I wonder why there isn’t an AirPrint alternative? If Apple want people to take the iPad seriously it needs these kind of features. I don’t understand the reasoning in making it so locked down and useless for so much stuff.
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.
Should I Buy an Intel Mac Today or Wait to Buy an Arm-Based Mac?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Never mind performance I'm sold on my next Mac being ARM just because Apple claim it'll run any iOS App.
I see Microsoft announcing "Your Phone" for windows 10 allowing Android apps to run on it.
I see Microsoft announcing "Your Phone" for windows 10 allowing Android apps to run on it.
I can't wait to see how great ARM macs will be.
However I think pretty much every single person here can agree on one very true point which has repeated itself with Apple products over many many years even going back to well into Steve Jobs time.
Expect any new Apple product, to get VASTLY better by the time the 2nd and 3rd models come out.
1st model (generally always issues)
2nd model fixes most of these problems, as they HAD to ship the 1st one and could not fix everything before launch so the 2nd one has all the things they really wanted to do with the 1st one.
3rd model, they'd had time to have a rethink and look at the good and bad points, and give it the love and polish to really make is a good well rounded product.
Macbooks follow a 4-year major release cycle. I always buy it in year 2 or year 3.
iPhones follow a 2-year major release cycle (at least they try). I always buy in the S year.
Straddling the fence on this. I do video and photo work so want a performance machine and am wary (as are many) about banking on a seamless transition to the new processors.
Any guesses on what Apple would give for trade-in value for a beefed up version of these new Intel iMacs in 3 years? (2TB hard drive, top of the line graphics card, 8GB RAM)? Never done a trade-in before.
Any guesses on what Apple would give for trade-in value for a beefed up version of these new Intel iMacs in 3 years? (2TB hard drive, top of the line graphics card, 8GB RAM)? Never done a trade-in before.
Keep in mind gentlemen (and gals) that Apple giveth and Apple taketh away.
The ARM SOC will have better accelerators for video, machine learning, graphics and so on compared to the standard intel CPU, which will translate to better performance for the stuff you do the most (browse, video, photo processing, ..) while likely consuming lower power. An entire ecosystem of IOS apps will become available and you can finally expect some sleek new designs for the Macs. And stuff that Apple has deliberately withheld from current Macs (higher resolution cameras, WiFi 6, NFC, Face ID, touch interfaces, ..) will also become standard.
Of course, Apple could also play shenanigans such as including RAM on the SOC, soldering it to the board or requiring proprietary modules making 3rd party or after-the-buy upgrades difficult or expensive. Same goes for SSD, if its soldered, then forget about upgrading later. The machines will start to look more like iPads and iPhones, appliances that you buy, use and discard. And you are likely to be further dependent on the IOS + Mac app store closed garden, even if side loading of apps is allowed.
It will be interesting to see what Apple does with standard interfaces such as PCIe whose definition is so dominated by intel. I don't expect Apple to go away from them, there's too big an ecosystem behind them, but will be interesting to see what happens in a generation or two when Apple wants to zig when others want to zag.
For those recommending waiting for the 2/3rd generation, I don't share your concern. The first ARM MAC already exists and has done so for 5 generations. We just call them iPads. Apple already has a mature ARM development platform, and they have been cross compiling X86 apps to ARM for a few years now. This is in no way similar to the PowerPC to Intel transition. The first generation ARM MACs are likely to be quite well developed.
And yes, the final itch, dongles. Long live the dongle king !! How else are the poor Apple execs going to afford retirement?
The ARM SOC will have better accelerators for video, machine learning, graphics and so on compared to the standard intel CPU, which will translate to better performance for the stuff you do the most (browse, video, photo processing, ..) while likely consuming lower power. An entire ecosystem of IOS apps will become available and you can finally expect some sleek new designs for the Macs. And stuff that Apple has deliberately withheld from current Macs (higher resolution cameras, WiFi 6, NFC, Face ID, touch interfaces, ..) will also become standard.
Of course, Apple could also play shenanigans such as including RAM on the SOC, soldering it to the board or requiring proprietary modules making 3rd party or after-the-buy upgrades difficult or expensive. Same goes for SSD, if its soldered, then forget about upgrading later. The machines will start to look more like iPads and iPhones, appliances that you buy, use and discard. And you are likely to be further dependent on the IOS + Mac app store closed garden, even if side loading of apps is allowed.
It will be interesting to see what Apple does with standard interfaces such as PCIe whose definition is so dominated by intel. I don't expect Apple to go away from them, there's too big an ecosystem behind them, but will be interesting to see what happens in a generation or two when Apple wants to zig when others want to zag.
For those recommending waiting for the 2/3rd generation, I don't share your concern. The first ARM MAC already exists and has done so for 5 generations. We just call them iPads. Apple already has a mature ARM development platform, and they have been cross compiling X86 apps to ARM for a few years now. This is in no way similar to the PowerPC to Intel transition. The first generation ARM MACs are likely to be quite well developed.
