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.
Intel Expecting Apple to Transition to Custom ARM-Based Chips Starting in 2020
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is true. Intel never had the best designers. When I worked at AMD I went to a conference and heard a group of Intel engineers talking about my chip and asking “how did they do that?”
What Intel had that killed us all the time was their great fabs.
Now they have blown it with their fabs for several years. Many of the folks I worked with at AMD are now at Apple.
What you are talking about is subjective-and is totally up to them. I will choose with my wallet-end of discussion. I dont' think I know "better", I know whats better for Me.
Maybe this will explain why Apple has taken 2 years to build the new Mac Pro. They’re designing it from the beginning to be an ARM powerhouse. I would add that maybe it will run on dual chips, the ARM chip running macOS and native ARM apps and the Intel chip running Intel apps.
OSX was more stable in my opinion on PPC, maybe the move to ARM will bring back that stability. BUT...bye bye Boot Camp, which might be the end of my nearly 20 year run on the Mac.
Yep for sure. From your perspective it sucks. I feel bad. But Apple is going to do what apple is going to do, and the results will be better macs and, eventually, better mac software.
I think you're looking at that the wrong way around: currently a developer who wants to support both iOS and MacOS has to write and maintain two different apps - many do, but they must be continually looking at the relative market sizes and wondering if the Mac version is worth the effort. Being able to target both with a single app would make them more likely to support (or continue supporting) the Mac.
Also remember that the iPhone market may be huge c.f. the Mac, but last quarter the iPad sold about 10 million vs. about 5 million Macs, and I suspect that the 'iPad Pro' sales - the users who would be more likely to buy serious software - is probably only a fraction of that. So if you're thinking of writing some new software for the iPad Pro, being able to sell the same app to Mac users could significantly boost your potential users...
As for ARM-based Macs - Apple have carried off 3 processor switches: PPC to x86, 68k to PPC and 6502 to 68k (...but a 68k software-emulating a 6502 was faster than a real 6502 so the last one is stretching a point) - and in those days, far more software relied on lovingly hand-crafted assembler and direct hardware access than it does today. Many Apps written in ObjC or Swift that use the Apple frameworks should just re-compile.
Bear in mind that we know that the next MacOS will drop 32-bit support, which is going to trigger a massive cull of "legacy" apps which aren't still being actively supported or contain too much architecture-specific code to be economical to fix.
The big problem with ARM Macs is - as people have noted - bye-bye BootCamp/Intel VMs. Sure, the ARM can do dual-boot or virtualisation, but it will be virtualising ARMs (and, apart from the IP issues about x86/AMD64 emulation, the ARM doesn't really have the performance headroom over Intel to deliver very good performance). So its gonna be virtual Linux or BSD (which is fine if you're doing web development or want to run Docker or suchlike) but even if MS start selling ARM Windows retail its probably not going to scratch that legacy software itch very well. I'm not going to try and put a positive spin on that, or tell people they don't need Windows on Mac, but I suspect that its a sacrifice that Apple would be happy to make.
Now, if I ran Apple I'd... well, I'd sell up, buy an island somewhere and enjoy a luxurious and idle retirement but that's not important right now
... er... if I were to armchair quarterback, I'd say don't start with an ARM Mac/MacBook, instead, put MacOS for ARM on the iPad Pro (and make a keyboard case with a trackpad). That way, you're adding features to the iPad rather than removing Intel compatibility from the Mac. Five years down the line, it may all be the same. Hardware wise, the latest iPad pro is more interesting than any current Mac laptop, and even if the notion that its as fast as a MBP is... optimistic... it's clearly not chopped liver. The way Apple could easily get this wrong is to pull the rug too soon - they'll need Intel and ARM Macs running side-by-side for a couple of years, and that means not letting the Intel Macs languish with out-of-date processors. The idea that they might use it as an excuse to lock down MacOS as much as iOS is also depressing - although we can probably kiss goodbye to Hackintoshes a year or two after as Apple have finished rolling out the T2, anyway.
