Intel Expecting Apple to Transition to Custom ARM-Based Chips Starting in 2020

[Unregistered 4U]

I think it's more accurate to say that iOS / UIKit developers will have an easier time with this transition

I think that Mac developers today using today’s mature Xcode will have a MUCH easier time than developers during the Intel transition using that version of Xcode. And definitely easier than those developers that were using CodeWarrior.
[doublepost=1551053361][/doublepost]

It's not up to Intel to announce this. Why would they even do this?

Intel isn’t announcing anything, they’re just saying what they think. Now, this decision COULD be based on the fact that Apple’s orders for next year’s Intel CPU’s seem to be FAR below what Intel would expect, but is still just a guess on their part... even though it carries a bit more weight than your average “analyst” that might say the same.
[doublepost=1551053539][/doublepost]

I wonder how these new chips will effect Logic Pro. I'm planning on buying a new imac at some point this year

I would guess internally they’ve got Final Cut Pro X, Motion, Logic Pro, Compressor and others are all compiled and testing under ARM. Apple will likely release a free update when its time.
[doublepost=1551054103][/doublepost]

This sounds like Rosetta 2.0 will have to be implemented to allow macOS intel apps to continue to run on the new hardware.

Intel apps will just run on the Intel systems people already have. Anyone that needs features that aren’t offered on the new systems, just wont upgrade... like those currently using cheese graters. (And very soon, those that need Intel 32-bit compatibility).

 

[Stella]

I’d be concerned with Apple making the Mac a walled garden.

Also, having to abandon the platform at home and work because the applications I require to use won’t be available.

 

[arkmannj]

If Apple does go this direction, it will be interesting to see how they go about it. Across all product lines or only certain models, etc.

The Apple chips have been showing some great promise but we haven’t yet seen how they perform on a full desktop experience which utilized a much greater degree of multitasking.

be interesting to see if it would cause other changes, When Apple was using the PowerPC chips it wasn’t uncommon to need a custom GPU and often wasn’t to the latest version X86 PCs got, and they often crossed more money.

and be interesting if the “Mac” experience becomes more similar to the iOS experience in terms of App loading, etc.

all around I’m sure Apple is thinking it through, but will be exciting to see where they go with it. I’m pretty cautious about it to be honest I’ve valued my mac products much better since the Intel switch, boot camp, vmware fusion, faster and more app development for mac.

 

[tresmith]

I don't do anything that relies on heavy computing power so I'm looking forward to a more powerful and longer battery life having macbook pro. At least a macbook air for sure.

 

[jannikmeissner]

This will be a disaster. The virtual machines that I run are going to crawl under any kind of emulator that Apple produces, and I'm not all that sure they'll even throw us that bone. Apple has been giving the Mac short shrift for years now and this puts the final nail in the coffin.

Well, it's 2019; my VMs have moved onto an OpenStack Cluster and I access them remotely or via SSH; nice thing about that: I can do that even from an iPad

 

[theluggage]

I’d be concerned with Apple making the Mac a walled garden.

Also, having to abandon the platform at home and work because the applications I require to use won’t be available.

So would I, and a switch to ARM might be a “convenient” time for them to sneak that in - but really, there’s nothing magic about ARM that either enables or requires lockdown: if Apple want to lock down MacOS they can do it any time they want, and once the T2 chip already in the MBP, Mini and iMP is standard that gets even easier.

As for applications - the transition will be a lot easier with modern software than it was for 68k to PPC or PPC to Intel - the forthcoming 32bit cull is probably going to be far worse (and will clear the decks somewhat for an ARM transition).

However, as for this whole thread, people are assuming that the transition predicted by Intel is going to be to ARM Macs. Remember that Tim Cook doesn’t know why anybody would buy a personal computer when they could have an iPad. All it takes is Xcode for Linux or Xcode-in-the-cloud and Apple could live without the Mac. (Don’t shoot the messenger!)

 

[LordVic]

Well, it's 2019; my VMs have moved onto an OpenStack Cluster and I access them remotely or via SSH; nice thing about that: I can do that even from an iPad

Do you have a good iOS app for SSH that doesn't kill the running process after 2 minutes? have yet to find one and it's been one of the reasons' I couldn't really use my iPad for remote maintenance.

Really sucked dialing in. establishing an SSH session, realizing I need to look up and read some documentation, switch to safari for 3 minutes, come back and my session is already dead.

 

[Stella]

Your right, there isn't anything to stop Apple locking down MacOS at any time, apart from a huge backlash.

The transition to Arm would be a very convenient time - Apple could make marketing reasons for doing so and Apple may have an easier time ( the faithful will lap up Apple's words as Gospel ).