And yes, the final itch, dongles. Long live the dongle king !! How else are the poor Apple execs going to afford retirement?
Last edited:
This isn't like the PPC to Intel transition, it's more like the 68K to PPC transition.
And while everyone loved that at the time, the reality is, where is the $ getting invested for continued development? Everything faces an exponential when it comes to making improvements, and you don't want to be in the minoritarian part of that curve.
Speaking as someone who owned a Betamax, a Wankel (Rx7), a Lisp machine, a Mac IIx, a G5, and am still enamoured with the PDP-10.
And while everyone loved that at the time, the reality is, where is the $ getting invested for continued development? Everything faces an exponential when it comes to making improvements, and you don't want to be in the minoritarian part of that curve.
Speaking as someone who owned a Betamax, a Wankel (Rx7), a Lisp machine, a Mac IIx, a G5, and am still enamoured with the PDP-10.
Hi G,
Loving the analysis!
Also:
I recognise a couple of those “tech that never took of” items:
1. Betamax - videos
2. Wankel - Rotary engine?
Nice one
Martin
Hi G,
Here is an alternative couple views:
1) How about someone who needs the “Old Tech’ for work / Specific use case - to bide over the next couple of years? This case makes perfect sense to buy the “Old tech”
2) How about having a rock solid bit of tech, rather than a rough draft, with the wait for getting bugs fixed in the future.
3) Nothing wrong with Good “Old tech” - If you are going to have an era piece , then why not the pinnacle of that era?
Cheers
Martin
There’s many sides to this argument and in general I agree with you: the latest tech is not always the best or most adequate !
1) Use case is one of the defining drivers. If one uses lota of x86 VMs (be it Win or Linux), he is better off with the last Intel Macs. On the other hand, if one works with software development and coding, he needs to jump the gun and get the new Arm Macs even id it’s not the perfect form factor (laptop vs desktop, smaller screen etc)
2) That argument can be used but it’s much less of a factor this time around. Apple has been making Arm computers in the form of smartphones and tablets for a while so there’s little “new”/undeveloped tech at this stage. For example, every year Apple brings new SOCs and no one waits for the “next year” version.
3) The pinnacle of an era is always great (Panasonic Plasma TVs) but here it becomes a question of longevity because of software/apps.
If one is buying a piece for work (4-5 year use) and relies on specific software most of the time, he will favor reliability and not the last version of any hardware/software.
If one is purchasing a computer for home/general use and intends to keep it for 10 years, than he might as well wait for another 1-2 years and get the tech that will be supported/commonplace in 3-4 years time.
TL/DR as always YMMV !!! Make your decisions based on your needs not other people’s opinions/feelings
Support is always one main concern.
Thanks to the Mac Pro, I am certain Apple is committed to supporting macOS in intel Macs for many more years to come, but I can't help but wonder if and when Apple will start treating intel Macs like second class citizens. Maybe ARM Macs start getting some features that intel Macs don't. There's also rumours of Apple saving the major iMac redesign for the ARM model, and you wonder what it will feature. FaceID? A touchscreen and the ability to swivel like the surface studio?
I have a late 2012 iMac and a late 2013 rMBP. I'll wait a little longer to see what Apple delivers.
Being home based since March, the 24" iMac is what I am most curious about.
Being home based since March, the 24" iMac is what I am most curious about.
Hi Expat,
Ops, sorry thought I replied to this when you posted ages ago! Wondered why no responses
Many thanks for your time with the comprehensive considered replies!
The Windows programs I would be using are just the bog standard office 365 apps. Excel in particular. I’m currently using an IPAD and I’m pretty dissapointed with the the IPAD version of Excel.
It would simply be good to have a familiar interface, for example if another member of the family used the laptop, who is a windows user.
All good food for thought
Regards
Martin
I think if your talking about What Rosetta Stone can offer as far as known software, than yes speeds are an unknown and we will have to take a wait to approach. The ARM speed difference is fairly straight forward when utilized properly as apple has shown it can. Generally RISC(ARM) gains a 33% advantage over CISC(INTEL), with Intel now being unable to advance to a newer fabrication level(again), and RISC being so fair ahead now very comfortably moving beyond 7nm for next gen; your basically talking about market domination dominance with ARM for the foreseeable future(at a fraction of the cost of what Intel is charging; so buy apple stock... they will Be making a killing with this move).
