graphic desigers, movie and video editors, photographers, etc. x 1000% more if they're using professional hardware in line with it (AVID Mediacomposer / ProTools)

Apple re-worked Final Cut and dropped many features which too a couple of years to come back. Some video editors moved over to Adobe Premier. Many didnt upgrade their systems for years.

Same with Tower Mac Pro's. I was on a dubbing stage last year, they're still all using Mac Pros from 2010 packed with ProTools cards.

So again, professional users are the absolutely last sector to move into new systems.

Most purchasers of the “pro” machines are people using word, mail, safari and pixel actor.

 

[FlyingTexan]

That’s some serious pushing your chips all in. ALL MACS on a an untested chip platform. Wonder how many chips they’ll use. Or have some insane core counts. Right now skeptical how the chip from an iPad Pro could compete with a true desktop or laptop processor. There’s still wattage, TDP, etc limits. Just slapping on a high ghz doesn’t mean much.

Right now it’s like a motorcycle vs an 18wheeler. Both might have 300hp but the big guy has the numbers that really matter.
[automerge]1592797207[/automerge]
Also keep in mind they’ll probably have other chips, like a future T2, that has specific tasks it access at like video encode to offset everything on one large chip like now.

 

[SocialKonstruct]

I dont think it makes sense at all. Professionals are the least fluid users. A blogger using word, mail, safari, and pixelmator wouldn't even notice the change to ARM so it makes sense to drop it on them first because they are ther least affected by teething problems.

However, A music creator using Logic, 15 x 3rd party pluggins..... their system will literally break until 15 devs port and test their software over. That would take alot of time.

x 1000% for graphic desigers, movie and video editors, photographers, etc. x 1000% more if they're using professional hardware in line with it (AVID Mediacomposer / ProTools / Fiberchannel cards, etc)

Apple re-worked Final Cut and dropped many features which too a couple of years to come back. Some video editors moved over to Adobe Premier. Many didnt upgrade their systems for years.

Same with Tower Mac Pro's. I was on a dubbing stage last year, they're still all using Mac Pros from 2010 packed with ProTools cards.

So again, professional users are the absolutely last sector to move into new systems. They dont have time to be Guinea pigs are are very locked into intricate production eco systems.

Yeah Final Cut Pro being broken made U of U switch to Premiere for classwork. I think in a few years our art school is going to switch to PC when all of our Adobe apps stop working in a few months.