As noted I'm practically in the same boat thinking instead that the new hardware will go in a tablet. As a side note a processor optimized for the iPhone is also likely. The thing is iPhone could use a lower power, as in energy , processor than the iPad. IPhone performance isn't to bad for what it does but the IPad on the other hand pretty much sucks.
They have the potential to implement hardware that is markably faster than competing systems for the same amount of energy consumed. Especially if code is kept as native while the competition is running some sort of VM. In the end you are right the winner will be the company delivering the best performance at the lowest power point. There is little else to distinguish hardware.
Why hasn't anybody mentioned the possibility that Apple will purchase a company that can implement much more efficient memory module solutions such as Hypercloud Technology by Netlist. These two companies have worked together in the past and it would completely destroy Google in the cloud while also giving Apple a much needed speed advantage and patent protection. Netlist is a 70 million dollar company. Isn't this Apple's MO?
"I don't care about it, so there's no reason for anyone to care."
Quote:
second of all, have you ever heard of boot camp? Sure you have, you just pretend it won't exist in the future.
You'll want to re-read my posts, or at least read all of them. A new architecture would make Boot Camp impossible. Virtualization is never out of the question.
Quote:
buy a $99 windows box
Can you BUY a computer for $99? Because if you can, I would and just make it a Hackintosh.
In theory the only way to get better RAM performance would be to have that RAM on the SoC itself. Even then you aren't likely to get better all around performance because of the different processing used to build hi density RAM.
Why hasn't anybody mentioned the possibility that Apple will purchase a company that can implement much more efficient memory module solutions such as Hypercloud Technology by Netlist. These two companies have worked together in the past and it would completely destroy Google in the cloud while also giving Apple a much needed speed advantage and patent protection. Netlist is a 70 million dollar company. Isn't this Apple's MO?
No. I'm not sure what you see at Netlist that has you so excited. All they have is RAM modules for servers. There really isn't anything "cloudy" about them.
Besides the last thing we want to have happen is for Apple to get to attached to the cloud and end up making their hardware useless for anybody but the brainless. People need to realize that cloud computing is a way for companies to keep their fingers in your wallet. The advantages to the user are few and for the most part rather specific.
No I said the current iPad is slow and that future machines will make it look significantly worst. This becomes readily apparent when iPad attempts to do anything non trivial or for that matter do Javascript heavy web sites.
You really feel the over all performance of a machine should be measured by random javascript on random websites?
Quote:
Well maybe because for many users the processor performance is not the primary indicator of good performance. Look at it this way the iPad processor can be best seen as a 486 class performance.
You hit the nail on the head. Processor performance is not the primary indicator for good performance.
What exactly are you using as a benchmark to measure the iPad against? Slow in comparison to what?
Quote:
That is Apple has to significantly increase performance just to realize its goals. IPad 1 can barely deliver on current needs so it should be obvious that a much faster SoC is coming.
Apple has sold roughly 14 million iPads in 2010. You feel it can barely deliver on its current needs. What other evidence is there of this?
Windows may not be made for installation on Macs, but it's possible.
And?
The reasons for running Windows on a Mac are rapidly diminishing...
Not that I expect Apple to abandon Intel for desktops or laptops any time soon - but it doesn't matter near as much as it did just a few years ago, and a few years from now it will matter even less.
This, more than anything probably scares the crap out of Intel and Microsoft both. The x86 architecture has a ton of baggage, and it's a miracle they have gotten it to perform as well as they have, but that baggage exists for Windows backwards compatibility. Mac OSX and now iOSX really don't need that baggage.
Longer term, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out...
One doesn't need to be an insider to know these things. They are obvious requirements to Apple's design cycle. I don't need to know any details about them. The chip will be faster, more powerful, etc.
samab does not recognize the concept of modification to a core. He strongly believes and stated in another thread that his absolute views of using unmodified IP or totally designing a core from scratch are the only two ways to use ARM IP, and he strenuously does not believe that Apple is an ARM architecture licensee so he doesn't think Apple can touch a single transistor inside the Cortex core.
No kidding. People like samab are still in denial that Apple knows what the heck they are doing.
Trust me, of all people Steve Jobs perfectly understands what happened with the original Mac and he has no intention of following the same path with the iOS.
Those that think that Apple doesn't have a long term plan for the iOS are sadly misguided.
2014 will be nothing like 1984 or 1994. The A4 was just a first step. That 4 year pipeline samab is so worried about? He needs to go back and re-read Steve Jobs comments about when they started working on the iPad that lead to the first iPhone and then the iPad... It's pretty obvious Apple has been working on these things for more than four years
The whole reason Macs have been so successful as of late is that they have no restrictions on what can run on the machines. Why would Apple screw with that?
If even half of the Mac's out there have had Windows run on them (Virtual PC, Bootcamp or otherwise) I would be very astonished. While Intel was probably a significant influencer a few years back, I doubt it's much of an influencer for the majority of Mac purchasers.
