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

[fairuz]

More tellingly, they could fit 240 cores in under 300 watts, which would be entirely feasible for a high end Mac Pro that has multi-threading friendly workloads to crunch through.

It's also necessary to know how fast the I/O is between the cores. Doesn't really count if it's bottlenecking there, and if your workload is fully parallel so that doesn't matter, it's better on multiple separate machines anyway. And I don't know what's going to be optimized for 240 CPU cores that's not just using GPUs or other specialized hardware.

 

[Stephen.R]

Why would you need Bootcamp on a Mac?

Why would you need cheese on a sandwich?

Why do you need clothes on your body?


This and more existential ridiculous questions coming soon to MacRumors.

 

[fairuz]

I’m usually in favour of platform advancement when it has advantages, even if there is some pain (eg I think dropping 32bit Support was a good move, and due to mature VM capabilities 32bit apps can still be run at near-full speed if necessary, with zero chance of that support being removed ala Rosetta) but so far I’ve yet to see any compelling argument about how this improves things.

All the talk about being “held up” by Intel, meanwhile Apple just released a new iPad Pro with a cpu that’s essentially unchanged (With 1 additional gpu core) from the one released two years ago. But I thought Apple is unrestricted on arm chips! They're supposed to be able to release unicorns that **** sparkles!

For the short term, same. Anyone claiming ARM is faster or something doesn't have anything to support it. [Edit: This is outdated. Apple has made great leaps in performance in their ARM chips, and now there's a real comparison.]

Long term, chip design is going to become very intertwined with software, and so will CPU design with other parts in the computer. CISC (making a CPU instruction for every darn thing) is out, accelerator chips are in. So it makes sense for Apple to use a CPU they can develop on their own. And Intel has been the leader, but it's possible their approach is going stale, even compared to AMD's supposedly simpler design.

 

[Stephen.R]

Ok, so this can be a reason that we have a two years old CPU in the “new” 2020 iPad. A14X is coming and it will be used in the macs. It’s a huge switch, with huge market impact so they have to make a no brainier power house CPU to impress the non believers.

But we keep being told that challenges in ramping up CPU performance are all just an Intel problem, and that Apple engineers are all ****ing CPU GODs, who **** rainbows and lollipops and design 200% performance boosts while they sleep. Right? RIGHT!?


I'm not trying to downplay what Apple has done with it's internally designed processors. But thinking that scaling up the performance from where they started to where they are now is necessarily indicative of how things would go on a desktop-class roadmap is crazy.

 

[V-l-a-d-i-m-i-r]

Quote:

Freeangel1 said:
People need a way of running windows on a Mac

No. I don't know if you have data that suggests this, but one friend and I are the only people I know who do that, and I work for a large corporation.

@fairuz
Guys, I have the data that suggests this. I believe at least tens of millions people worldwide are really using Boot Camp. How I know it? I develop some drivers for Boot Camp (Trackpad++ for example), and counting just two primary mirrors these tools have been downloaded millions of times by unique users. Yet I think bigger group of Boot Camp users may not even know about them, because I never even advertised them anywhere, except of few forum posts, in years. I don't even have any YouTube video on this topic and neither social network account. As for me, this proves the real Boot Camp users community is huge one.

 

[Stephen.R]

For the short term, same. Anyone claiming ARM is faster or something doesn't have anything to support it.
Long term, chip design is going to become very intertwined with software, and so will CPU design with other parts in the computer. CISC (making a CPU instruction for every darn thing) is out, accelerator chips are in. So it makes sense for Apple to use a CPU they can develop on their own.

This is literally why I keep saying that I think the likely (and in my mind sane) next step is for Apple to enhance the T2 into a "T3" co-processor, which takes on more responsibilities, while maintaining compatibility with the entire rest of the desktop computing world via a regular Intel or AMD CPU.

 

[Jury]

the Apple A-Series SoC makes sense on a MBAir, MBPro if it does not need a fan to prevent overheating and able to run 2-3x times less heat without compromising the performance.

It's pointless to switch from x86 if Apple can't achieve that goal with ARM architecture.

 

[fairuz]

This is literally why I keep saying that I think the likely (and in my mind sane) next step is for Apple to enhance the T2 into a "T3" co-processor, which takes on more responsibilities, while maintaining compatibility with the entire rest of the desktop computing world via a regular Intel or AMD CPU.

They can do that, but it can only go to a certain point, then they're back to this dilemma.
The Intel instruction set is going to be considered technical debt soon, and some of it already is.

 

[fokmik]

Why would you need cheese on a sandwich?

Why do you need clothes on your body?


This and more existential ridiculous questions coming soon to MacRumors.

agreed,,,i buy a mac because i have easy access to all apps and OS....macos, windowsOS, linux, and soon, ipad apps

 

[msp3]

Does no one remember the PowerPC days when applications were so few and far in between, every single one of them could be reviewed in Macworld? It's amazing how mainstream Macs are nowadays and the vast array of choices we have for programs. Trouble is, I don't know what to attribute to Apple's success and what's made accessible by Intel and x86

 

[nikusak]

Look outside once in a while people, Apple are rarely first, they’re just the ones who make it thin and aluminium, and then cripple it at the two year mark with firmware or software (if the device lasts that long...)