Apple has a couple of advantages:
1) it has an asymmetrical design with high performance coupled with low power cores, that gives then flexibility to build different SOCs for different Macs (lighter notebooks will use more low power cores to extend battery life while pro laptops may lean towards more high power cores whilst iMacs can run with little or no low power cores)
2) Apple has lots of experience with multi core SOCs as iPad SOCs have historically 2x cores vs its iPhone counterparts, that gives Apple the ability to add 8-12-16 cores to its SOC and differentiate its offering within the same design generation
3) TSMC investments in 5nm allows for higher density / lower power consumption and decreases manufacturing costs (more SOCs per wafer) which in turns allow for higher IPCs and binning possibilities (a 16 core design can achieve higher yields if you can use a 12 core model given 4 defective cores, or just sell an 8 core design by turning off the other cores
4) Apple has build image and video special units, storage controllers, security, machine learning, wireless communication, etc around its CPU and GPU cores, this offloads part of the instructions out of the CPU but still in the faster bandwidth within a SOC (no need for PCIe lanes) at the same time conserving energy
5) All its Macs have internal fans which are not present due to size constraints in iPhones and iPads, that allows Apple to run more power through its SOCs than the current sub 10 watts to 15-20 watts thus allowing for even greater performance
The first Apple Silicon will simply blow past the A12z and whatever equivalent intel processor in the previous version of the same Mac.
Some people will have to see it to believe it. I’m in the camp of reading the tea leafs (as laid out above) and eagerly awaiting the future to materialize!
1) it has an asymmetrical design with high performance coupled with low power cores, that gives then flexibility to build different SOCs for different Macs (lighter notebooks will use more low power cores to extend battery life while pro laptops may lean towards more high power cores whilst iMacs can run with little or no low power cores)
2) Apple has lots of experience with multi core SOCs as iPad SOCs have historically 2x cores vs its iPhone counterparts, that gives Apple the ability to add 8-12-16 cores to its SOC and differentiate its offering within the same design generation
3) TSMC investments in 5nm allows for higher density / lower power consumption and decreases manufacturing costs (more SOCs per wafer) which in turns allow for higher IPCs and binning possibilities (a 16 core design can achieve higher yields if you can use a 12 core model given 4 defective cores, or just sell an 8 core design by turning off the other cores
4) Apple has build image and video special units, storage controllers, security, machine learning, wireless communication, etc around its CPU and GPU cores, this offloads part of the instructions out of the CPU but still in the faster bandwidth within a SOC (no need for PCIe lanes) at the same time conserving energy
5) All its Macs have internal fans which are not present due to size constraints in iPhones and iPads, that allows Apple to run more power through its SOCs than the current sub 10 watts to 15-20 watts thus allowing for even greater performance
The first Apple Silicon will simply blow past the A12z and whatever equivalent intel processor in the previous version of the same Mac.
Some people will have to see it to believe it. I’m in the camp of reading the tea leafs (as laid out above) and eagerly awaiting the future to materialize!
I don't think they would've bothered to design the Mac Pro only to ditch that after a single revision. We'll probably see that case for about a decade. An Apple Silicon Mac Pro is likely. It'll probably also look the same. And I'm guessing it'll have MPX modules for AMD.
13MBP didn't get a refresh because the refresh will have AS, no way they'll stick with same design as Ming mentions
My opinion is that the current intel Mac Pro will live on until Apple can ensure that their own silicone is compatible with most pro users equipment/components. Or until the majority of software developers make their software compatible with Apples ARM.
If I had to guess maybe 5 years until an ARM Mac Pro appears. Or who knows maybe Apple sticks with intel for just the Mac Pro line?
This is what worries me too. For instance I quite like the new iMac, but unless I get solid software support for the next 5-7 years, I see no point getting the thing. Customers need an actual number. Years can mean anywhere between 2 and infinity itself. The 2012 Retina MacBook Pro, to this day, 9 years later is still a decent machine and all apps run on it just fine. I am sure most people would want to know that's the case going forward as well.
Honestly, it's not that hard to deduce from past experience.
It's reasonable to assume 5 years of support and software updates from the time its place in the lineup gets supplanted by a successor model. Put differently: if you're one of the last people to buy this iMac as the (still) current model, you can assume to get five years out of it. Rarely if ever have they gone shorter on their Macs.
Also, since moving to yearly release cycle for macOS, they have continued to support the two preceding releases with security maintenance releases.
Assuming that the follow-up iMac is will be a early, mid or even late 2021 ARM iMac, that'll probably make it 2026 for the current model:
10.16 (fall 2020 release)
10.17 (fall 2021)
10.18 (fall 2022)
10.19 (fall 2023)
Maybe a bit earlier in 2025, if we're seeing a late november 2020 (or very early 2021) ARM iMac update. Or if they decide to interpret internal guidelines a bit more liberal. Though i also imagine concurrently keeping an Intel model in the lineup for a bit longer for compatibility purposes. Also the Mac Pro will probably stick around for a bit longer than iMac, so they are likely going to release Intel updates anyway.
(psst: this year's release is 11.0, not 10.16. It's only 10.16 in compatibility mode.)