I'm watching it but I don't have near-term concerns. I'm running 2014 and 2015 MacBook Pros and, if they go to ARM only with no x86 support, then I'll just get a MacPro and use that for the next decade. I'd just get used MBPs if I needed a new laptop. I think that Apple will get ARM right in a few years. I actually do expect an x86 solution though. If there isn't a great solution, then some of us could get together and build one.
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.
Leaving Apple over ARM Based Macs discussion [merged]
- Thread starter SocialKonstruct
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm watching it but I don't have near-term concerns. I'm running 2014 and 2015 MacBook Pros and, if they go to ARM only with no x86 support, then I'll just get a MacPro and use that for the next decade. I'd just get used MBPs if I needed a new laptop. I think that Apple will get ARM right in a few years. I actually do expect an x86 solution though. If there isn't a great solution, then some of us could get together and build one.
I do not think so. I have the top of the line Asus Zenbook ProDuo sitting right next to me and still use the MBPr 90% of the time.
ZenBook Pro Duo UX581｜Laptops For Home｜ASUS Global
The elegant ZenBook is compact, ultrathin and light, featuring the best laptop technology, NanoEdge displays, precision craftsmanship, uncompromising performance, and innovation. It's designed to bring out the very best in you.
www.asus.com
TB is an optional protocol in the USB4 spec, and still requires Intel certification.
In other words, not all USB4 devices will support TB. And Intel still has a grip on TB.
There are currently 0 ARM-based devices that are TB certified; and only 2 AMD motherboards TB certified. If Apple makes an ARM Mac with TB (which I think it jas to have), they will be the first major OEM to have a non-Intel TB certified device.
Intel can issue certification for Thunderbolt 3 devices (peripherals), but the certification is not mandatory.
The new USB4 spec promises a lot: Thunderbolt 3 support, 40Gbps bandwidth, and less confusion
Meet USB4, which promises to simply the USB naming scheme and integrate the high-bandwidth Thunderbolt 3 specification.
www.pcworld.com
So there you go. Intel retains ownership of the patents, but everybody can use USB 4.0. In fact, even Thunderbolt 3 itself went royalty-free in 2018. This is reason why you're seeing more Thunderbolt 3 devices in 2020.
Royalty free does not mean no certification. The article you linked states:Intel can issue certification for Thunderbolt 3 devices (peripherals), but the certification is not mandatory.
The new USB4 spec promises a lot: Thunderbolt 3 support, 40Gbps bandwidth, and less confusion
Meet USB4, which promises to simply the USB naming scheme and integrate the high-bandwidth Thunderbolt 3 specification.
So there you go. Intel retains ownership of the patents, but everybody can use USB 4.0. In fact, even Thunderbolt 3 itself went royalty-free in 2018. This is reason why you're seeing more Thunderbolt 3 devices in 2020.
The new USB4 spec promises a lot: Thunderbolt 3 support, 40Gbps bandwidth, and less confusion
Meet USB4, which promises to simply the USB naming scheme and integrate the high-bandwidth Thunderbolt 3 specification.
www.pcworld.com
Royalty free does not mean no certification. The article you linked states:
The new USB4 spec promises a lot: Thunderbolt 3 support, 40Gbps bandwidth, and less confusion
Meet USB4, which promises to simply the USB naming scheme and integrate the high-bandwidth Thunderbolt 3 specification.
Same article states that members of the USB-PG group, which includes Apple, can use Thunderbolt 3 willy nilly.
Even if you are right and the wording may preclude someone like AMD (news flash: it doesn't: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-motherboard-asrock-first-thunderbolt-certification-intel), the implication is still that Apple can just implement either USB 4 or Thunderbolt 3 as they see fit, because Intel will for sure certify whatever Apple comes out with.
So I don't see why you have to fuss over this. It used to be an issue in 2018. It's no longer an issue starting from 2019. More manufacturers are now able to come out with certified Thunderbolt 3 devices, even if the certification is mandatory.
when was I fussing? I said an Apple would be the first major oem to bring a non-Intel TB certified device.
I'm not sure how my being "afraid to learn something different" equates to time saved not having to screw around with Microsoft's software and hardware failures. If I'm "afraid," then it's a personality failure ... one of many I obviously have.
My idiosyncratic behavior has no effect on the years I've added to my life by studiously avoiding anything from Redmond. I even passed up the chance to walk across the street and hear Bill Gates speak at a conference in 2016.