Why do you people keep repeating this "Apple cripples their products at two year mark" garbage?

Oh, the battery gate? Please. You know very well what that was about, and how the user can choose whether to throttle or not (and risk shutdown with crap battery). Or just get a new battery.

Apple's software support for their mobile devices is the longest in the industry.

My 4,5 year old iPhone 6s runs iOS 13.4 perfectly (battery replaced a year ago). My 3,5 year old Apple Watch 2 is fine, even the battery is still great. My 2,5 year old iPad Pro runs iPadOS 13.4 amazingly well. I'm typing this on a 6,5 year old MacBook Pro. Still great.

Nobody is using a 4,5 year old Android phone, for starters. All 2,5 year old Android tablets are already EOL when it comes to software updates. That's crippling a product, isn't it?

You can criticize Apple for so many things, but this surely isn't one of them.

It's amazing how so many go crazy about rumoured ARM Macs. The products are not even out yet. The only thing I'm worried about is how Docker etc. will work.

Apart from that, I couldn't be more excited to see what they have been up to in Cupertino.

ps. Apple is the most successful consumer electronics company ever.

I'm always wondering WHY the others don't follow Apple's lead: just wait and "make it thin and aluminium" and insane profits will follow!

Or maybe, just maybe, there is (much) more to it.

 

[fairuz]

Does no one remember the PowerPC days when applications were so few and far in between, every single one of them could be reviewed in Macworld? It's amazing how mainstream Macs are nowadays and the vast array of choices we have for programs. Trouble is, I don't know what to attribute to Apple's success and what's made accessible by Intel and x86

If the tools and environment are there, the CPU architecture doesn't matter at all to the average software dev. Unusually low-level third party things would be hit hard.
[automerge]1585297924[/automerge]

Wow it’s not even out yet and most comments act like Apple is inventing something here. For those curious, Windows has worked on Arm for many years. Microsoft and their partners have sold Arm based Windows laptops and convertibles for years. Surface Pro X has a custom Arm chip. Adobe is already porting the Windows suite of apps to Arm so doing the Mac side is likely in progress too. Look outside once in a while people, Apple are rarely first, they’re just the ones who make it thin and aluminium, and then cripple it at the two year mark with firmware or software (if the device lasts that long...)

Microsoft doesn't make their own ARM chips. Apple made the best ARM chips available and utilized them well.
Tell the Macs and iPhone in my sig to die. 2 years was up a while ago.

 

[tha_man]

I don't think loss of bootcamp will be a dealbreaker for most Mac users. For some yes, but this is a minority. For me it would be a few years ago, today I only use it for occasional gaming with Steam and Gog.

I think the real problem will be software support. Sure, if you only use your Mac for surfing the web or XCode, you have nothing to worry about. But will various professional software still be rational to develop for a now completely different (and way less popular) platform? How about smaller developers? There will still be have Logic, Cubase, Ableton and probably most of the other big DAWs, but it will take time to port the VST/AU plugins to new architecture and I fear many will not be ported at all. Non-music software for areas, where Mac is not as popular as for music production will be even a bigger issue.

I'm not sure I want to deal with another "Amiga" situation. It was great computer, but too different from PCs and not widespread enough to develop software for it.

As far as iOS App ecosystem goes, yeah ARM Mac will probably get lots of it, but personally couldn't care less for most apps available there, and those that I do care about are meant to be used on a phone anyway.

 

[Stephen.R]

It's been clear for the past decade that virtualizing servers and stuff on your local machine is a dying practice.

Parallels for Mac was first released in 2006, VMWare Fusion in 2007 and evidence of Mac support appeared in Virtualbox sources in 2007.

Vagrant, a tool for creating reproducible local (and now even remote) VMs for development work, was literally released a decade ago.

The first alphas/betas of Docker Desktop for Mac and Windows were released 4 years ago.


So, Really? A dying practice or the past decade? It's only been a thing on Macs since the switch to Intel, so 14 years. It's had tools for reproducible environments for 10 years. So you're saying that people got this great new raw ability, but it became a "dying practice" literally the moment that tools to make it easier to use started to appear?

Yeah ok buddy.

 

[Tech198]

and i expect to only to be the start.. expect more macs to follow

 

[crsh1976]

Wait and see, I don't see the point in moving over to ARM yet.

 

[bchreng]

Does no one remember the PowerPC days when applications were so few and far in between, every single one of them could be reviewed in Macworld? It's amazing how mainstream Macs are nowadays and the vast array of choices we have for programs. Trouble is, I don't know what to attribute to Apple's success and what's made accessible by Intel and x86

It seems like things are different now. The iOS app store is huge. It probably wouldn’t be too difficult for developers to port their apps to Mac OS running on those ARM chips. The new iPad Pro seems to be paving the way for that to happen too.

 

[darrens]

Interestingly, Windows on ARM emulates x86 to run legacy apps, so it's technically feasible. Apple have also done this before with their previous two processor transitions.

Apple just needs to do something similar. (Yes - I know Microsoft havent done the 64 bit instruction set yet).

