Question : wait or buy

[matrix07]

I only use my iMac for basic functions : e mail, Word, watch Live-streams, participate in meetings via Zoom or Teams and basic photoshop. What would your advice be in this case ?

With this usage I would aim for Apple Silicon Mac. Intel Mac is at the end of the road. AS Mac will get more OS updates. And thinking about it, if Apple is not confident their chips will beat Intel’s hand down I don’t think they’ll bother with the switch. 🙂

 

[Eithanius]

I'm having the same question. My 2010 MBP is dying from GPU Panic to signs of expanding battery. I would want to wait but time seems to be against it. But then if I splurge on a MacIntel I would worry it would suffer the same fate as the PowerPC Macs - OS support won't last beyond 4 years. Apple launched the first MacIntel in 2006, and by 2009 PowerPC Macs did not get OS X Snow Leopard as it was Intel only.

And when I splurge I would expect my Mac to last at least 8 years. My current MBP lasted 10.

 

[MisterMe]

I'm having the same question. My 2010 MBP is dying from GPU Panic to signs of expanding battery. I would want to wait but time seems to be against it. But then if I splurge on a MacIntel I would worry it would suffer the same fate as the PowerPC Macs - OS support won't last beyond 4 years. Apple launched the first MacIntel in 2006, and by 2009 PowerPC Macs did not get OS X Snow Leopard as it was Intel only.

And when I splurge I would expect my Mac to last at least 8 years. My current MBP lasted 10.

Everyone has their own use case, but "suffer the same fate as the PowerPC Macs" is not nearly the worse conceivable fate. As an owner of several 2005 Power Mac G5s, I can state without fear of contradiction that little mainline software is being developed for PPC-based Macs but little is not zero. I use a PowerMac G5 everyday--some 15 years after I purchased my last new PowerMac G5.

The installed base of Intel-based Macs is substantially larger than the installed base of PPC-based Macs. If you buy a new Intel-based Mac this afternoon, it will still be actively supported--maybe not by Apple, but by an active developer community--when you repurpose it as a doorstop.

Having said that, I understand that new Macs are coming and they promise to be awesome. However, you need replace a 10 year old computer and you can't wait. You have other options. If you need to replace a failing computer but don't want to sink a lot of money into a new Intel-based Mac, then buy only as much computer as will get the job done. This may mean buying lowest-end Mac that will do what you need. Another option is to buy a refurbished Mac. Apple sells them. There are a number of dealers online that also sell refurbished Macs. Older Macs have the advantage of being bootable natively in a larger number of macOS versions than Apple's new computers.

 

[flyguy5]

I bought a 13" MBP fully maxed out and estimated delivery date is showing Nov 10-17. I had no idea what Apple Silicon was when I ordered my new MBP in October. Then I accidentally stumbled upon John Gruber's WWDC podcast with Craig Federighi talking all about AS and could not believe that I had somehow missed the news about AS, and now I have buyers remorse while waiting for my new Intel Mac to arrive.

I need boot camp for work, but I don't mind keep my old MBP around.

Should I return and order the new silicon MBP?

 

[MisterMe]

I bought a 13" MBP fully maxed out and estimated delivery date is showing Nov 10-17. I had no idea what Apple Silicon was when I ordered my new MBP in October. Then I accidentally stumbled upon John Gruber's WWDC podcast with Craig Federighi talking all about AS and could not believe that I had somehow missed the news about AS, and now I have buyers remorse while waiting for my new Intel Mac to arrive.

I need boot camp for work, but I don't mind keep my old MBP around.

Should I return and order the new silicon MBP?

Nobody can tell you how to spend your money. If I were in your situation, then I would contact my vendor. Have the salesperson to cancel your order. If you have already received it, then don't open the box. Ask your vendor about the procedures for returning the computer.

 

[DHagan4755]

Should I return and order the new silicon MBP?