Remember, the majority aren't geeks like us that are reading this board. There are far more of "them" than "us"
Quote:
Frankly if you have been keeping track of Apples CPU patents over the last couple of years you have to wonder what is taking them so long. It looks like their intentions are to supplement the ARM instruction set with instructions that accelerate the execution of Objective C.
It's probably because just because Apple can do a thing, it doesn't mean they will until it makes absolute sense. That precedent has been set pretty clearly.
For all intents and purposes, the iPhone pretty much came out of no where. Yeah, there were some vague rumors and rampant speculation, but nothing of significance until it was practically announced/released.
I have no doubt that whatever Apple is working on, it will be equally or more significant than the original iPhone. And it will arrive just as quick.
Quote:
In the mobile arena this is nothing to get negative about, in fact it should be just the opposite. A highly optimized high performance processor is exactly what is needed to really make mobile devices fly.
Yup, and I sincerely doubt we are the first to think such a thing is a good idea
I think you missed something here, no one has indicated that they are getting rid of i86 hardware in Macs.
Not with the current or maybe even the next generation or two of chips.
But to think that Apple will stick with x86 chips forever is pretty silly. All the moves they are making with LLVM and other technologies, they are intentionally freeing themselves from CPU and architecture dependancy.
Who knows, this might be the opportunity for someone else to mature an architecture. Heck, given Steve Jobs and Larry Ellison's relationship, who knows. Perhaps the Mac's of the future could be running SPARC. I can think of worse things! It's certainly a cleaner architecture.
The point is, Apple isn't afraid to make bold moves if it has to. And that is what makes this very interesting to me. I can't wait to see what next rabbit comes out of the hat!
I agree. Apple will stay wedded to x86 only as long as it continues to make sense.
The days of Apple being beholden to others are coming to an end. I wouldn't be surprised if some of that cash horde they are sitting on wasn't destined for lower level supply chain such as screens or even their own CPU foundry line.
Seriously one big selling point for Macs is that the user can run just about anything in a VM.
For whom? A few geek hobbyists? I guarantee the majority of current Mac purchasers couldn't care less.
Quote:
Apple simply isn't big enough to do its own processor to match the i86 families. Not even close.
Seriously? Second largest company on the stock market sitting on a cash horde and amassing all kinds of low level design experience?
Underestimate Apple at your own risk. Just ask RIM and Microsoft...
Quote:
I see zero chance of this happening.
It doesn't take much imagination to have limited vision...
Quote:
It is one thing to run a program that uses ARM IP it is a totally different thing to build a processor that is functionally more impressive than the i86 hardware on the market.
There are other mature architectures out there that can be used. And we don't know how far Apple is with ARM. They were an original contributor in the '90s.
Quote:
I don't know about that, if I was AMD I'd be all over Apple and very willing to build whatever SoC they wanted. Imagine if one of AMD's Bobcat based Fusion products was tweaked for Apple, with Apple IP on board.
And who knows, they could be working with or perhaps even acquiring AMD for all we know.
Quote:
Well yeah in mobile devices, I suspect this is their goal. The problem is when you go beyond that, the issues are massively non trivial. More importantly the spark that got Macs to selling was i86 more than anything else.
Yup, but as I said, the need for that spark is long gone and I doubt the fact that Mac's come with Intel chips matters to the majority of current Mac buyers.
I wish Apple would actually manufacture things. They could start off by letting Americans assemble iPods and iPhones. Then they could have Americans manufacture the cases to their computers and idevices in the USA. In time Apple could manufacture their own circuit boards and chips in the USA. With the premium prices of Apple products the company could afford to do these things within the USA. Just the good public relations alone would get them more sales from Americans who want to support US manufacturers.
I was with you until you started spouting fantasy gobbledygook such as the above. It's a pipe dream -0 manufacturing is not coming back to the US any time soon. Not with our current economic situation. The "premium" you speak of is trivial compared to what it would take to accomplish you desires.
Quote:
If Foxcon employs one million people in China then Apple could eventually move that production to the USA and create at least that many jobs.
Not gonna happen. There are far to many socio-economic reasons why it isn't going to happen any time soon. This isn't an issue of Apple's doing, BTW. If you wan't to blame someone, you can blame our politicians and business leaders for selling our soul out over the past 20 years for short term economic gains.
Here we go. What better way to completely shut the user out of the computer than making the whole thing proprietary? Mac OS will only work on Apple's architecture (read: Apple computers), and Windows, et. al. won't ever be installable because they'll have no need to build Apple versions.
It'd take forever, but it may happen.
Please, by the time Intel Apple products are phased out I'm sure there will be excellent Windows virtualisation/ emulators for ARM.
Edit: But I see this has been covered extensively already by other posters.
If even half of the Mac's out there have had Windows run on them (Virtual PC, Bootcamp or otherwise) I would be very astonished. While Intel was probably a significant influencer a few years back, I doubt it's much of an influencer for the majority of Mac purchasers.
I doubt that. Seriously it is a security feature in the sense that it gives people a sense of a fall back. On top of that there are many that simply need that compatibility for part of there computing needs. Further it isn't just Windows that people want to be able to run.