I can't be too pessimistic about ARM desktops, since I was using one in 1988, and back then, the original ARM 2/3 ran rings around anything Intel had to offer. Acorn/ARM stopped designing desktop chips concentrated on embedded, and then mobile, applications because it was the only way they could sell processors that didn't run Windows.
The thing is they are already investing most of those resources already, making the ARM chips for iOS devices. Designing derivations for laptops/desktops is a small increment -- it's actually making good use of their existing R&D.
I think it is worth pointing out, as well, that comparing Intel's track-record of producing chips on-time and as promised, compared to Apple's over, say, the last ten years, is a win for Apple. They have produced a new AX processor every year on time for each new iPhone. They have a very good track record with their chip designs.
Regardless...it's quite a stretch to assume that the entire line, giving no other options will be changed overnight to drop support for all software which is dependent upon that hardware platform. You're not rewriting major software, even those developed by Apple, in this short period of time to only operate on ARM-based hardware. I don't believe that something similar in releasing Rosetta for cross-platform support will occur. But, if it does it will only be at the point when they drop development of Darwin for Intel chips. That's not happening by next year and I feel safe in making that assumption.
What's funny is Intel wasn't even IBM's first choice for the PC. They were seriously eyeing the 68000, but eventually went for the cheaper 8088 instead. Add to that the fact that MS-DOS also wasn't their first choice, and you have quite a fluke of an industry-dominating platform.
Curious why Windows is so important to you. I understand how it was 10 years ago but today? Windows has lost most of its influence. Developers have moved to iOS and Android and some of the establishment devs like Adobe are making that final transition to iOS now.
If you want a Windows or Linux machine, sure. But that’s a pretty niche market. Most people just want to run Microsoft Office and a browser.
I don’t think anyone is missing it. The lack of mention just shows how far down the list of “must have’s” running other OS’s is. If there’s a developer that wants to make money making emulation work, there will possibly be options. But, I think BootCamp is right out the window.
Yep. Boot camp has gotten less and less important now that we have BYOD at work, more work is done on mobile, and people think of Apple as a legitimate non-toy device.
Well, obviously that would be true, but I think games have long been an afterthought on Macs anyway. That said, the claim is that the A12X has XboxOne-level power, so it might not be that far of a stretch to think a much more powerful Apple chip (like one with 35W+ of thermal headroom) could manage games if they can target the hardware well. I think the major loss would be Bootcamp, unless Apple has some wizardry there.
This is all in the pursuit of thinness, just like with the current MacBook Pro being basically USB-C only, forcing the use of dongles, killing the super handy Magsafe port and the cool illuminated logo.
The new ARM machines will be as thin as 2 credit cards, have a non mechanical keyboard and will communicate and charge wirelessly. No ports!
Because Thin is more important than anything.
The new ARM machines will be as thin as 2 credit cards, have a non mechanical keyboard and will communicate and charge wirelessly. No ports!
Because Thin is more important than anything.
iOS Games? Talk about toys...Those aren't a games. You guys do get that A LOT of game artwork is complied in macOS right? It's a billion dollar industry; there is money in it. But oh well.
Glad to see I'm not the only one weary of this. I frequently need to view medical records and surveillance videos that will only open on windows. I run VMware and it works, you throw this kink into things, and PPC hell will return at a minimum for a good chunk of time.
I don't want to go back to living with a G4 processor trying to emulate stuff. I too am frustrated with Intel, but switching everything over is going to be a mess. And no I don't want an iPad as my computer.
I don't want to go back to living with a G4 processor trying to emulate stuff. I too am frustrated with Intel, but switching everything over is going to be a mess. And no I don't want an iPad as my computer.
I actually prefer Civ VI on my ipad vs. mac. It’s faster, and easier to play because of touch controls.
My concern with this would be whether they're planning on turning macs into essentially iOS appliances. I can see where that would be tempting for Apple, to say "look, we have the same interface on all our devices, just pick your screen size and form factor." But a lot of people need an actual desktop OS with file system access and work programs, not just a screen with app icons. But Apple may be going their own way now and not care about that, just cater to people who want an Apple experience as a lifestyle brand.
The choice of chip has nothing to do with what you’re talking about. Any chip can run any operating system.