It would also seem to be feasible to have BootCamp for Windows on ARM and virtualisation of Windows on ARM - it's just up to Apple to decide if they want to lock down these new Macs as much as they have iPhones and iPads.

With mouse support coming to iPads, I do wonder if the ARM macbook is just an iPad in a notebook case...

 

[Tech198]

Everything Apple has done so far they did it on few devices, and patent pays off..

It wasn't long when a few Macs had TouchBar, now you can't even get one without one. Older devices get the same as iPad Pro Pencil ..and so on

 

[arvinsim]

They are going ARM so it's easier to write apps across the board, hoping that iOS/tvOS/ipadOS fanatics will switch to Macs so they can use the same app on the desktop. Kind of like using Messages on MacOS. It's not a bad line of thinking, and the ARM processors will be faster and consume less power.

As for x86 support - I use a PC for gaming, so I really don't need bootcamp anymore. Until macs support gaming and get decent graphics, many people will still have one around. It sickens me, the GPU options in macs. For a $3200 iMac, I get a two year old AMD GPU that is instantly outdated. My three year old iMac can't run Fortnite for my kids but a $100 Nvidia card in a $600 PC runs it at 120fps. Weird. I would assume the ARM processors will also have integrated graphics like the mobile devices, which would be an improvement over the garbage Apple stuffs into their macs. Could also mean we don't get stuck on the current minus two years Intel upgrade. Does a single mac have the 9th gen Intel processor right now? I have a four month old Lenovo at work with a 10th gen i7. Yeah, I get it isn't a big improvement, but that's not the point. It was the same story back when it mattered.

I can swallow using the abysmal GPUs on MacOS since there are still some low fidelity games that I love playing.

You know what killed Mac gaming for me? Killing of 32-bit support in MacOS Catalina.

 

[iPadified]

Which OS will it run? Will X86 apps be fully compatible? Will it be pointer and keyboard centric? The iPad forum has recently discussed a 27 inch desktop "iPad" and given what is happening with iPP and iPadOS, there would be no problem to release a "iMac" with ARM running iPadOS or a little bit more opened up version with less restricted management of windows for multitasking.

Please can someone tell me if there is something in iPadOS, apart from user input method and window management, that makes it impossible to run Final Cut, Inventor or full version of Office? Is not iPadOS a scaled down for of version of MacOS?

 

[mike...]

The best thing they could do is have transitionary Macs that have both an Apple and Intel CPU in them

 

[TheHurryKayne]

This is literally why I keep saying that I think the likely (and in my mind sane) next step is for Apple to enhance the T2 into a "T3" co-processor, which takes on more responsibilities, while maintaining compatibility with the entire rest of the desktop computing world via a regular Intel or AMD CPU.

So an hybrid solution to drive all to the Arm technology . A sort of Rosetta built inside? I have to say that i have mixed feelings maybe even the next mac will be . I suppose even the new and old Mac owners could have , not to mention the few with a new Mac Pro .The Marzipan's project says that Ipad apps apps could be rendered to the Macs and maybe this suggest an hint that even the Mac apps are being in the process . When apps ,i mean software like Logic or After Effect ,or Komplete or Reason will land on Arm Macs , while all the licenses are already on the cloud ,such as Roland or Adobe , when this will happen maybe no one will notice the difference between intel or Arms but just how we spend money , sky rocketed in the "sky " monthly ,in small fee sliced together.
Even the usb 4 thing is disappointing , Tiger Lake has been announced last January with Thunderbolt 4 in a foggy way just to discover that is just the USB 4 with the thunderbolt 3 within , not 80 Gbps and now Kuo is saying we will see that just in the 2021 .
I won't spend my money now and again in the 2021 just because of the 'fake Thunderbot 4 and the new Usb4 which is quick like the old thunderbolt 3 , correct me if i'm wrong , when we already have the new 10 nm Ice Lake right now.
I have to say , i saw, like you are , the Arm label beside Windows 10

Interestingly, Windows on ARM emulates x86 to run legacy apps, so it's technically feasible. Apple have also done this before with their previous two processor transitions.

but i can't see all the worldwide intel people in the run ,in the short period , and switch to Arm because Apple is doing and i don't see all the publishers give that to Apple , lets see what Spotify and Netflix , just speaking about the cloud economy , are saying differently from Apple or the retro compatibility new Xbox or PS5 are maintaining , the base is too precious . So future its fully open , maybe not my pockets and i think the real MINE thing is better that the one cloudly rented . In the meanwhile will be already in the Apple Intel base with a the new Macbook Air .

 

[baryon]

As USB4 is based on Thunderbolt 3, it offers data transfer speeds up to 40 Gbps, which is twice as fast as the bandwidth of the latest USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 specification. USB4's underlying Thunderbolt 3 protocol also means the specification supports up to two 4K displays or one 5K display over a single cable.

So in practice, how is USB4 any different from Thunderbolt 3 already found in current Macs? They can already connect to two 4K or one 5K display over a single cable at 40Gbps.

 

[Enerccio]

so is there even point of buying macbook if you will get last x86 one? Seems like what is the point. No I do not want ARM.