Quote:
Remember, the majority aren't geeks like us that are reading this board. There are far more of "them" than "us"
Well the geek mentality I understand. However I think you mis the practical mentality where people chose a Mac for its good points and then run the odd app they need to in a VM. Using a VM really isn't geeky anymore.
Quote:
It's probably because just because Apple can do a thing, it doesn't mean they will until it makes absolute sense. That precedent has been set pretty clearly.
Of course moving forward is always an issue of timing. However Apples continued research in this area tells me they have goal that sees some of this research going into products. Seriously why bother hiring engineers that do this level of work if you don't have intentions of putting at least some of that effort to work in product.
From what I can see A4 is NOT an example of implementing such hardware or engineering effort.
Quote:
For all intents and purposes, the iPhone pretty much came out of no where. Yeah, there were some vague rumors and rampant speculation, but nothing of significance until it was practically announced/released.
I find it hard to believe that you would put into print the above.
Quote:
I have no doubt that whatever Apple is working on, it will be equally or more significant than the original iPhone. And it will arrive just as quick.
Yup, and I sincerely doubt we are the first to think such a thing is a good idea
This is a truly excellent post. Remember, we do not know how this convergence of phone, tablet, laptop, desktop + other is going to play out.
Definitely there will be Intel Macs through 2015. But the dominance and importance of ARM Apple products leading up to 2015 can never be underestimated.
By mid-2012 we could easily imagine a MacBook Air 10" running ARM OSX. The thing is, by mid-2012 our understanding of "computing" will be changed and challenged further.
AMD is not a serious long-term option. Sure, Fusion has some potential but mainly in the transition to the first Mac ARM products.
Apple definitely is spreading its bets in any case, and this is a good thing. Their Intel relationship is definitely lukewarm at the moment, though of course as I mention Apple will need Intel for a few more years at least.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid
Exactly what I'm thinking. $278 million for PA Semi plus $121 for Intrinsity is too much to spend on a slightly warmed-over single-CPU ARM design. The purchases prevent competitors from acquiring that IP and engineering talent, but that's only a small bonus.
I think Apple's long-term goal is to create their own proprietary SoC for not just their iDevices but for Macs as well. This would help lower their hardware costs since they won't be paying off-the-shelf prices for one of the most expensive components in their products. And lower hardware costs will help Apple maintain their margins.
But there are two more gigantic benefits. First, Apple could conceivably transition Mac OS back from Intel to their custom multi-core ARM. They have already transitioned Mac OS through several CPU changes: 68k to PowerPC, then PowerPC to Intel. Been there, done that, got the developers to come along too. And that could enormously benefit iDevices in the next decade. Eventually mobile device CPU power will exceed that of today's desktop computers, and Apple could prepare for that future by transitioning Mac OS to run on their ARM-based mobile CPUs.
Second, and this is perhaps the most important benefit for Apple, using a custom ARM chip on all their computing products would free them from dependence on an outside chip designers. For decades, from the 6502 to Intel Core i7, Apple has been at the mercy of the Motorolas, IBMs, and Intels of the world. Each of which have different goals than Apple. Motorola and IBM were more concerned with the embedded versions of their PowerPC chips than efficient and speedy desktop and laptop computer versions. Intel is more concerned with optimizing Windows performance than anything else. (And the CISC design of their CPUs uses vast areas of silicon for the execution of obscure backward-compatible x86 instructions generated only by Microsoft's compilers.)
None of those chip makers really wants to build a bespoke chip just for Apple. Intel, just after Apple completed the PowerPC-to-Intel transition, gave Apple their newest chips first. The original MacBook Air had an avant-garde chip that eventually was used in other laptops. But that was presumably because Apple paid them for that privilege, an unsustainable tactic, and the honeymoon ended.
Apple could eliminate their co-dependence on other chip designers now that they have acquired PA Semi's and Intrinsity's intellectual property. And that will set them up for their next decade or two of innovation. No other tech company in the world will be as well prepared.
I was with you until you started spouting fantasy gobbledygook such as the above. It's a pipe dream -0 manufacturing is not coming back to the US any time soon. Not with our current economic situation. The "premium" you speak of is trivial compared to what it would take to accomplish you desires.
I work in US based manufacturing and let me tell you it is tough. The biggest issue that you simply can't compete unless you are highly automated or are in some way protected. Even these things are of limited value these days, as many of the automation companies locally are now sending entire automation lines to China for various efforts. The low labor rate and lax regulation means that they often can do a completed item for the cost of the raw material for a case in the US. There is a rolling snowball effect due to everything being far cheaper to source in China.
Quote:
Not gonna happen. There are far to many socio-economic reasons why it isn't going to happen any time soon. This isn't an issue of Apple's doing, BTW. If you wan't to blame someone, you can blame our politicians and business leaders for selling our soul out over the past 20 years for short term economic gains.
Yep politicians of all strips and colors. Few if any have said boo about the out sourcing of manufacturing to China. It is rather sad because manufacturing is key to a countries strength.
