Intel to Apple Silicon Transition for Mac Was Announced Five Years Ago

[aaronage]

This thread is full of nonsense

The idea that Apple is behind on graphics is completely detached from reality. Metal and Apple Silicon are very well supported for 3D and AI work. The state of graphics on Mac is the best it has ever been.

M4 Max is as fast as a desktop 4070 in Blender and literally faster than all of AMD and Intel’s GPUs. M3 Ultra is 4080 SUPER level. A theoretical M4 Ultra would be 4090 level. No “professional” is crying about this.

There is also a lot of excitement for Apple hardware in the AI community. Metal is very well supported by software like llama.cpp. Apple has popular frameworks like MLX to make inference faster and more efficient on Apple Silicon (by taking advantage of unified memory). MLX also allows for distributed clusters, e.g. a set of Mac Studio’s communicating over a Thunderbolt ring network. Performance is great.

Oh it does. They ditched Nvidia GPU and therefore, they cant even use their GPU for their own server and super computer which heavily affected their AI development.

What is your point exactly? Apple doesn’t need to run everything in its own data centres, they can rent NVIDIA, AMD, Google Amazon etc. hardware for jobs like training. Just as they rely on Google, AWS etc. for cloud services. Apple doesn’t need to solve every problem in house.

 

[jlc1978]

And what is your definition of a professional user? It sounds as though you wouldn’t consider me a professional user despite the fact I make my living using my MacBook Pro, because 2D AutoCAD drawings don’t need an RTX5090.

I guess I am not either even though I also make a living with my MacBook Pro doing consulting work, analysis and programming. I also am apparently hallucinating since I run an LLM on my MBP.

Mac Pro isn’t a priority for Apple. Staying on Intel was never in the cards. The switch to Apple Silicon started in 2008 under Steve Jobs when Apple acquired PA Semi. 5 years later they introduced the iPhone 5S with a “desktop class” 64-bit processor and the writing was on the wall that eventually the Mac would switch over.

The die was cast when the cofounded ARM as well. The Newton was in many was a test case for Apple going to their own processors.

From what I can see, Apple is making their own servers for their cloud based LLM, based on arrays of a modified iPad design, interestingly, to run a secure Private Cloud Compute. Apple is doing some interesting work, and making some cool products (that we don’t always get to see), but all anyone can do is moan about AI.

It'll be interesting to see the results, given Apple can tailor the OS and chip to meet their needs, potentially resulting in a powerful yet efficient design. It also will let them keep everything in house, and use it as a service revenue stream by charging developers to incorporate it into their apps; giving developers access to AI without having to use a third party's service.

What is your point exactly? Apple doesn’t need to run everything in its own data centres, they can rent NVIDIA, AMD, Google Amazon etc. hardware for jobs like training. Just as they rely on Google, AWS etc. for cloud services. Apple doesn’t need to solve every problem in house.

It also makes more sense since you can scale up or down as needed and offload the actual physical plant and its operations to someone who can achieve better economies of scale. Reinventing the wheel, as you point out, is not necessary.

 

[BNBMS]

Apple being behind on AI has nothing to do with the switch to Apple Silicon. They were caught off guard by the rapid rise of generative AI.

Mac Pro isn’t a priority for Apple. Staying on Intel was never in the cards. The switch to Apple Silicon started in 2008 under Steve Jobs when Apple acquired PA Semi. 5 years later they introduced the iPhone 5S with a “desktop class” 64-bit processor and the writing was on the wall that eventually the Mac would switch over.

I guess I am not either even though I also make a living with my MacBook Pro doing consulting work, analysis and programming. I also am apparently hallucinating since I run an LLM on my MBP.



The die was cast when the cofounded ARM as well. The Newton was in many was a test case for Apple going to their own processors.



It'll be interesting to see the results, given Apple can tailor the OS and chip to meet their needs, potentially resulting in a powerful yet efficient design. It also will let them keep everything in house, and use it as a service revenue stream by charging developers to incorporate it into their apps; giving developers access to AI without having to use a third party's service.



It also makes more sense since you can scale up or down as needed and offload the actual physical plant and its operations to someone who can achieve better economies of scale. Reinventing the wheel, as you point out, is not necessary.

Loading…

forums.macrumors.com

I am right after all.

Nobody is saying that no one should cater to that market, it would indeed be a ridiculous assertion!

I know there are many people who would like to see Apple make a high end product, and it is a bit sad to see Apple neglect the Mac Pro, which I have always loved since my Sawtooth G4. I can see good reasons for Apple to stay in that market too, but one of the most profitable companies in the world is hardly going to go bankrupt if they don’t.

You’re taking one old fact and extrapolating it over the entire company. After that “old GPU” event when LLMs had caught Apple by surprise, they didn’t just continue to struggle to build a foundational model on an old, small array. They have been leasing large arrays of the latest tech to do it.

So what if Apple uses leased Google Tensor and Nvidia clusters run by other companies?

From what I can see, Apple is making their own servers for their cloud based LLM, based on arrays of a modified iPad design, interestingly, to run a secure Private Cloud Compute. Apple is doing some interesting work, and making some cool products (that we don’t always get to see), but all anyone can do is moan about AI.