So would I, and a switch to ARM might be a “convenient” time for them to sneak that in - but really, there’s nothing magic about ARM that either enables or requires lockdown: if Apple want to lock down MacOS they can do it any time they want, and once the T2 chip already in the MBP, Mini and iMP is standard that gets even easier.

 

[LordVic]

Your right, there isn't anything to stop Apple locking down MacOS at any time, apart from a huge backlash.

There was massive backlash against Apple when they just added blocking of non-app store programs by default, even with the option to disable. Imagine if it were permanent.

although, it's also possible that enough people are leaving Mac's that Apple doesn't care and might just switch over, and deal with the backlash. Like pulling off a bandaid.

 

[StellarVixen]

I think that MacBook will be the first. I do not expect Apple to immediately release every Mac with ARM CPU.


I think low power devices such as MacBook and MacBook Air will get ARM chips first, then MacBook Pro, and then maybe desktop Macs.


I feel sorry for the Hackintosh community.

 

[LordVic]

I think that MacBook will be the first. I do not expect Apple to immediately release every Mac with ARM CPU.


I think low power devices such as MacBook and MacBook Air will get ARM chips first, then MacBook Pro, and then maybe desktop Macs.


I feel sorry for the Hackintosh community.

While I feel you're right, I think it's a move that could impose some serious confusion in the lineup due to incompatibilities between programs.

I'm not worried in particular about programs that are from the App store. I think Apple will do a good job ensuring that published programs are compatible via both architectures.

where it becomes a problem is the non-App store related programs that won't be easily cross compiled due to using other technologies. it might not be a huge market, but there might be some people who have a desktop Mac who want a MacBook for portability, and they suddenly find that not all the programs they run on their desktop will run on their laptop.

if They do transition slowly, they'll have to do something to help minimize the fragmentation between devices.

 

[cmaier]

I think that MacBook will be the first. I do not expect Apple to immediately release every Mac with ARM CPU.


I think low power devices such as MacBook and MacBook Air will get ARM chips first, then MacBook Pro, and then maybe desktop Macs.


I feel sorry for the Hackintosh community.

Why do you feel sorry for them? I might feel sorry for them if they paid for the OS instead of using it for free, but they don’t.

 

[StellarVixen]

While I feel you're right, I think it's a move that could impose some serious confusion in the lineup due to incompatibilities between programs.

I'm not worried in particular about programs that are from the App store. I think Apple will do a good job ensuring that published programs are compatible via both architectures.

where it becomes a problem is the non-App store related programs that won't be easily cross compiled due to using other technologies. it might not be a huge market, but there might be some people who have a desktop Mac who want a MacBook for portability, and they suddenly find that not all the programs they run on their desktop will run on their laptop.

if They do transition slowly, they'll have to do something to help minimize the fragmentation between devices.

Oh, I do not imagine it being that hard, most of the software source code can be just recompiled with ARM compilers, and you have software working just like it did on x86. If devs care about Mac platform, this will not be huge problem to solve.

Apple will probably make their own ARM compilers, too.

 

[cmaier]

Oh, I do not imagine it being that hard, most of the software source code can be just recompiled with ARM compilers, and you have software working just like it did on Intel.

Apple will probably make their own ARM compilers, too.

They already make their own arm compilers.

 

[StellarVixen]

They already make their own arm compilers.

Oh, yes, you are right.
[doublepost=1551103727][/doublepost]

Why do you feel sorry for them? I might feel sorry for them if they paid for the OS instead of using it for free, but they don’t.

Well, they used to build powerful computers that run Mac OS for less money than the Macs actually cost, and they have been doing this for years.


Now, is is back to PPC era, in this regard.

 

[LordVic]

Oh, I do not imagine it being that hard, most of the software source code can be just recompiled with ARM compilers, and you have software working just like it did on Intel.

Apple will probably make their own ARM compilers, too.

Not so easy if you're dealing with legacy programs that aren't being actively developed anymore.

I know, it sucks to have to deal and support some of this stuff, but in many industries, just swapping it out isn't really an option.

I work in the banking / finance industry in software and support. My previous company developed the software that banks back end runs on. current company uses the same software.

the technology it's based on has a core that's about 20 years old. The software works and does exactly the required functionality, even by today's standards. is still supported. But to rewrite the software to use a modern engine would take an estimated 4-6 years and approximately 5-$10million. In addition to supporting the few dozen clients currently using the existing one at the same time. For a client to migrate off the software would take approximately 1-2 years and cost several million as well (i've done all the math/research).

there's no "just recompile the code" here since of how ancient the tech is. if Apple (or any other manufacturer) were to suddenly do as you propose, they would immediately be removed from acceptible devices for users because compatility with legacy software is an unfortunate reality in the enterprise/corporate world.