About the only way things will change is if a major war flares up and the people of the USA give Washington no choice but to discontinue trade with China. Up to this point nothing has galvanized the American public to a suitable extent. Unfortunately war would in a literal sense whip out companies like Apple that have focused to much of their production effort on China. A conflict would mean Apples revenues would disappear over night with no easy fix to get back to a solid cash flow. It is really sad that the boards governing companies like Apple have never heard about keeping all your eggs in one basket.
For whom? A few geek hobbyists? I guarantee the majority of current Mac purchasers couldn't care less.
I doubt that.
Quote:
Seriously? Second largest company on the stock market sitting on a cash horde and amassing all kinds of low level design experience?
Seriously yes, very much so. Look at the trouble AMD has keeping up with Intel and they have had years of i86 experience. The difference between doing an ARM tweak and a full blown custom i86 processor is massive. As to emulation NO I don't think ARM hardware will be up to that anytime soon.
Quote:
Underestimate Apple at your own risk. Just ask RIM and Microsoft...
What about Apples customers? It would be foolish to underestimate them. Frankly any would barf at the thought of another architecture transition for the Mac.
Quote:
It doesn't take much imagination to have limited vision...
No; it takes imagination to see the trouble another processor transition will cause Apple. Beyond that Apple simply doesn't have the volume to support the engineering required to produce i86 class CPU's for the Mac market.
Everybody has been talking about how big Apple is but functionally they are a tiny company when it comes to CPU design.
Quote:
There are other mature architectures out there that can be used. And we don't know how far Apple is with ARM. They were an original contributor in the '90s.
Apple can do whatever they want with ARM for iOS devices, but Macs will need to remain i86 for the foreseeable future. More so they will not buy into yet another half successful architecture. If they did not learn from the PPC day we are all in trouble.
Quote:
And who knows, they could be working with or perhaps even acquiring AMD for all we know.
This is certainly possible and possibly a more rational approach to putting Apple IP into Macs.
Quote:
Yup, but as I said, the need for that spark is long gone and I doubt the fact that Mac's come with Intel chips matters to the majority of current Mac buyers.
It is a big deal and I think it is silly to dismiss out of hand. There are the issues of compatibility and performance and nothing Apple can produce with ARM will be able to match anything Intel has anytime soon.
It wold be great to see Apple produce a 64 bit processor that gives equal performance per watt to the latest Intel or AMD i86 but it is also wishful thinking. Even AMD is way ahead of the curve with its new Bobcat core.
This is a truly excellent post. Remember, we do not know how this convergence of phone, tablet, laptop, desktop + other is going to play out.
While this is true, few of us can see into the future, we can look at past market behaviors. Iphone gave people a compelling reason to give up their old cell phones. I do not however see a compelling reason for one to give up an OS like Mac OS/X. Can Apple pull one out of the hat here, possibly but many uses for an OS like Mac OS/X will not be easily replaced by something drastically different.
Quote:
Definitely there will be Intel Macs through 2015. But the dominance and importance of ARM Apple products leading up to 2015 can never be underestimated.
In iOS based products this is very much the case. It is much harder to see where a transition to ARM in the desktop/laptop line up would make sense. These products literally have to develop in a different direction.
Quote:
By mid-2012 we could easily imagine a MacBook Air 10" running ARM OSX. The thing is, by mid-2012 our understanding of "computing" will be changed and challenged further.
Honestly I can't imagine a viable Mac of any sort running an ARM processor. Certainly not by 2012. As for "computing" as you call it, there is a huge difference between what that means to a consumer and what that means to somebody that uses a Mac Professionally. IPad has grabbed considerable consumer uptake because it satisfies certain needs really well. Even on the commercial side of things it has its good points but it is not a work station by any means. In fact it can't even pass as a computer for a clerk.
Quote:
AMD is not a serious long-term option. Sure, Fusion has some potential but mainly in the transition to the first Mac ARM products.
Apple would have a far better chance of putting their IP in a successful i86 chip if they work with somebody like AMD. AS for ARM show me a road map anywhere where it is indicated that core performance will come close to an AMD Bobcat based core anytime soon. Mind you this is a real 64 bit core.
Quote:
Apple definitely is spreading its bets in any case, and this is a good thing. Their Intel relationship is definitely lukewarm at the moment, though of course as I mention Apple will need Intel for a few more years at least.
Apples best near term weapon against Intels stupidity and belligerence, is AMD. All Apple really needs to do is to implement a couple of successful AMD based platforms to get Intel to pull its head out of its ass. I'm sure Intel is motivating Apple so that we can agree upon.
I just see the idea of extending ARM IP into anything that is suitable to run against current i86 hardware as being more than Apple can chew. People are expecting Apple to throw together a chip in a few years that has all the benefits of the i86 evolutionary process. This makes no sense even with the advanced help of ARM IP.
I'm sitting on route 4, in the middle of Florida, with a faster data connection than what I had in my hotel. (iPhone 3G) Traffic stopped due to a nasty accident, looks really ugly from about a mile away.