Loading…

forums.macrumors.com

And yet, Apple is falling behind and they have no choice but to use other companies such as ChatGPT.

 

[Bungaree.Chubbins]

Loading…

forums.macrumors.com

I am right after all.

Loading…

forums.macrumors.com

And yet, Apple is falling behind and they have no choice but to use other companies such as ChatGPT.

So what? Siri is such a small part of the picture!

 

[BNBMS]

So what? Siri is such a small part of the picture!

Doesn't change the fact and you are only ignoring it.

 

[Bungaree.Chubbins]

Doesn't change the fact and you are only ignoring it.

So Siri is the only aspect that matters? Everything Apple demonstrated at WWDC means nothing? Or is that what we're meant to ignore?

 

[cubbie5150]

The rumors leading up to the official announcement kept me in the Apple fold. At the time, I was still rocking a 2014 15" MBP. The dodgy keyboards of later models + thermal management issues I experienced + smaller annoyances were leading me to shop for Windows-based machines. Ugh...DID NOT WANT, but Apple was kind of underwhelming me at the time.

Thankfully, I started hearing about the move away from Intel, along with informed (?) speculation that it would lead to fixing the issues that concerned me about contemporary MBP models at the time. At least, I allowed myself to hope for it.

Glad I did as I am still rolling along with my 2021 16" M1 Pro MBP. Best computer of any form factor that I've ever owned.

 

[BNBMS]

So Siri is the only aspect that matters? Everything Apple demonstrated at WWDC means nothing? Or is that what we're meant to ignore?

Apple is at least 5 years behind with AI. Do you wanna keep ignore that?

 

[Bungaree.Chubbins]

Apple is at least 5 years behind with AI. Do you wanna keep ignore that?

I’ve never said they weren’t. What I am saying is that they have a good strategy. I think that apples plan for AI, how to integrate it for developers to access locally run, private models, and to use it to make various tools more useful, is the path to a sustainable future that will survive a bubble bursting. Sure, they’re being in developing their own LLM, and Siri leaves a lot to be desired for those who need a voice assistant, but that only matters if you’re looking at it in the really short term.

Let’s see how everything looks in 5 years time.

 

[KPOM]

Apple is at least 5 years behind with AI. Do you wanna keep ignore that?

And how is the transition away from Intel relevant to that? They still would have spent billions on their own chips for the iPhone and iPad. They still would have spent money developing the Vision Pro. They just didn't see AI coming so quickly.

 

[BNBMS]

And how is the transition away from Intel relevant to that? They still would have spent billions on their own chips for the iPhone and iPad. They still would have spent money developing the Vision Pro. They just didn't see AI coming so quickly.

AND I never said it's related. I only pointed out about poor performance of Apple Silicon especially since Apple cant even make chips for Mac Pro and servers.

 

[BNBMS]

I’ve never said they weren’t. What I am saying is that they have a good strategy. I think that apples plan for AI, how to integrate it for developers to access locally run, private models, and to use it to make various tools more useful, is the path to a sustainable future that will survive a bubble bursting. Sure, they’re being in developing their own LLM, and Siri leaves a lot to be desired for those who need a voice assistant, but that only matters if you’re looking at it in the really short term.

Let’s see how everything looks in 5 years time.

You are only admitting that Apple is way behind than others.

 

[Bungaree.Chubbins]

You are only admitting that Apple is way behind than others.

Is developing an LLM the holy grail or something? What is this obsession? Apple is often not first to something, but they often come out the other end in a better position. The iPod want the first portable digital music player, the iPhone want the first smartphone, and Apple didn’t get on board the LLM hype train at the beginning.

I don’t understand why you are focusing on this one specific data point at the exclusion of everything else.

I believe, based on what I have seen, that some will be in a good position when LLMs mature. Apple has been working in AI for many years, they were just late to LLMs. I like what I have seen of their philosophy and strategy. They won’t be behind forever.

 

[KPOM]

AND I never said it's related. I only pointed out about poor performance of Apple Silicon especially since Apple cant even make chips for Mac Pro and servers.

But that's not what the chips are for. They are for mobile devices and laptops that make up the bulk of Apple's sales. I do think it's long past time for Apple to make up with Nvidia and license their GPU technology for their higher end chips. But Apple hasn't made servers for almost 20 years and the Mac Pro is such a niche product.

 

[Lioness~]

My summary of couple of pages:
My argument are better then yours, you don’t understand my argument.
Siri still ’rules' 😂

Tim might been the right one to take over after Steve?
But it doesn’t mean he’s the right one to lead Apple forward from now on.
I’m just waiting for his leave, and don’t expect a lot from Apple, Cook or Siri until the new era has started after that.
I have what I need for now and some time forward. I can wait for next products after the Cook era, no problem at all. I am though interested of getting more into AI, but not with any Siri involved.

 

[BNBMS]

But that's not what the chips are for. They are for mobile devices and laptops that make up the bulk of Apple's sales. I do think it's long past time for Apple to make up with Nvidia and license their GPU technology for their higher end chips. But Apple hasn't made servers for almost 20 years and the Mac Pro is such a niche product.

