However I still would not welcome a change to ARM architecture. It would require complete rewrites of everything, the OS, the apps, etc. There would be a significant period of time where we would have to choose to either stay on older hardware to use our apps, or sacrifice some of the apps we use to have the newest hardware.
Maybe they have made the OS "transition ready" as much as possible over the years in anticipation of the switch, but they have not readied developers apps.
And I don't want a bunch of iOS apps on my Mac. There is a reason they have different design paradigms, one is based on touch, the other on KB/M
What if touch and keyboard/mouse merge?
I'm not saying they will, definitely not like Microsoft's Surface, but I have a feeling Apple has something up their sleeves....
Yes, as I said, I believe that in time, we will see a unification of ARM and the operating systems.
However, personally, I am saying, I don't necessarily want that to happen. I prefer my phone and iPad to work in the way that they do, and OS X to work in the traditional way that it does.
Hopefully never. Look at the unmitigated disaster that windows 8 RT is. I would say the something will occur. If Apple were leave the intel platform (as opposed to producing a second ARM computer line), I would then probably look for a different solution as I have little desire to go on to an inferior chip set.
Yes, but imagine booting OSX from your phone with external display....seems far fetched now.....but I can see apple going in such a direction. What do you think?
Yes, there will no doubt be some great new features and things that can be done. I can almost picture your main machine at home being extremely powerful, and connected to iCloud. You access the machine from any number of devices, iPhones, iPad, Macs, etc. from anywhere in the world that you have a data connection. The auxiliary devices would last forever because they aren't doing any of the processing locally, they are just "streaming" the content, so battery life would be awesome, speed would be awesome, and the devices would be incredibly thin and lightweight. You would also have access to the full power of a home desktop on your mobile device, and all of your data, media, etc. would be accessible at all times. I think that right now there are some limitations to this idea like data caps from providers, and data coverage, but over time they will become more and more of non issues for the majority of people. I think that a setup like this would be pretty amazing honestly. And luckily apple is forward thinking enough that they will push the tech when it's mostly available to the majority of people. They are not going to wait for 100% LTE coverage in America, just like they didn't wait for 100% decline of the floppy drive or the CD drive.
I hope apple can come up with a cooler device/hybrid than the surface. I don't really like it much to be honest, but that's me. I just don't think that an iPad/macbook type combo is what apple wants, nor what people want. I have never wanted to reach out and touch my macbooks to use them, but holding an iPad, I love using the touch interface. They are just used in two different ways, and I think there has to be some better way of combining them. I remember a ways back talk of a projected laser type of keyboard where a device could be set down and a keyboard projected in front of it for use. I think something like this would be far cooler than a keyboard attachment. Guess we will see where it all goes in the next few years.
I couldn't agree with you more. I sign on the apple bandwagon knowing I can use my hardware with Windows when I need to. It's a luxury I'm not willing to give up. The ARM architecture is no where close to the Intel platform in terms of power.
Just how in this huge wide world of rational beings did you come up with that nonsense? RTs failure had absolutely nothing to do with the chosen chipset.Hopefully never. Look at the unmitigated disaster that windows 8 RT is.
It should be pretty clear now that there is nothing inferior about ARMs 64 bit architecture. Considering A7 is Apples first crack at a 64 bit architecture, it is an amazing chip that gives up very little to the competition.I would say the something will occur. If Apple were leave the intel platform (as opposed to producing a second ARM computer line), I would then probably look for a different solution as I have little desire to go on to an inferior chip set.
This I agree with, the chip is hardly inferior. People need to remember these performance figures come from a chip running at an extremely slow clock rate.I wouldn't really call ARM an "inferior chipset" I was reading yesterday that the A7 is comparable to 2009 top end iMacs, and a quad core A8 could compare to new macbook airs, all in the size of your phone.
There will come a time where you will see very little performance difference between an Intel Core and an ARM one running on the same production node.Today, yes ARM is still a little behind Intel, but in another 2 or 3 years I wouldn't be surprised to see that small gap disappear.
I'm not sure where that nonsense comes from. First UNiX is a portable OS, second the core of iOS is the same core that powers Mac OS. IOS is very much a UNIX platform also. Running Mac OS on ARM is nothing more that a recompile and a few bug fixes. Just look at how easy it is for developers to move from 32 bit ARM to 64 bit.However I still would not welcome a change to ARM architecture. It would require complete rewrites of everything, the OS, the apps, etc.
Well that is always the case with new hardware but the lack of immediate iPad software did not stop the take up of iPad. In any event I would expect that developers could push out ARM based versions of their apps within hours of an ARM based Mac announcement.There would be a significant period of time where we would have to choose to either stay on older hardware to use our apps, or sacrifice some of the apps we use to have the newest hardware.
That day may come sooner than you think.I think that however, this day will eventually come. ARM will catch the performance of Intel, and at that point it would almost be silly not to switch architectures. ARM is much smaller, produces much less heat, is much more efficient, etc.
We don't even know what the top end speed is on the A7. 1.4 GHz is actually pretty slow for many ARM designs. There might be another 100Ghz of head room in the chip. Of course higher clock rates imply more heat but it is still possible to beat Intel here.ARM is actually far superior to most Intel chipsets for those reasons. It is only still lacking in clock speed,
and honestly not by much when you consider the size limitations of ARM chips. Plus that gap will lessen over the next couple of years.
I couldn't agree with you more. I sign on the apple bandwagon knowing I can use my hardware with Windows when I need to. It's a luxury I'm not willing to give up. The ARM architecture is no where close to the Intel platform in terms of power.
I wouldn't really call ARM an "inferior chipset" I was reading yesterday that the A7 is comparable to 2009 top end iMacs, and a quad core A8 could compare to new macbook airs, all in the size of your phone.
think that however, this day will eventually come. ARM will catch the performance of Intel, and at that point it would almost be silly not to switch architectures. ARM is much smaller, produces much less heat, is much more efficient, etc. ARM is actually far superior to most Intel chipsets for those reasons. It is only still lacking in clock speed, and honestly not by much when you consider the size limitations of ARM chips. Plus that gap will lessen over the next couple of years.