I only mention this because of the idea that 4G ought to be in Apples hardware plans. It just highlights that CPU engineering is only part of the equation. A faster SoC is great and I do hope it is the advancement we are hoping for, but a more balanced update would be welcomed.
Comments
As noted I'm practically in the same boat thinking instead that the new hardware will go in a tablet. As a side note a processor optimized for the iPhone is also likely. The thing is iPhone could use a lower power, as in energy , processor than the iPad. IPhone performance isn't to bad for what it does but the IPad on the other hand pretty much sucks.
They have the potential to implement hardware that is markably faster than competing systems for the same amount of energy consumed. Especially if code is kept as native while the competition is running some sort of VM. In the end you are right the winner will be the company delivering the best performance at the lowest power point. There is little else to distinguish hardware.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why hasn't anybody mentioned the possibility that Apple will purchase a company that can implement much more efficient memory module solutions such as Hypercloud Technology by Netlist. These two companies have worked together in the past and it would completely destroy Google in the cloud while also giving Apple a much needed speed advantage and patent protection. Netlist is a 70 million dollar company. Isn't this Apple's MO?
First of all, who cares,
"I don't care about it, so there's no reason for anyone to care."
second of all, have you ever heard of boot camp? Sure you have, you just pretend it won't exist in the future.
You'll want to re-read my posts, or at least read all of them. A new architecture would make Boot Camp impossible. Virtualization is never out of the question.
buy a $99 windows box
Can you BUY a computer for $99? Because if you can, I would and just make it a Hackintosh.
In theory the only way to get better RAM performance would be to have that RAM on the SoC itself. Even then you aren't likely to get better all around performance because of the different processing used to build hi density RAM.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why hasn't anybody mentioned the possibility that Apple will purchase a company that can implement much more efficient memory module solutions such as Hypercloud Technology by Netlist. These two companies have worked together in the past and it would completely destroy Google in the cloud while also giving Apple a much needed speed advantage and patent protection. Netlist is a 70 million dollar company. Isn't this Apple's MO?
No. I'm not sure what you see at Netlist that has you so excited. All they have is RAM modules for servers. There really isn't anything "cloudy" about them.
Besides the last thing we want to have happen is for Apple to get to attached to the cloud and end up making their hardware useless for anybody but the brainless. People need to realize that cloud computing is a way for companies to keep their fingers in your wallet. The advantages to the user are few and for the most part rather specific.
No I said the current iPad is slow and that future machines will make it look significantly worst. This becomes readily apparent when iPad attempts to do anything non trivial or for that matter do Javascript heavy web sites.
You really feel the over all performance of a machine should be measured by random javascript on random websites?
Well maybe because for many users the processor performance is not the primary indicator of good performance. Look at it this way the iPad processor can be best seen as a 486 class performance.
You hit the nail on the head. Processor performance is not the primary indicator for good performance.
What exactly are you using as a benchmark to measure the iPad against? Slow in comparison to what?
That is Apple has to significantly increase performance just to realize its goals. IPad 1 can barely deliver on current needs so it should be obvious that a much faster SoC is coming.
Apple has sold roughly 14 million iPads in 2010. You feel it can barely deliver on its current needs. What other evidence is there of this?
Windows may not be made for installation on Macs, but it's possible.
And?
The reasons for running Windows on a Mac are rapidly diminishing...
Not that I expect Apple to abandon Intel for desktops or laptops any time soon - but it doesn't matter near as much as it did just a few years ago, and a few years from now it will matter even less.
This, more than anything probably scares the crap out of Intel and Microsoft both. The x86 architecture has a ton of baggage, and it's a miracle they have gotten it to perform as well as they have, but that baggage exists for Windows backwards compatibility. Mac OSX and now iOSX really don't need that baggage.
Longer term, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out...
One doesn't need to be an insider to know these things. They are obvious requirements to Apple's design cycle. I don't need to know any details about them. The chip will be faster, more powerful, etc.
Duh!
Yup - no kidding
samab does not recognize the concept of modification to a core. He strongly believes and stated in another thread that his absolute views of using unmodified IP or totally designing a core from scratch are the only two ways to use ARM IP, and he strenuously does not believe that Apple is an ARM architecture licensee so he doesn't think Apple can touch a single transistor inside the Cortex core.
No kidding. People like samab are still in denial that Apple knows what the heck they are doing.
Trust me, of all people Steve Jobs perfectly understands what happened with the original Mac and he has no intention of following the same path with the iOS.
Those that think that Apple doesn't have a long term plan for the iOS are sadly misguided.
2014 will be nothing like 1984 or 1994. The A4 was just a first step. That 4 year pipeline samab is so worried about? He needs to go back and re-read Steve Jobs comments about when they started working on the iPad that lead to the first iPhone and then the iPad... It's pretty obvious Apple has been working on these things for more than four years
The whole reason Macs have been so successful as of late is that they have no restrictions on what can run on the machines. Why would Apple screw with that?
