Kuo: Apple to Launch Several Macs With Arm-Based Processors in 2021, USB4 Support Coming to Macs in 2022

[high heaven]

Here's the problem.

What about those professional softwares from x86? Adobe? Autodesk? Maya? Davinci Resolve? Avid? etc? You see, if third party developers don't join ARM-based Mac, it would be a failure.

Let's face it. There are only few professional softwares from Apple: Final Cut Pro, Logic Pro, etc. Meanwhile, there are tons of third party professional software even Mac users are using such as Adobe. If third-party don't join the new platform, then it is pointless to have ARM-based Mac. Most x86 based games won't gonna work too.

So I have to wonder will they gonna develop a new software just for ARM-based Mac? If not, I dont see any reason of buying it.

 

[Falhófnir]

Here's the problem.

What about those professional softwares from x86? Adobe? Autodesk? Maya? Davinci Resolve? Avid? etc? You see, if third party developers don't join ARM-based Mac, it would be a failure.

Let's face it. There are only few professional softwares from Apple: Final Cut Pro, Logic Pro, etc. Meanwhile, there are tons of third party professional software even Mac users are using such as Adobe. If third-party don't join the new platform, then it is pointless to have ARM-based Mac. Most x86 based games won't gonna work too.

So I have to wonder will they gonna develop a new software just for ARM-based Mac? If not, I dont see any reason of buying it.

If Apple makes it clear Arm is the future of the platform, all development efforts will shift to making versions of software for Arm Macs. It might take a while for the software ecosystem to populate, but it will happen because that's where the market will be heading. The only software that won't be updated is that which is either no longer supported full stop - in which case it's on borrowed time anyway (and that's if it's 64 bit, 32 bit abandonware is already gone), or that which the developer sees no value in recompiling, tweaking and refining for the Arm systems, in which case again, it's days were likely numbered anyway.

 

[fbr$]

Maybe they will offer models that have an embedded x86 CPU just for that purpose?

Please correct me if I'm wrong!

Aren't current x86 processors RISC inside the hood, along with a CISC-to-RISC "translater"?

Couldn't Apple implement a x86-to-ARM "translater" via hardware?

 

[cmaier]

Please correct me if I'm wrong!

Aren't current x86 processors RISC inside the hood, along with a CISC-to-RISC "translater"?

Couldn't Apple implement a x86-to-ARM "translater" via hardware?

Sorta/kinda, they are.

No, they couldn’t really do it by hardware. First, they would need a license from AMD and Intel. Second, it is very very difficult to get it right, and so you want to do it by software that you can quickly update. A large part of the work in designing an x86 processor is doing the logical verification phase that shows it properly executes x86 instructions.

 

[FrankCataldi14]

A toy version of Office runs on IOS...let’s be real.

I can practice law using the iOS version of Office (i.e., motions, briefs, etc.).

It's not a "toy version."

Can it do everything the desktop version can do?

Perhaps not, but it is more than capable for most users.

 

[Tagbert]

Will current third-party apps still work? The last thing I want to do is wait for ARM-compatible versions of Office and other programs I use. I can't remember how the PowerPC to x86 went, but I don't think a lot of the programs were compatible.

This should be much easier now. The recent generation of dev tools allow the compiler to target either Arm or x86. No one really writes CPU-specific code anymore except drivers. Apps will come in fat-binaries and the transition should be relatively smooth.

 

[cmaier]

I can practice law using the iOS version of Office (i.e., motions, briefs, etc.).

It's not a "toy version."

Can it do everything the desktop version can do?

Perhaps not, but it is more than capable for most users.

How do you do TOC, TOA, etc?

 

[code-m]

The one thing which will keep wires in business is the fact that wireless charging today is very limited. I had high hopes for WiTricity, but that seems basically dead, except for a few implementations in the automotive industry.

True wireless power has the problem of interference in a very mobile wireless world we live in today compared to what Tesla envisioned and demonstrated when he was alive. Is it possible, maybe but something tells me there are too many things competing for RF spectrum that it does not interfere with each other to not cause reliability issues. Look at how limiting both 5G technology is. Simply emitting even low levels of power would make it less efficient compared to Qi. There is a method to make wireless power feasible but not in the sense you are thinking.

 

[jeyf]

Please i'm already getting a dejavu here... many apps that never got ported to Intel, and? If it doesn't meet your needs then move on.

this is the reason I am not buying any new macOS
along with stock piles of bleach, TP and frozen pizza.