...because people really, really need to attach a 5k display and high-end NVME SSD-based RAID array to their $35 Raspberry Pis, phones, tablets and ARM-powered rack servers and AMD gaming towers (which tend to have internal PCIe slots and storage bays and/or connect to their storage over a network).
Truth is, Thunderbolt isn't a "must-have" in the PC world, and an ARM Mac range would be the first significant ARM-based personal computer/workstation (outside of the UK in the 1990s) - so the current lack of implementations is probably down to lack of demand rather than anything else.
Apple have gone for TB big time with the Mac considering that only the Mac Pro has any capacity for PCIe or internal storage expansion. If/when the move to ARM for the MBP, iMac and Mini, they'll need to implement either Thunderbolt or whatever the 20/40Gbps option in USB4 is going to be called. It isn't rocket science. Well, maybe it is rocket science but Apple can afford a bit of rocket science (even though Cook doesn't seem inclined to join Musk, Bezos and Branson in te 200-mile-high club).
The rumoured 2021 date for ARM Mac products is pretty much in line with the expected date for USB4 products, anyhow.
...that said, if the first product is a 12" MacBook or MBA replacement - or even a developer's lashup - then it can probably live without Thunderbolt to start with.
The most I'm afraid of is the topic of Adobe Creative Cloud Software and licensing. What will they do? Will they drop the support like many years ago they dropped powerpc support? It's all cloud now, so no permanent license, so if I want to stay on Catalina for the next decade should I pirate the last version that worked? Earlier it was simpler because of the permanent license... Very confusing times...
Why would Adobe not port Adobe CC to the new chipset? I would not be surprised it was one of the first application suites ported, along with MS Office 365. In both cases the companies want to you to continue your subscriptions and keep sending them money month after month.
They will port, but I don't want to forced to switch to arm so quickly, I just bought the new and maxed out MBP 16 inch...
You're putting the cart before the horse. I think there would be plenty of use for TB on small ARM devices if any existed that supported TB. But people can't even try anything right now because no such thing exists.
For example, the possibilities of mating a powerful eGPU to an ARM-based board such as Pi or others raises some intriguing possibilities. It would be possible to built a cheaper or more power-efficient machine learning processing station that way. Or distributed computing. Also, there are cryptocurrency possibilities.
I don't think it'll be an issue, specifically because Adobe is cloud based now. They'll port to ARM for sure (they even have a headstart on that already when they started porting Photoshop's full app to work on iPad which is ARM). I don't think they'll drop support over night. I think they'll let anyone using Adobe products on Intel Macs keep doing that for a couple years, but yes at a certain point there will be a time (let's say for example 5 years from when the first ARM compatible Adobe suite comes out) when you get the last update that works on Intel Macs. I think you'll be able to stay on that version and keep paying for it and still be able to access it though.
I would imagine that final Intel Mac compatible version of Adobe suite will still function long as you keep paying Adobe their subscription fee. No reason for them to brick it if people like yourself plan to stay on an Intel Mac and still pay for access to that last version of the suite, they just eventually will stop pushing new updates to it. I could even see them lowering the monthly subscription fee for those people since you'd be losing access to updates, you'd only be paying for continued access to the final Intel Mac version of Adobe suite. That would be how i would handle it if i was Adobe at least.
Last edited:
So seems all apps will be ported to ARM. Does that mean Intel Mac's will be running some kind of emulator to run ARM apps? That would be really horrible.
Or will native x86 software continue to exist next to ARM apps?
So what is the point of a MacBook Pro anyway when it can run iPhone and iPad apps natively. Means the iPad Pro in theory can do the same, so Apple might as well kill off the MacBook Pro then as it is more portable.
Or will native x86 software continue to exist next to ARM apps?
So what is the point of a MacBook Pro anyway when it can run iPhone and iPad apps natively. Means the iPad Pro in theory can do the same, so Apple might as well kill off the MacBook Pro then as it is more portable.
I’ll stick with the Mac if Windows still runs in Parallels. If not: bye Mac. I don’t want to use Windows, but need to for work
It will be like PPC Macs. Obviously current apps will still run on intel, and future apps under the dual binary will too. But my guess is after Apple completed the transition, ie. when all their current lineup are Ax based, then we will see developers stop supporting intel.
Just like PPC Macs today, you can still use them, but just not running the most updated OS/Apps.
Just like PPC Macs today, you can still use them, but just not running the most updated OS/Apps.
The "native binary" part is basically a common platform binary thing. I'm guessing what it is is a binary that contains both x86 and ARM code paths so it'll work like a native app on both x86 and ARM. I'm not sure... gotta read up on documentations, but that's the impression I'm getting. It's not an emulation layer. It's just a bigger app overall to consumers since apps will now contain both ARM and x86 code.