If even half of the Mac's out there have had Windows run on them (Virtual PC, Bootcamp or otherwise) I would be very astonished. While Intel was probably a significant influencer a few years back, I doubt it's much of an influencer for the majority of Mac purchasers.
Remember, the majority aren't geeks like us that are reading this board. There are far more of "them" than "us"
Frankly if you have been keeping track of Apples CPU patents over the last couple of years you have to wonder what is taking them so long. It looks like their intentions are to supplement the ARM instruction set with instructions that accelerate the execution of Objective C.
It's probably because just because Apple can do a thing, it doesn't mean they will until it makes absolute sense. That precedent has been set pretty clearly.
For all intents and purposes, the iPhone pretty much came out of no where. Yeah, there were some vague rumors and rampant speculation, but nothing of significance until it was practically announced/released.
I have no doubt that whatever Apple is working on, it will be equally or more significant than the original iPhone. And it will arrive just as quick.
In the mobile arena this is nothing to get negative about, in fact it should be just the opposite. A highly optimized high performance processor is exactly what is needed to really make mobile devices fly.
Yup, and I sincerely doubt we are the first to think such a thing is a good idea
I think you missed something here, no one has indicated that they are getting rid of i86 hardware in Macs.
Not with the current or maybe even the next generation or two of chips.
But to think that Apple will stick with x86 chips forever is pretty silly. All the moves they are making with LLVM and other technologies, they are intentionally freeing themselves from CPU and architecture dependancy.
Who knows, this might be the opportunity for someone else to mature an architecture. Heck, given Steve Jobs and Larry Ellison's relationship, who knows. Perhaps the Mac's of the future could be running SPARC. I can think of worse things! It's certainly a cleaner architecture.
The point is, Apple isn't afraid to make bold moves if it has to. And that is what makes this very interesting to me. I can't wait to see what next rabbit comes out of the hat!
Not yet, anyway.
I agree. Apple will stay wedded to x86 only as long as it continues to make sense.
The days of Apple being beholden to others are coming to an end. I wouldn't be surprised if some of that cash horde they are sitting on wasn't destined for lower level supply chain such as screens or even their own CPU foundry line.
Seriously one big selling point for Macs is that the user can run just about anything in a VM.
For whom? A few geek hobbyists? I guarantee the majority of current Mac purchasers couldn't care less.
Apple simply isn't big enough to do its own processor to match the i86 families. Not even close.
Seriously? Second largest company on the stock market sitting on a cash horde and amassing all kinds of low level design experience?
Underestimate Apple at your own risk. Just ask RIM and Microsoft...
I see zero chance of this happening.
It doesn't take much imagination to have limited vision...
It is one thing to run a program that uses ARM IP it is a totally different thing to build a processor that is functionally more impressive than the i86 hardware on the market.
There are other mature architectures out there that can be used. And we don't know how far Apple is with ARM. They were an original contributor in the '90s.
I don't know about that, if I was AMD I'd be all over Apple and very willing to build whatever SoC they wanted. Imagine if one of AMD's Bobcat based Fusion products was tweaked for Apple, with Apple IP on board.
And who knows, they could be working with or perhaps even acquiring AMD for all we know.
Well yeah in mobile devices, I suspect this is their goal. The problem is when you go beyond that, the issues are massively non trivial. More importantly the spark that got Macs to selling was i86 more than anything else.
Yup, but as I said, the need for that spark is long gone and I doubt the fact that Mac's come with Intel chips matters to the majority of current Mac buyers.
I wish Apple would actually manufacture things. They could start off by letting Americans assemble iPods and iPhones. Then they could have Americans manufacture the cases to their computers and idevices in the USA. In time Apple could manufacture their own circuit boards and chips in the USA. With the premium prices of Apple products the company could afford to do these things within the USA. Just the good public relations alone would get them more sales from Americans who want to support US manufacturers.
I was with you until you started spouting fantasy gobbledygook such as the above. It's a pipe dream -0 manufacturing is not coming back to the US any time soon. Not with our current economic situation. The "premium" you speak of is trivial compared to what it would take to accomplish you desires.
If Foxcon employs one million people in China then Apple could eventually move that production to the USA and create at least that many jobs.
Not gonna happen. There are far to many socio-economic reasons why it isn't going to happen any time soon. This isn't an issue of Apple's doing, BTW. If you wan't to blame someone, you can blame our politicians and business leaders for selling our soul out over the past 20 years for short term economic gains.
Here we go. What better way to completely shut the user out of the computer than making the whole thing proprietary? Mac OS will only work on Apple's architecture (read: Apple computers), and Windows, et. al. won't ever be installable because they'll have no need to build Apple versions.
It'd take forever, but it may happen.
Please, by the time Intel Apple products are phased out I'm sure there will be excellent Windows virtualisation/ emulators for ARM.
Edit: But I see this has been covered extensively already by other posters.
If even half of the Mac's out there have had Windows run on them (Virtual PC, Bootcamp or otherwise) I would be very astonished. While Intel was probably a significant influencer a few years back, I doubt it's much of an influencer for the majority of Mac purchasers.
