An ARM based MacBook with a headline "Million compatible apps", why would it be that far away? Apple has a record of changing architecture every decade or so. so now its been a decade with intel. Time is up and I guess it's only a matter of months they announce it. Next WWDC ?
Nvidia has Maxwell cores coupled with ARM Procs, and AMD Either has started or will start integrating it's own GPU IP with ARM processor offerings this year or the next.
Edit: Nvidia and AMD had also coupled GPU's with Cell, Xenon and The Broadway/Cafe processors on Consoles, all of which are non X86. So it is possible.
If you don't know about the Seattle SoC from AMD already available for 6 months to OEMs I can assure Apple is already testing them, along side new Opterons and Carrizo APUs.
Apple will soon have a new line up of FirePro cards to draw upon from AMD and have an APU for the Mac Mini to the iMac that would reduce the cost, but if done correctly [using a dual APU on-board] wipe the floor with the current iMac i5/i7 line up.
The Carrizo is 5K H.265 hardware decode/encode compliant.
Maybe they just might make a laptop out of an iPad. That would make things simple.
I am firmly in this camp though there is significant resistance to this idea for reasons I don't fully get. I think folks think it is an either or proposition. An IOS based laptop would be a new device so nothing really changes. It would be a low end device but no lower end than a current iPad. I'd be all over an IOS based laptop.
AMD is a joke anymore; people say they want x86 power, then AMD is not your option. They don't have the talent nor the cash to compete with Intel anymore.
If I remember correctly, Apple hired a truckload of ADM engineers a couple years back. There may be much more going on in this world then anyone has sniffed out.
Chromebooks seem to be finding a niche out there and don't offer Wintel compatibility nor OSX/iOS compatibility. I do believe a iOS compatible Apple laptop could find a much bigger niche, especially in the education market where Wintel compatibility is a not an issue.
The switch to an Apple iOS laptop would not be for a pricing reason as much as for the gain in battery life. In addition there are a wealth of iOS apps for education. If Apple were to release this new laptop "for the educational market" only. It may trigger a high demand outside of education as anything one can't have is instantly more desirable to have. Apple can keep it on or not, as they have done with several "education only" products over the years. Meanwhile Apple can gain valuable feedback on how important Intel/WIntel compatibility is as well. This kind of limited release should not upset the Apple/Intel relationship. Whatever happens down the future timeline, I see Apple retaining the Intel/Wintel compatibility in all their professional products for the next few years.
Finally, I see no reason for an iOS laptop to have a touch-enabled screen. The Apple trac pad gets the job done with no loss of function, and no change of iOS app code. We all envision the A-series chip slowly growing in power over a number of revisions. Apple could also be working on a big "bump" that will be more like a "leap" We can't know what is going on behind the Apple cone of silence.
If I remember correctly, Apple hired a truckload of ADM engineers a couple years back. There may be much more going on in this world then anyone has sniffed out.
Chromebooks seem to be finding a niche out there and don't offer Wintel compatibility nor OSX/iOS compatibility. I do believe a iOS compatible Apple laptop could find a much bigger niche, especially in the education market where Wintel compatibility is a not an issue.
The switch to an Apple iOS laptop would not be for a pricing reason as much as for the gain in battery life. In addition there are a wealth of iOS apps for education. If Apple were to release this new laptop "for the educational market" only. It may trigger a high demand outside of education as anything one can't have is instantly more desirable to have. Apple can keep it on or not, as they have done with several "education only" products over the years. Meanwhile Apple can gain valuable feedback on how important Intel/WIntel compatibility is as well. This kind of limited release should not upset the Apple/Intel relationship. Whatever happens down the future timeline, I see Apple retaining the Intel/Wintel compatibility in all their professional products for the next few years.
Finally, I see no reason for an iOS laptop to have a touch-enabled screen. The Apple trac pad gets the job done with no loss of function, and no change of iOS app code. We all envision the A-series chip slowly growing in power over a number of revisions. Apple could also be working on a big "bump" that will be more like a "leap" We can't know what is going on behind the Apple cone of silence.
Why on earth limit such a device to education? The iPad is extensively used outside of education. Obviously no one would buy such a device for running windows but it would run office for IOS. And why not a touch screen? Why not both? Because we sneered at that concept yesterday? Let's re-think it. That's what Apple is good at.
this is a dumb article and a dumb hypothesis, high end users be they Apple or Microsoft customers have been loosing out of late due to Intel shifting focus to the low end of the market where the volume and the money is, Apple replacing risc with cisc will only be of benefit to the low end market these chips will never replace Oct core sever processors and we at the high end will be left hanging. Worse, if the OS transitions to the new architecture and all the high end pro apps are still on Intel I predict a huge mass exodus of high end professional users migrating to Windows just as fast as they can.
Right. Apple losing the high end to Windows.
If you had tried, really hard, you couldn't have come up with a dumber statement.
Chromebook's are a failure. The only people that buy them do on impulse due to price, and then have extreme buyer's remorse when they realize its not Windows, or anything remotely familiar, and runs nothing.
Wouldn't it be interesting if they DID replace Intel processors in the Mac Book Pro with ARM... I'm imagining like sixteen A10 ARM processors with 64 total cores for $400 to manufacture...
Steve Jobs was alive when they started using custom ARM chips in Apple products and there is no doubt in my mind that it was designed from the beginning to run OS X. We don't know what Apple's ARM processors are fully capable of because they have not been pushed to their limits.
The original Apple TV sold between 2007 and 2010 was essentially a scaled down Mac, running a modified OS X on an Intel x86 processor and Nvidia CPU.