Apple moving to ARM does run this risk of alienating and losing a lot of enterprise / corporate where legacy support is mandatory. Heck, Apple's removal of 32bit support is going to completely 100% render OSx already incompatible with our software.

 

[StellarVixen]

Not so easy if you're dealing with legacy programs that aren't being actively developed anymore.

I know, it sucks to have to deal and support some of this stuff, but in many industries, just swapping it out isn't really an option.

I work in the banking / finance industry in software and support. My previous company developed the software that banks back end runs on. current company uses the same software.

the technology it's based on has a core that's about 20 years old. The software works and does exactly the required functionality, even by today's standards. is still supported. But to rewrite the software to use a modern engine would take an estimated 4-6 years and approximately 5-$10million. In addition to supporting the few dozen clients currently using the existing one at the same time. For a client to migrate off the software would take approximately 1-2 years and cost several million as well (i've done all the math/research).

there's no "just recompile the code" here since of how ancient the tech is. if Apple (or any other manufacturer) were to suddenly do as you propose, they would immediately be removed from acceptible devices for users because compatility with legacy software is an unfortunate reality in the enterprise/corporate world.

Apple moving to ARM does run this risk of alienating and losing a lot of enterprise / corporate where legacy support is mandatory. Heck, Apple's removal of 32bit support is going to completely 100% render OSx already incompatible with our software.

Oh, yes, that is true. Programs that are not actively developed and maintained are gonna be left in the dust.


But as I said, if someone cares for Mac OS as a platform, they will hire developers, blow away the dust from the source code, and recompile it for ARM. Or write new. If not, well...tough luck.


What software is so ancient that its source code is absolutely incompatible with ARM compilers? And if you need to spend millions of dollars to develop new up to date banking apps, maybe the time is now, since even Windows laptops with ARM chips are about to appear.

As the time passes, you will find more and more of your clients being unable to use your app, just because you refuse to move on, and keep sitting on 20+ year old tech. Sooner or later, you will have to comply to this new tech.


After all, all things must come to an end, ultimately.

 

[cmaier]

Oh, yes, you are right.
[doublepost=1551103727][/doublepost]
Well, they used to build powerful computers that run Mac OS for less money than the Macs actually cost, and they have been doing this for years.


Now, is is back to PPC era, in this regard.

That’s all true. But I don’t feel sorry for them. It’s not like they are entitled to leverage the hard work of Apple in creating the OS for free. Apple gives away the operating system but only to those who buy the hardware - it’s a fair system. Feeling entitled to different hardware than apple makes, or hardware at a lower price, doesn’t give them a moral right to just take the OS and do what they want with it, and being prevented from doing so should not warrant pity. It’s like feeling sorry for someone who doesnt like their house so they squat in yours, but you change the locks so no now they have to go someplace else.

 

[mcsandberg]

I hope Apple moves to ARM soon. I believe Intel is yesterday's news. The ARM processors are getting very fast and the graphics capabilities are better than what we see in Intel-based thin and light laptops with Intel Iris Pro or Intel HD graphics. My MacBook doesn't have the muscle my iPad Pro has both in CPU and GPU performance. It's time to ditch Intel and move to ARM. Bring it on!!

ARM hasn't caught up to the monster chips that intel and AMD are currently shipping. ARM is completely dedicated to power efficient computing, not power unlimited ultra performance computing.

ARM is simply repeating the performance increase curve seen on the desktop a decade ago. Now intel is shipping a 5GHz 10 core monster.

 

[cmaier]

ARM hasn't caught up to the monster chips that intel and AMD are currently shipping. ARM is completely dedicated to power efficient computing, not power unlimited ultra performance computing.

The ARM architecture, like nearly every other architecture, is agnostic as to performance level. You are confusing architecture/micro architecture and instruction set architecture.

 

[ocnitsa]

I don't see it as a move to a universal OS as much as it is a move to a universal development platform based on ARM + UIKit

I think Apple is always thinking 5 steps ahead and moving towards a larger goal...

 

[falainber]

Excuse my ignorance here, but isn’t TSMC investing $25 Billion into getting 5nm ready for Apple by 2020 according to the article on this site? What point are you making with this chart?
[doublepost=1550959473][/doublepost]
Exactly. Ever wonder why they’ve made a point to tell us that macOS and iOS are not going to merge? Probably one of the reasons is so that this exact perception can be avoided.

macOS will continue to be macOS, and iOS will continue to be iOS...

Wonder how the whole TB3 thing is going to play out though...IIRC Apple is a joint owner of that tech, along with Intel...wondering how a TB3 controller on an ARM motherboard will play out - that is a nonnegotiable for Mac, needs to be there, can’t simply be USB-C...