I doubt that. Seriously it is a security feature in the sense that it gives people a sense of a fall back. On top of that there are many that simply need that compatibility for part of there computing needs. Further it isn't just Windows that people want to be able to run.
Remember, the majority aren't geeks like us that are reading this board. There are far more of "them" than "us"
Well the geek mentality I understand. However I think you mis the practical mentality where people chose a Mac for its good points and then run the odd app they need to in a VM. Using a VM really isn't geeky anymore.
It's probably because just because Apple can do a thing, it doesn't mean they will until it makes absolute sense. That precedent has been set pretty clearly.
Of course moving forward is always an issue of timing. However Apples continued research in this area tells me they have goal that sees some of this research going into products. Seriously why bother hiring engineers that do this level of work if you don't have intentions of putting at least some of that effort to work in product.
From what I can see A4 is NOT an example of implementing such hardware or engineering effort.
For all intents and purposes, the iPhone pretty much came out of no where. Yeah, there were some vague rumors and rampant speculation, but nothing of significance until it was practically announced/released.
I find it hard to believe that you would put into print the above.
I have no doubt that whatever Apple is working on, it will be equally or more significant than the original iPhone. And it will arrive just as quick.
Yup, and I sincerely doubt we are the first to think such a thing is a good idea
Definitely there will be Intel Macs through 2015. But the dominance and importance of ARM Apple products leading up to 2015 can never be underestimated.
By mid-2012 we could easily imagine a MacBook Air 10" running ARM OSX. The thing is, by mid-2012 our understanding of "computing" will be changed and challenged further.
AMD is not a serious long-term option. Sure, Fusion has some potential but mainly in the transition to the first Mac ARM products.
Apple definitely is spreading its bets in any case, and this is a good thing. Their Intel relationship is definitely lukewarm at the moment, though of course as I mention Apple will need Intel for a few more years at least.
Exactly what I'm thinking. $278 million for PA Semi plus $121 for Intrinsity is too much to spend on a slightly warmed-over single-CPU ARM design. The purchases prevent competitors from acquiring that IP and engineering talent, but that's only a small bonus.
I think Apple's long-term goal is to create their own proprietary SoC for not just their iDevices but for Macs as well. This would help lower their hardware costs since they won't be paying off-the-shelf prices for one of the most expensive components in their products. And lower hardware costs will help Apple maintain their margins.
But there are two more gigantic benefits. First, Apple could conceivably transition Mac OS back from Intel to their custom multi-core ARM. They have already transitioned Mac OS through several CPU changes: 68k to PowerPC, then PowerPC to Intel. Been there, done that, got the developers to come along too. And that could enormously benefit iDevices in the next decade. Eventually mobile device CPU power will exceed that of today's desktop computers, and Apple could prepare for that future by transitioning Mac OS to run on their ARM-based mobile CPUs.
Second, and this is perhaps the most important benefit for Apple, using a custom ARM chip on all their computing products would free them from dependence on an outside chip designers. For decades, from the 6502 to Intel Core i7, Apple has been at the mercy of the Motorolas, IBMs, and Intels of the world. Each of which have different goals than Apple. Motorola and IBM were more concerned with the embedded versions of their PowerPC chips than efficient and speedy desktop and laptop computer versions. Intel is more concerned with optimizing Windows performance than anything else. (And the CISC design of their CPUs uses vast areas of silicon for the execution of obscure backward-compatible x86 instructions generated only by Microsoft's compilers.)
None of those chip makers really wants to build a bespoke chip just for Apple. Intel, just after Apple completed the PowerPC-to-Intel transition, gave Apple their newest chips first. The original MacBook Air had an avant-garde chip that eventually was used in other laptops. But that was presumably because Apple paid them for that privilege, an unsustainable tactic, and the honeymoon ended.
Apple could eliminate their co-dependence on other chip designers now that they have acquired PA Semi's and Intrinsity's intellectual property. And that will set them up for their next decade or two of innovation. No other tech company in the world will be as well prepared.
I was with you until you started spouting fantasy gobbledygook such as the above. It's a pipe dream -0 manufacturing is not coming back to the US any time soon. Not with our current economic situation. The "premium" you speak of is trivial compared to what it would take to accomplish you desires.
I work in US based manufacturing and let me tell you it is tough. The biggest issue that you simply can't compete unless you are highly automated or are in some way protected. Even these things are of limited value these days, as many of the automation companies locally are now sending entire automation lines to China for various efforts. The low labor rate and lax regulation means that they often can do a completed item for the cost of the raw material for a case in the US. There is a rolling snowball effect due to everything being far cheaper to source in China.
Not gonna happen. There are far to many socio-economic reasons why it isn't going to happen any time soon. This isn't an issue of Apple's doing, BTW. If you wan't to blame someone, you can blame our politicians and business leaders for selling our soul out over the past 20 years for short term economic gains.
Yep politicians of all strips and colors. Few if any have said boo about the out sourcing of manufacturing to China. It is rather sad because manufacturing is key to a countries strength.