If I were you, and you ordered from Apple, I would call them up & cancel. The expectation is that Apple silicon 13" MacBook Pros will be announced on November 17th. In my opinion they won't be shipping until December. So if you can wait it out a little bit, it might be worth your while. BTW, I think Boot Camp is dead

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Back when Apple released the first x86 macs, they were 32 bit. Intel went 64 bit about a year later, and support for those first generation 32bit macs was dropped rather quickly.

I'm not saying the same will happen with ARM macs, but it's in the back of my mind that the earliest adopters might see shortened lifespans (both hard and soft cutoffs) compared to a comparable Intel machine.

 

[cardfan]

If I were you, and you ordered from Apple, I would call them up & cancel. The expectation is that Apple silicon 13" MacBook Pros will be announced on November 17th. In my opinion they won't be shipping until December. So if you can wait it out a little bit, it might be worth your while. BTW, I think Boot Camp is dead

That’s the worse thing he could do. Apple silicon will render most of his software useless.

 

[Eithanius]

Back when Apple released the first x86 macs, they were 32 bit. Intel went 64 bit about a year later, and support for those first generation 32bit macs was dropped rather quickly.

I'm not saying the same will happen with ARM macs, but it's in the back of my mind that the earliest adopters might see shortened lifespans (both hard and soft cutoffs) compared to a comparable Intel machine.

The same can be said for Intel Macs, supports could just end few years after ARMs are introduced. Apple has shown that previously with PowerPCs.

All in all, I sometimes do think that when it comes to Transitions, consumers tend to lose out in terms of long term support. My mac just wanting to die at the wrong time.

 

[DHagan4755]

That’s the worse thing he could do. Apple silicon will render most of his software useless.

Not really. He said if he needed to use boot camp, he'd keep his old computer around. Besides when Apple releases the new 13" MacBook Pro I betcha the older Intel models will decrease in price. So he could either save money or have the latest & greatest Apple tech. It's really quite simple.

 

[flyguy5]

If I were you, and you ordered from Apple, I would call them up & cancel. The expectation is that Apple silicon 13" MacBook Pros will be announced on November 17th. In my opinion they won't be shipping until December. So if you can wait it out a little bit, it might be worth your while. BTW, I think Boot Camp is dead

Yeah I ordered straight from Apple's website. I think Apple has a 14 day return policy, and my Mac still hasn't arrived yet which is probably a good thing as it gives me more time to see what they actually show on the 17th.

Is there any difference between cancelling a processing order vs receiving and returning in order to get a refund?

I will wait to see what they show on the 17th before doing anything. Not sure if my new Intel MBP would show up before the actual event, but my order estimate says it will arrive between 10-17th. If they show a 13" MBP AS, then I will probably return the Intel and get a refund. I will most likely also keep my current 13" MBP around to use boot camp when I need it.

 

[MikhailT]

Back when Apple released the first x86 macs, they were 32 bit. Intel went 64 bit about a year later, and support for those first generation 32bit macs was dropped rather quickly.

I'm not saying the same will happen with ARM macs, but it's in the back of my mind that the earliest adopters might see shortened lifespans (both hard and soft cutoffs) compared to a comparable Intel machine.

Two major differences; ecosystem was limited to Macs basically and third party CPU maker with limited roadmap that's designed for the mass market.

This time around, the Apple silicon is integrated throughout the entire ecosystem (iPhone, iPad, watch, TV, earpods, etc) and Apple designs the silicon for themselves. Apple knows the entire roadmap ahead as it is limited to Apple only.

Apple Silicon Macs are going to be using a derivative of the A14 SoC, same one that's in iPad Air 4 and iPhone 12 series.

 

[dmccloud]

The same can be said for Intel Macs, supports could just end few years after ARMs are introduced. Apple has shown that previously with PowerPCs.

All in all, I sometimes do think that when it comes to Transitions, consumers tend to lose out in terms of long term support. My mac just wanting to die at the wrong time.