Not to sideways the thread but a wikipedia cut and past; "a hypervisor is computer software, firmware or hardware that creates and runs virtual machines. A computer on which a hypervisor runs one or more virtual machines is called a host machine, and each virtual machine is called a guest machine"

 

[code-m]

Yes, agreed.

But only in Apple-land can they choose to ignore, say 0.5% of users, and leave $100M on the table.

My point is that even Apple's weakest product produces HUGE revenue numbers.

Every company looks for routine stable revenue, iPhone for example every year to five years people upgrade. iPad usually every two to six years. Laptops usually every three years or longer. When you compare the development costs spread between many years and the number of your present customer’s upgrading and future growth then it makes sense for a company such as Apple to keep developing ARM as it also streamlines OS development costs and developers commitment. Having a platform such as x64 does not fit with Apple’s vision. Rather than think of what you won’t be able to do think of what will be possible like having one ARM device and having iOS automatically scale to iPadOS or macOS ARM similar to the cursor adapting when using the trackpad on iPadOS. New software developed that maybe better than what exists today.

 

[ani4ani]

Are you going to call the 365 version also a toy. Microsoft would not produce or support if not making money from these versions. Like it or not for many users it fits the bill. I gather Pages works for many as well. Complaining it’s a toy does not make it so, it just means for whatever reason the developer has chosen at this time to remove things and possibly add it later that can occur on a desktop version too.

it’s a toy because the developer has removed about 80% of its features and the other 20% are gimped or slow to utilise / use.
[automerge]1585346419[/automerge]

I can practice law using the iOS version of Office (i.e., motions, briefs, etc.).

It's not a "toy version."

Can it do everything the desktop version can do?

Perhaps not, but it is more than capable for most users.

it can do about 10% of what the desktop version can do...very inefficiently

 

[ssgbryan]

If Apple makes it clear Arm is the future of the platform, all development efforts will shift to making versions of software for Arm Macs. It might take a while for the software ecosystem to populate, but it will happen because that's where the market will be heading. The only software that won't be updated is that which is either no longer supported full stop - in which case it's on borrowed time anyway (and that's if it's 64 bit, 32 bit abandonware is already gone), or that which the developer sees no value in recompiling, tweaking and refining for the Arm systems, in which case again, it's days were likely numbered anyway.

That is not how software development works.

The 1st thing that happens is a cost/benefit analysis - is it worth porting to ARM? Will we sell enough copies to justify the time to port and test? How many copies will we sell? A lot of folks will say, Nope, because there will be a chicken/egg problem. No one is going to want to be 1st.

And then there is the look at it from the end user perspective:

ARM computer version 1 hardware
Applications version 1 software

I don't see everyone buying new hardware and new software in the same go around. And you will have to buy all new software, it isn't going to be free. When I update my copy of Zbrush, it won't be on ARM.

I have already been down this road with the PPC/Intel switch. It is why I was on 10.6 until 10.10 was released.

If Windows 10 had been available then I would have jumped then, but I was too chained to the ecosystem. As Apple dropped parts of the ecosystem (Time capsule, printers, monitors, etc) it became a lot easier to leave.

My mission critical apps aren't Candy Crush and iFart apps - they actually do things.

 

[code-m]

it’s a toy because the developer has removed about 80% of its features and the other 20% are gimped or slow to utilise / use.
[automerge]1585346419[/automerge]


it can do about 10% of what the desktop version can do...very inefficiently

365 is still available to use on any platform and I have yet to hear compassions that it is limited other than paying a subscription. Having features removed is a developers decision not necessarily the limitations of a platform. Sometimes developers remove features that are not used by most of the customers and decided to include it later that does not mean it is a toy. It takes software many years to reach market maturity and companies make calculated decision to extend its life by introducing on a new platform and reintroducing features, a business decision. As long as Office lives to it’s core operation Microsoft can call it what it wants, don’t like it find an alternative and I know there are many options. Complaining about cross platform compatibility gets you nothing, subscribe to 365. Cannot afford it maybe your business is not profitable enough or you have not heard of tax write-offs. In any case options exists and excuses get you nowhere.

 

[lsand3]

Improved processors are nice and all, but the cross-compatibility that intel processors allow has become a staple to my daily life. Does anyone know if this will affect Bootcamp?

 

[Falhófnir]

That is not how software development works.