About the only way things will change is if a major war flares up and the people of the USA give Washington no choice but to discontinue trade with China. Up to this point nothing has galvanized the American public to a suitable extent. Unfortunately war would in a literal sense whip out companies like Apple that have focused to much of their production effort on China. A conflict would mean Apples revenues would disappear over night with no easy fix to get back to a solid cash flow. It is really sad that the boards governing companies like Apple have never heard about keeping all your eggs in one basket.
For whom? A few geek hobbyists? I guarantee the majority of current Mac purchasers couldn't care less.
I doubt that.
Seriously? Second largest company on the stock market sitting on a cash horde and amassing all kinds of low level design experience?
Seriously yes, very much so. Look at the trouble AMD has keeping up with Intel and they have had years of i86 experience. The difference between doing an ARM tweak and a full blown custom i86 processor is massive. As to emulation NO I don't think ARM hardware will be up to that anytime soon.
Underestimate Apple at your own risk. Just ask RIM and Microsoft...
What about Apples customers? It would be foolish to underestimate them. Frankly any would barf at the thought of another architecture transition for the Mac.
It doesn't take much imagination to have limited vision...
No; it takes imagination to see the trouble another processor transition will cause Apple. Beyond that Apple simply doesn't have the volume to support the engineering required to produce i86 class CPU's for the Mac market.
Everybody has been talking about how big Apple is but functionally they are a tiny company when it comes to CPU design.
There are other mature architectures out there that can be used. And we don't know how far Apple is with ARM. They were an original contributor in the '90s.
Apple can do whatever they want with ARM for iOS devices, but Macs will need to remain i86 for the foreseeable future. More so they will not buy into yet another half successful architecture. If they did not learn from the PPC day we are all in trouble.
And who knows, they could be working with or perhaps even acquiring AMD for all we know.
This is certainly possible and possibly a more rational approach to putting Apple IP into Macs.
Yup, but as I said, the need for that spark is long gone and I doubt the fact that Mac's come with Intel chips matters to the majority of current Mac buyers.
It is a big deal and I think it is silly to dismiss out of hand. There are the issues of compatibility and performance and nothing Apple can produce with ARM will be able to match anything Intel has anytime soon.
It wold be great to see Apple produce a 64 bit processor that gives equal performance per watt to the latest Intel or AMD i86 but it is also wishful thinking. Even AMD is way ahead of the curve with its new Bobcat core.
This is a truly excellent post. Remember, we do not know how this convergence of phone, tablet, laptop, desktop + other is going to play out.
While this is true, few of us can see into the future, we can look at past market behaviors. Iphone gave people a compelling reason to give up their old cell phones. I do not however see a compelling reason for one to give up an OS like Mac OS/X. Can Apple pull one out of the hat here, possibly but many uses for an OS like Mac OS/X will not be easily replaced by something drastically different.
Definitely there will be Intel Macs through 2015. But the dominance and importance of ARM Apple products leading up to 2015 can never be underestimated.
In iOS based products this is very much the case. It is much harder to see where a transition to ARM in the desktop/laptop line up would make sense. These products literally have to develop in a different direction.
By mid-2012 we could easily imagine a MacBook Air 10" running ARM OSX. The thing is, by mid-2012 our understanding of "computing" will be changed and challenged further.
Honestly I can't imagine a viable Mac of any sort running an ARM processor. Certainly not by 2012. As for "computing" as you call it, there is a huge difference between what that means to a consumer and what that means to somebody that uses a Mac Professionally. IPad has grabbed considerable consumer uptake because it satisfies certain needs really well. Even on the commercial side of things it has its good points but it is not a work station by any means. In fact it can't even pass as a computer for a clerk.
AMD is not a serious long-term option. Sure, Fusion has some potential but mainly in the transition to the first Mac ARM products.
Apple would have a far better chance of putting their IP in a successful i86 chip if they work with somebody like AMD. AS for ARM show me a road map anywhere where it is indicated that core performance will come close to an AMD Bobcat based core anytime soon. Mind you this is a real 64 bit core.
Apple definitely is spreading its bets in any case, and this is a good thing. Their Intel relationship is definitely lukewarm at the moment, though of course as I mention Apple will need Intel for a few more years at least.
Apples best near term weapon against Intels stupidity and belligerence, is AMD. All Apple really needs to do is to implement a couple of successful AMD based platforms to get Intel to pull its head out of its ass. I'm sure Intel is motivating Apple so that we can agree upon.
I just see the idea of extending ARM IP into anything that is suitable to run against current i86 hardware as being more than Apple can chew. People are expecting Apple to throw together a chip in a few years that has all the benefits of the i86 evolutionary process. This makes no sense even with the advanced help of ARM IP.
I only mention this because of the idea that 4G ought to be in Apples hardware plans. It just highlights that CPU engineering is only part of the equation. A faster SoC is great and I do hope it is the advancement we are hoping for, but a more balanced update would be welcomed.
Intel and AMD will not be surpassed by ARM in CPU designs for Workstations, Desktops and high-end laptops.