Tell that to AI competition.

 

[BNBMS]

Is developing an LLM the holy grail or something? What is this obsession? Apple is often not first to something, but they often come out the other end in a better position. The iPod want the first portable digital music player, the iPhone want the first smartphone, and Apple didn’t get on board the LLM hype train at the beginning.

I don’t understand why you are focusing on this one specific data point at the exclusion of everything else.

I believe, based on what I have seen, that some will be in a good position when LLMs mature. Apple has been working in AI for many years, they were just late to LLMs. I like what I have seen of their philosophy and strategy. They won’t be behind forever.

They are literally too late to the AI market that they cant even start anything which is a serious problem. It's just a matter of time before Apple falls.

 

[jlc1978]

I believe, based on what I have seen, that some will be in a good position when LLMs mature. Apple has been working in AI for many years, they were just late to LLMs. I like what I have seen of their philosophy and strategy. They won’t be behind forever.

Depending on Apple's goals for AI, the may not need their own LLM, but rather build a tailored model that can run on device for most cases and use their own M chip/ MacOS cloud for heavy ones.

For general AI they can cut a deal with an existing one, no need to build their own. That saves a lot of time and money that can be better spent developing the homegrown solution and adding to it as the market evolves.

 

[Bungaree.Chubbins]

Depending on Apple's goals for AI, the may not need their own LLM, but rather build a tailored model that can run on device for most cases and use their own M chip/ MacOS cloud for heavy ones.

For general AI they can cut a deal with an existing one, no need to build their own. That saves a lot of time and money that can be better spent developing the homegrown solution and adding to it as the market evolves.

It’s seems as though Apple has a good small model as they’re using their own LLM to run on device powering writing tools, and underpinning the upcoming features for developers to call in their apps in iOS 26. It appears that they’re unsatisfied with their large LLM’s performance with Siri though.

Apple could just use an existing model that meets its requirements until its own it’s ready, but some people will somehow view it as an admission of failure. As though developing another LLM is some holy grail, the end boss of IT…

 

[platinumaqua]

Last I checked you could still run windows via parallels… and the performance of the apple silicon is leagues ahead of intel or AMD in terms of performance per watt.

Virtualizing is not the same as native booting. Plus specialized hardware would not have drivers for ARM Windows

 

[jlc1978]

Virtualizing is not the same as native booting. Plus specialized hardware would not have drivers for ARM Windows

True but it works well for many users; if you need native booting you’re better off with a box that runs the needed os natively.

 

[platinumaqua]

True but it works well for many users; if you need native booting you’re better off with a box that runs the needed os natively.

and that's my original point. That native box can be the Mac in the Intel days! It was also easy to recommend Macs to PC people back then because there's the alternative of running Windows full time on a Mac so there's no need to take a loss in case they end up not liking Mac OS. Recent AMD Ryzen mobile chips showed that it's Intel that's crap, not necessarily x86-64 itself.

 

[jlc1978]

and that's my original point. That native box can be the Mac in the Intel days! It was also easy to recommend Macs to PC people back then because there's the alternative of running Windows full time on a Mac so there's no need to take a loss in case they end up not liking Mac OS. Recent AMD Ryzen mobile chips showed that it's Intel that's crap, not necessarily x86-64 itself.

I gt your point, but that is not, IMHO, a good reason to spend the extra money on a Mac over a PC. As a PC, the Mac didn't have any inherent advantages over a Windows box, and you had the added cost beyond the Mac premium of a Window's license. It's not, to me, a question of not taking a loss but rather what do you gain by inching the added expense?

 

[platinumaqua]

I gt your point, but that is not, IMHO, a good reason to spend the extra money on a Mac over a PC. As a PC, the Mac didn't have any inherent advantages over a Windows box, and you had the added cost beyond the Mac premium of a Window's license. It's not, to me, a question of not taking a loss but rather what do you gain by inching the added expense?

Until the 2016 disaster of MacBooks, it was the premium build quality of the unibody design, good screen/speakers/trackpad that made them worth the premium; and the price premium wasn't that much compared to the average Windows PC back then.

Anecdote, but I did see people switching to Mac in other forums back then because there's a Windows fallback in case they didn't like it. Most of them ended up staying on Mac OS after they got used to it.

 

[Bungaree.Chubbins]

Until the 2016 disaster of MacBooks, it was the premium build quality of the unibody design, good screen/speakers/trackpad that made them worth the premium; and the price premium wasn't that much compared to the average Windows PC back then.

Anecdote, but I did see people switching to Mac in other forums back then because there's a Windows fallback in case they didn't like it. Most of them ended up staying on Mac OS after they got used to it.

I guess my own experience of switching colours my thoughts on this. From my perspective, ditching Intel has been nothing but positive, a huge win for Apple. When I switched, I started with a G4 Power Mac, so it was never going to run Windows, and it was the inherent advantages of OS X that me want to move. I always saw the Intel era as a bit of a disappointing necessity that diluted a little bit of what made Apple great, and Apple restored that with the M1.

I’m not trying to invalidate your opinion, I’m just adding my experience which illustrates the other side of the coin.