And the point of a MacBook is to provide "power users" (whatever that means) more tools and capabilities on top of being able to natively run iOS apps. I'm guessing Xcode development will at least be less of a pain in the rear because there is no need for an "iOS Simulator" anymore. Everything can just run natively.
I'm watching intently to see what Apple is able to come out with later this year. They seem to be implying that they can make MacBooks that are more energy efficient at the same performance level as Intel chips. Bold claim. If they actually had real hardware that could achieve that level of performance, you'd think they'd already announce the hardware now, plus provide their usual benchmark numbers like 2x faster, 10x faster, 1000x faster or whatever.
But the fact is that they did not show any performance delta benchmark between Intel Macs and the upcoming ARM Macs running A12Z or a mythical A14... and that's pretty telling to me.
And the point of a MacBook is to provide "power users" (whatever that means) more tools and capabilities on top of being able to natively run iOS apps. I'm guessing Xcode development will at least be less of a pain in the rear because there is no need for an "iOS Simulator" anymore. Everything can just run natively.
I'm watching intently to see what Apple is able to come out with later this year. They seem to be implying that they can make MacBooks that are more energy efficient at the same performance level as Intel chips. Bold claim. If they actually had real hardware that could achieve that level of performance, you'd think they'd already announce the hardware now, plus provide their usual benchmark numbers like 2x faster, 10x faster, 1000x faster or whatever.
But the fact is that they did not show any performance delta benchmark between Intel Macs and the upcoming ARM Macs running A12Z or a mythical A14... and that's pretty telling to me.
The new universal apps will run natively on your existing Mac (at least when you upgrade to Big Sur, not sure if an older macOS will be supported though), old "Intel 64-bit only" apps will continue to work fine.
The only scenario where I think someone would jump the ship because of the transitioning, is that they really need Boot Camp for their daily workload.
Or maybe in a less likely scenario, your crucial daily app discontinued their support for macOS older than Big Sur, and you really hate the newer macOSes.
The only scenario where I think someone would jump the ship because of the transitioning, is that they really need Boot Camp for their daily workload.
Or maybe in a less likely scenario, your crucial daily app discontinued their support for macOS older than Big Sur, and you really hate the newer macOSes.
Which is all gamers. Don’t know if Windows will still run in virtualization. They didn’t say whether it’ll have an intel emulation there - Linux also comes in arm flavors
Yeah I noticed that they mentioned Linux in virtualisation too, steering clear of referencing Windows. Given that boot camp is a thing currently, if it were to be a thing on ARM Macs I’d have thought they’d have brought it up during this portion of the keynote to assuage any fears. I think I’ll get one of the last intel Macs so that I can still play windows games when I’m not doing productivity stuff.
I thought that not mentioning Windows was a curious omission as well. That said, it should be entirely possible to do it, although performance might not be the same as on Intel silicon. If the ARM chips are fast enough it will be good for most productivity type apps, but games will likely suck.
More likely the ARM-only apps won't run at all. Though like with the PPC → Intel switch most developers will choose Universal Binary for a little while, our Intel Macs have about three or four more years of smooth functioning before the problems start appearing.
I know some scientists, they need to be able to run Windows natively and they like OSX.
Parallels is not an option for them.
But they can go on without OSX - guess what they do ?
Linux on a VM on a slow A12Z chip really ?
But for all the others, Apple Silicon may be a big step forward, especially to run iOS apps on the Mac.
What about Big Surf as a boot option on the iPad Pro ?
Parallels is not an option for them.
But they can go on without OSX - guess what they do ?
Linux on a VM on a slow A12Z chip really ?
But for all the others, Apple Silicon may be a big step forward, especially to run iOS apps on the Mac.
What about Big Surf as a boot option on the iPad Pro ?
I think Bootcamp is a thing for us tech enthusiasts but most "normal" people don't do it. They don't want to pay for the Windows license and most of their stuff runs natively on Macs anyway. Anyone serious about PC gaming in the future will have to pony up for a dedicated Windows box.
[automerge]1592855614[/automerge]
Yes. My guess is that Apple has done the calculus. Those folks are real, but they're probably edge cases and Apple will lose them to WIntel solutions. For most people, being able to run iPhone/iPad Apps on their Mac will be a huge benefit. It will also finally push the Mac OS app store in being less of the ghost town that it currently is. The question for me is could this give rise to touch screen Macs?