The 1st thing that happens is a cost/benefit analysis - is it worth porting to ARM? Will we sell enough copies to justify the time to port and test? How many copies will we sell? A lot of folks will say, Nope, because there will be a chicken/egg problem. No one is going to want to be 1st.

And then there is the look at it from the end user perspective:

ARM computer version 1 hardware
Applications version 1 software

I don't see everyone buying new hardware and new software in the same go around. And you will have to buy all new software, it isn't going to be free. When I update my copy of Zbrush, it won't be on ARM.

I have already been down this road with the PPC/Intel switch. It is why I was on 10.6 until 10.10 was released.

If Windows 10 had been available then I would have jumped then, but I was too chained to the ecosystem. As Apple dropped parts of the ecosystem (Time capsule, printers, monitors, etc) it became a lot easier to leave.

My mission critical apps aren't Candy Crush and iFart apps - they actually do things.

Don't see how that's incompatible with what I wrote. At the end of the day, the Mac market is either worth the trouble of porting your software to or its not. That doesn't change with whether Macs are x86 or Arm based. If Apple is clear the transition is happening, that's a clear signal to developers that their Mac customers are soon going to be using these systems, and the ratio of x86:Arm is only going to shift in time as Apple phases in new Arm models and phases out x86 models from sale.

 

[jasnw]

Or don't, and buy a linux lapotp from System76.

Or a System76 Meerkat. I'm coming up on a need for a new non-AIO desktop system and I'm down to a coin flip between a Mini and a Meerkat. If Apple is headed in the ARM direction, I'm buying the Meerkat and transitioning back to Linux. I came to OS X when the PowerPC went away, and I'll leave when the ARM becomes Apple's desktop CPU.

As for the massive number of iOS and padOS apps out there that will come flooding in to the desktop? I see nothing on any of my mobile systems that I need/want on my desktop. Come on, Apple, if you're in a hissy fit with Intel just switch the desktop systems to AMD. Stay x86 compatible at the hardware level.

 

[code-m]

That is not how software development works.

The 1st thing that happens is a cost/benefit analysis - is it worth porting to ARM? Will we sell enough copies to justify the time to port and test? How many copies will we sell? A lot of folks will say, Nope, because there will be a chicken/egg problem. No one is going to want to be 1st.

And then there is the look at it from the end user perspective:

ARM computer version 1 hardware
Applications version 1 software

I don't see everyone buying new hardware and new software in the same go around. And you will have to buy all new software, it isn't going to be free. When I update my copy of Zbrush, it won't be on ARM.

I have already been down this road with the PPC/Intel switch. It is why I was on 10.6 until 10.10 was released.

If Windows 10 had been available then I would have jumped then, but I was too chained to the ecosystem. As Apple dropped parts of the ecosystem (Time capsule, printers, monitors, etc) it became a lot easier to leave.

My mission critical apps aren't Candy Crush and iFart apps - they actually do things.

Apple provides an option of universal apps via Catalyst. This means you can benefit presently from ARM and x64 Apple users. There is always going to be a risk not only for Apple but developers as well. You have to look at future customers while pleasing present and not just focus on the present because it’s comfortable, known and familiar. Either you as a developer adapt or someone else takes your spot it’s always evolving.

 

[sirozha]

It's so strange to me that no one seems to see an obvious solution to the software shortage problem on an ARM-based Mac. Make it a hybrid device and create a framework for automatically porting the UI in the iPadOS apps to the ARM-based macOS GUI.

Combine the 12" MacBook with the iPad Pro. It's almost there already with the new iPadOS mouse compatibility. All that needs to happen is to run macOS when the device is docked into the keyboard/trackpad dock. You can immediately port tens of thousands of iPadOS apps to the ARM-based macOS. This would be a stop gap. Those software developers who want to port their Intel-based macOS applications to ARM-based macOS will do so within certain time of the release of this device. Those who don't want to build distinct ARM-based macOS apps but already have iPadOS applications will simply recompile them with the automatic UI adjustment for the ARM-based macOS. It won't be perfect but will be quite workable.

The hybrid device can be the first foot in the door of the ARM-based Macs. As the number of applications for the ARM-based macOS grows, Apple can release ARM-based desktops that will not have the iPadOS mode but only the macOS mode.

For the foreseeable future, Apple will continue to make the X86-64 architecture Macs in the Pro lines, such as MacBook Pro, Mac Pro, and iMac Pro. The non-pro Macs can gradually become ARM-based. But I think that the first ARM-based Mac will be a hybrid Macbook/iPad Pro device and not the MacBook Air.