There is a big difference between the PPC-Intel transition and the Intel-AS transition. When Apple transitioned to Intel, everything on both PPC and Intel was 32-bit. When Intel switched to 64-bit within a year, that accelerated the end of PPC development as there was no path to cross-platform coding for 64-bit applications. With this transition, Apple has already made the switch to 64-bit only with Catalina, and Rosetta 2 and the new XCode are both written to handle cross-platform development for 64-bit applications. Additionally, since Apple will be controlling both the OS and processors going forward, it in their best interest to continue cross-platform development for as long as the market requires it while also working with third party developers such as Adobe, Microsoft, etc. to create feature-equivalent AS builds of their most commonly used software (Office, Adobe Creative Suite, etc.). Apple's focus is on the performance of AS being equivalent to (if not better than) Intel's offerings, which frees up the third party developers to port their applications feature-for-feature to the new platform. Many people and organizations currently running Intel-based Macs will hold off on upgrading until either a) their must-have software is updated to run on AS, b) either virtualization of Windows or a Boot Camp replacement is created, or c) their current machine dies and they have no choice but to upgrade. For this reason alone, it would be prudent for Apple to continue cross-platform support for 4-5 years after the transition has been completed.

Another consideration is that since Apple controls the roadmaps for both OS and processor development now, they have the unique ability to customize their processors to fit features of the OS and vice-versa. Since Apple just licenses the instruction set from ARM, they have the ability to build their processors according to their own design specifications. ARM architecture also lends itself to a highly modular model, which allows Apple to use the same technology to build a whole series of processors, differentiated by core counts and (possibly) clock speeds. The upcoming Apple Silicon will be the first desktop/notebook class processors built upon 5nm technology, when Intel is still stuck on 14nm and has delayed 10nm until 2022. Even AMD is using the 7nm process with its 4th and new 5th generation Ryzen CPUs, so Intel is in a position where they essentially have to overclock everything to gain measurable performance since they can't do a process shrink. We've already seen reports that Apple has booked out all of TSMCs 5nm production for the forseeable future, so they are running full steam ahead on this transition.

 

[mr_roboto]

There is a big difference between the PPC-Intel transition and the Intel-AS transition. When Apple transitioned to Intel, everything on both PPC and Intel was 32-bit. When Intel switched to 64-bit within a year, that accelerated the end of PPC development as there was no path to cross-platform coding for 64-bit applications.

Completely untrue. Mac OS X Tiger (10.4.0) supported 64-bit processes on PowerPC. 64-bit user interface libraries (e.g. Cocoa) were not available yet, but you could compile and run 64-bit programs which used only basic UNIX APIs. Mac OS X Leopard (10.5.0) introduced 64-bit ports of most system libraries on both PowerPC and Intel.

There was never a time during which MacOS X had better 64-bit support on Intel. In fact, there was a period of time where, as far as the public was concerned, the opposite was true, because the only shipping Intel Macs used 32-bit Core CPUs.

Some devs and technical types (myself included) thought this was a mistake, that Apple should have made 64-bit the only option for Intel software from day 1. If they had, we never would have had this issue with abandonment of 32-bit Intel software. However, that might have required them to delay introduction of Intel Macs for a year or so, since they would've needed to wait for Intel's 64-bit Core 2 chips and completion of their own work on 64-bit versions of their frameworks.

 

[macintoshmac]

Although waiting is the way to go, I would think twice before picking anything first-gen with Apple. Although this year it might be good enough. I also want to see where they take the Touch Bar concept in MacBook and what the next design refresh might look like, for both MacBooks and the Mac.

 

[xander09]

I think anybody in the habit of keeping their computers for a long time, like the OP and myself (2011 17-inch MBP and 2013 11-inch Air), should strongly consider waiting. At some point, major OS releases will be Apple Silicon-only. We don't know when this will happen. It was just shy of four years between when the first Intel Mac was released and 10.6 (Snow Leopard) was released solely for Intel Macs. I'd wager that Intel Macs have 4-6 years before Apple cuts them loose and major OS upgrades are Apple Silicon only.