Apple is not is joint owner. Intel cooperated with Apple on development but that does not give Apple any rights. Per Wikipedia:

"On 24 May 2017, Intel announced that Thunderbolt 3 would become a royalty-free standard to OEMs and chip manufacturers in 2018, as part of an effort to boost the adoption of the protocol.[62]. As of February 2019 Intel still has not opened up their royalties, and there are no AMD chipsets/computers with Thunderbolt support released or even announced."

 

[theluggage]

I think that MacBook will be the first. I do not expect Apple to immediately release every Mac with ARM CPU.

Oddly, I think likely candidates are (a) the 12" MacBook, (b) the forthcoming Mac Pro or (c) just letting the Mac wind down and promoting the iPad Pro as an alternative to laptops.

Reason for the Mac Pro (I don't think this is highly likely, just feasible): if they're planning a full transition over the next 2-3 years then now is not the time to invest heavily in anything radical by way of Intel-based machines. Also - they haven't had a credible Mac Pro offering on the books for years now so its clearly a segment of the market they can afford to lose. We'd be probably talking about something with a metric shedload of CPU cores and on-chip vector processors/codecs/shaders accompanied by optimised versions of FCPx etc. designed to silence the "ARMs can't be powerful" crowd. (but I suppose Apple would never release an over-designed FCPx appliance instead of a versatile workhorse...)

The downside of a 12" ARM MacBook is that it would directly compete with the top-end iPad Pro models, and Apple seem more interested in iOS than Mac at the moment. Of course, if it had an ARM processor and could run iOS apps via Marzipan, would it be a Mac or an iPad?

 

[The_Interloper]

That’s all true. But I don’t feel sorry for them. It’s not like they are entitled to leverage the hard work of Apple in creating the OS for free. Apple gives away the operating system but only to those who buy the hardware - it’s a fair system. Feeling entitled to different hardware than apple makes, or hardware at a lower price, doesn’t give them a moral right to just take the OS and do what they want with it, and being prevented from doing so should not warrant pity. It’s like feeling sorry for someone who doesnt like their house so they squat in yours, but you change the locks so no now they have to go someplace else.

In my experience, not everyone who runs a Hackintosh does it because they feel "entitled" to different or lower cost hardware. In many cases, these are frustrated long-term Mac users who have invested many thousands of dollars over the years in Apple and depend on their software for their livelihood. In recent years, Apple has been an atrocious custodian of the macOS – alienating and letting down pro users at their own admission – and their hardware offering has, at times, been abysmal.

For example, someone who bought a 2013 Mac Pro and has come to the end of its useful life/service contract will find they only have the exact same computer still for sale 6 years later or a closed, thermally challenged all-in-one to choose from on the desktop. For laptop users, the choice is arguably even worse – not a single model available that doesn't thermally throttle and long-running (three years and counting) keyboard reliability issues.

I know several people who are at the end of their tether with Apple and what they consider to be overpriced, outdated and underperforming hardware. For many, the Hackintosh has been the only way to stay on macOS and run hardware that keeps their business competitive. Apple should be grateful they haven't simply given up and dropped the platform; feeling "entitled" has nothing to do with it.

 

[cmaier]

In my experience, not everyone who runs a Hackintosh does it because they feel "entitled" to different or lower cost hardware. In many cases, these are frustrated long-term Mac users who have invested many thousands of dollars over the years in Apple and depend on their software for their livelihood. In recent years, Apple has been an atrocious custodian of the macOS – alienating and letting down pro users at their own admission – and their hardware offering has, at times, been abysmal.

For example, someone who bought a 2013 Mac Pro and has come to the end of its useful life/service contract will find they only have the exact same computer still for sale 6 years later or a closed, thermally challenged all-in-one to choose from on the desktop. For laptop users, the choice is arguably even worse – not a single model available that doesn't thermally throttle and long-running (three years and counting) keyboard reliability issues.

I know several people who are at the end of their tether with Apple and what they consider to be overpriced, outdated and underperforming hardware. For many, the Hackintosh has been the only way to stay on macOS and run hardware that keeps their business competitive. Apple should be grateful they haven't simply given up and dropped the platform; feeling "entitled" has nothing to do with it.

You don’t “invest” in hardware and software - you buy it. And in exchange for your cash you get to keep it and use it. Just because you bought a Mac once and you are “invested” in their software does not give you the right to continue to use the OS on hardware you don’t buy from Mac. That’s what I mean by “entitled.” “I love Macs, and I can’t continue to use Macs because of cost/capabilities/whatever unless I hackintosh” is not a rationale. If you can’t use Macs you buy from Apple, you aren’t entitled to use Macs.