 

[code-m]

It's so strange to me that no one seems to see an obvious solution to the software shortage problem on an ARM-based Mac. Make it a hybrid device and create a framework for automatically porting the UI in the iPadOS apps to the ARM-based macOS GUI.

Combine the 12" MacBook with the iPad Pro. It's almost there already with the new iPadOS mouse compatibility. All that needs to happen is to run macOS when the device is docked into the keyboard/trackpad dock. You can immediately port tens of thousands of iPadOS apps to the ARM-based macOS. This would be a stop gap. Those software developers who want to port their Intel-based macOS applications to ARM-based macOS will do so within certain time of the release of this device. Those who don't want to build distinct ARM-based macOS apps but already have iPadOS applications will simply recompile them with the automatic UI adjustment for the ARM-based macOS. It won't be perfect but will be quite workable.

Catalyst it’s a given and not a hint.

 

[jeyf]

... look at it from the end user perspective:
ARM computer version 1 hardware
Applications version 1 software
I don't see everyone buying new hardware and new software in the same go around...
My mission critical apps aren't Candy Crush and iFart apps - they actually do things.

it would be an opportunity to just dump Apple.
its a choice you have.

i exclusively run Candy Crush and iFart apps and just dont need the high cost to own. Say if the keyboards have butterflies than I suffer with junk hardware too.

 

[KPOM]

I’m waiting to upgrade!
[automerge]1585279300[/automerge]

Hopefully they can bring back the 12” MacBook.
[automerge]1585348410[/automerge]

OK. We all know how the POWERPC IBM G5 Processor era went.
People need a way of running windows on a Mac
its fine for apple to reduce its costs on processors but I really doubt people will spend all that money to buy new software
Windows 10 is it. there will not be a windows 11. And companies rely heavily on the windows eco system and backwards compatibility

By the way. the shape of the economy has a lot to do with what people spend their money on

their were 3.3 Million people that lost their jobs so far today

They are not gonna spend money on ARM Processor Macs with no jobs or income
especially when robots and automation are taking the place of humans.
the future could look like a MAD MAX movie. No one knows.
We have to make wise choices on the environment and not handing too much human responsibility to machines

I like intel and AMD
fixing and upgrading my own computer
like fixing and repairing my own car.

USB 4 I am sure will be available on the X86 platform. No need to go ARM just for that other than Battery life

AMD better than Intel anyway

Windows runs on ARM now. New Microsoft Store apps are required to run natively on ARM.

 

[code-m]

it would be an opportunity to just dump Apple.
its a choice you have.

i exclusively run Candy Crush and iFart apps and just dont need the high cost to own. Say if the keyboards have butterflies than I suffer with junk hardware too.

With a narrow-minded view it is no wonder your focus is on casual games and brief entertainment party apps. Yes I am sure most of the apps on the AppStore is as you mentioned

 

[Think creative]

and this is why I'm not buying the new MacBook air. I've got a MBP 13 inch from 2015 I picked up last summer, and honestly it does everything I need for a portable computer. I was smart and got 16 gigs of ram. Next time, I'm going with at least a 1tb ssd and hopefully 32 gigs of ram. a 14 inch with like 20 hours of battery life? Sign me the hell up.

 

[FrankCataldi14]

How do you do TOC, TOA, etc?

I can prepare a table of contents and table of authorities on Word on iPad.

A paralegal or an assistant can clean up any formatting problems.

The use of acronyms in your question was adorable, by the way.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

This could probably sink Intel. These babies will be screamers! I wonder if they’ll play nice with Chrome and all the apps out there.

Apple’s only a tiny part of Intel’s business. And, as these CPU’s will be only for Apple’s use, even if it does run circles around Intel‘s solutions, Windows users and the greater computing world will still use Intel. The bigger impact to Intel will be if AMD beats them. Oh, AND if Qualcomm is able produce ARM processors anywhere near the performance of Apple’s A-series.

I can't remember how the PowerPC to x86 went, but I don't think a lot of the programs were compatible.

Most folks held on to their current computer for awhile to wait for everything to shake out, I’d guess it would be the same here. Folks buying NEW Macs, of course, had no legacy apps to be concerned with. And, developers that wanted to reach into the pocket of someone that just spent 1 to 2 thousand dollars on an Intel Mac would do the work to port to Intel.