 

[al404]

Here for the same question, should I upgrade to new iMac, my iMac is 2017 but has fusion drive and I work on it.
I would like to get a mind range 27 iMac because it will be faster and SSD only
I think that apple would upgrade MacBook lineup to AS first and I would not get first AS and first new redesign iMac for possible "new" issue, so I would probably ha to wait till September 2022 at least.

I think that Apple with Intel switch, iPhone and iPad got a huge Mac base, and they sell as the company that keeps alive and supported their hardware for a really long time. So I think that they should support iIntel Mac at least for 8/10 years.

Since windows and windows software runs on AMD and intel and I guess ARM CPU without issue would not be possible for developer to compile the same App for multiple CPU?
iPhone Apps are compiled from intel Xcode

 

[Lammers]

I think anybody in the habit of keeping their computers for a long time, like the OP and myself (2011 17-inch MBP and 2013 11-inch Air), should strongly consider waiting. At some point, major OS releases will be Apple Silicon-only. We don't know when this will happen. It was just shy of four years between when the first Intel Mac was released and 10.6 (Snow Leopard) was released solely for Intel Macs. I'd wager that Intel Macs have 4-6 years before Apple cuts them loose and major OS upgrades are Apple Silicon only.

Well the other way of looking at it is that anybody in the habit of keeping their computers for a long time evidently doesn’t care much about having the latest and greatest performance or capability (and I don’t mean that in a disrespectful way) and therefore it doesn’t really matter whether they wait or not, they can buy a new Mac any time (affordability notwithstanding) and they’ll be happy with the upgrade.

There are *always* new and better Macs being released later/soon/next quarter/next year, so the philosophy of waiting for the next refresh because that will be “better” leads to people just continuing to wait year after year and depriving themselves of the value and enjoyment they could get from just buying a new Mac now and getting on with their lives.

 

[Joseph C]

Is it right that the rumours say the first silicon Macs will be in the same enclosure/form factor as now, with redesigns next year?

 

[Loyola]

Hopefully the new Macs are affordable. I had planned to buy a new one this year but the 27 inch iMac was out my price range.

 

[Jouls]

When Apple transitioned to Intel, everything on both PPC and Intel was 32-bit.

Though it is implicit in mr_robotos answer, I wanted to point out that the PowerPC 970 (G5) processor was 64-bit.

 

[Eithanius]

I'd wager that Intel Macs have 4-6 years before Apple cuts them loose and major OS upgrades are Apple Silicon only.

This is exactly what I worried about buying Intel Macs now. What if the hardware last another 10 years, but the OS does not...?

In my country, we have very weak purchasing power, and we do not have Refurbished Store let alone special deals from AAR/APR - a MBP going for $1,699 will be sold at $1,699, no bloody Black/Red Friday sales, no freaking Back To School promos. We don't even have 14-day return grace period. Hence commitment to an Apple hardware here will have to be long term.

 

[dogslobber]

Can you still get Intel Macs right now or is there a shortage? The record Mac sales show that people are grabbing Intel Macs while they're still available like it's a closing down sale. This paints a dubious picture for the world of ARM Macs...

 

[MevetS]

.... [snip] ... This paints a dubious picture for the world of ARM Macs...

How exactly? Maybe for sales, as many who were in the market for a new Mac may have already bought one. But other than that it says nothing about "the world of ARM Macs...".

 

[thenewperson]

The record Mac sales show that people are grabbing Intel Macs while they're still available like it's a closing down sale

It does not show that at all. All we can get from the record Mac (and iPad, and laptops from other vendors) sales is that people are actually upgrading their own PCs instead of relying on the one they get from work for everything or managing the old one they currently have because they don’t use it as much.