In late 2010, Apple released a "second generation" successor running a version of iOS on its own A4 processor (incorporating the same GPU cores iOS devices use). That shift (involving a complete hardware architecture overhaul) helped Apple to drop the price from $299 to $99.
I’ll mention it, since you didn’t:
The first-gen Apple TV idled at around 100 watts (and/or 100ºF; I forget). The second and third-gen max out at roughly 6 watts. And they’re much cooler.
The first-gen Apple TV idled at around 100 watts (and/or 100ºF; I forget). The second and third-gen max out at roughly 6 watts. And they’re much cooler.
That saves money on all ends.
And that was a 1 GHz processor, If I remember correctly, that felt slower to you
Apple also uses Intel chips in their datacenters (or so I assume -- there really aren't any realistic alternatives other than Power7/8, and I seriously doubt they use that).
I'd love to see some informed speculation as to how many Xeons Apple buys from Intel every year to go into those data centers. Those server-grade Xeons are the highest profit margin chips Intel sells.
It's not crazy to suggest that Apple could develop an ARM-based core that could scale from an iPad pro all the way to the Mac Pro and datacenter. Intel does this today -- their Core architecture is used in everything from the MS Surface Pro up to data centers.
If you add up all those chips -- iPad, Mac, and datacenter -- I think we're talking about a volume that really is sufficient to provide the economies of scale necessary for a switch.
I think the thing that might push this over the edge into making sense is the opportunity to add customized circuitry to various SOCs targeting different devices. In an iPhone/iPad, you add a bunch of transistors supporting the camera. In the Mac, you swap those out for transistors supporting 3d UI (or whatever). In the server market, maybe you swap that out and replace it with more cores.
Apple has always been platform agnostic with regards to architecture. For their back-end data center servers, Apple uses a combination of OS X, Solaris, AIX, considering that AIX is exclusively for POWER, Apple at least uses both x86 and POWER chips, and possibly some sparc chips as well.
And that was a 1 GHz processor, If I remember correctly, that felt slower to you
Slower to who? I never had a first gen. I still love the idea behind it, though: storage ON the device.
WHY CAN’T I USE HOME SHARING WITH MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS AT ONCE?! I should be able to get to at least TWO different libraries from an Apple TV without having to log in every time.
I want to see “X’s Library”, “Y’s Library”, and “Z’s Library” in a list. Click, boom, you’re there. Different computers in the same home, different content, accessible from any Apple TV in the house.
Oh, and I’d love if the Computers view was a grid of artwork, not a list. Specifically for my sister, who would benefit from the pictorial association of more than one thing at once.
Geez, if they’re going to force the Apple TV to be a device dependent on network-connected storage (using it as just a dumb terminal, basically, with only network-accessed “accounts”), you should be able to actually get to those accounts.
I’m going to stop here. I have too many suggestions for change to the Apple TV for an ARM thread to handle.
What about Touch ID and ApplePay on a Mac? Wouldn't that require a Axx chip?
No, just the secure element thereof. Apple could just build a standalone chip for it and throw it on the motherboard. That might also do something about Hackintoshing.
Though I’m less against their work these days since they mean I can get new graphics cards.
this is a dumb article and a dumb hypothesis, high end users be they Apple or Microsoft customers have been loosing out of late due to Intel shifting focus to the low end of the market where the volume and the money is, Apple replacing risc with cisc will only be of benefit to the low end market these chips will never replace Oct core sever processors and we at the high end will be left hanging. Worse, if the OS transitions to the new architecture and all the high end pro apps are still on Intel I predict a huge mass exodus of high end professional users migrating to Windows just as fast as they can.
AMD is already set to release octo-core server chips. AppliedMicro, Huawei and Cavium are set to release 16-core server chips.
Comments
An ARM based MacBook with a headline "Million compatible apps", why would it be that far away? Apple has a record of changing architecture every decade or so. so now its been a decade with intel. Time is up and I guess it's only a matter of months they announce it. Next WWDC ?
1) We don't know if Intel would license the use to Apple.
2) We're talking about low-end machines here. How many >$800 "PCs" currently have TB peripherals connected.
3) Remember that TB already uses Apple's mDP port so we should still expect DP as a video-out protocol.
1) We don't know if Intel would license the use to Apple.
2) We're talking about low-end machines here. How many >$800 "PCs" currently have TB peripherals connected.
3) Remember that TB already uses Apple's mDP port so we should still expect DP as a video-out protocol.
USB 3.1 already has DP Protocol.
If you don't know about the Seattle SoC from AMD already available for 6 months to OEMs I can assure Apple is already testing them, along side new Opterons and Carrizo APUs.
http://www.amd.com/en-us/products/server/opteron-a-series
http://www.amd.com/en-us/press-releases/Pages/2015-ces-2015jan05.aspx
Apple will soon have a new line up of FirePro cards to draw upon from AMD and have an APU for the Mac Mini to the iMac that would reduce the cost, but if done correctly [using a dual APU on-board] wipe the floor with the current iMac i5/i7 line up.
The Carrizo is 5K H.265 hardware decode/encode compliant.
If I remember correctly, Apple hired a truckload of ADM engineers a couple years back. There may be much more going on in this world then anyone has sniffed out.
Chromebooks seem to be finding a niche out there and don't offer Wintel compatibility nor OSX/iOS compatibility. I do believe a iOS compatible Apple laptop could find a much bigger niche, especially in the education market where Wintel compatibility is a not an issue.
The switch to an Apple iOS laptop would not be for a pricing reason as much as for the gain in battery life. In addition there are a wealth of iOS apps for education. If Apple were to release this new laptop "for the educational market" only. It may trigger a high demand outside of education as anything one can't have is instantly more desirable to have. Apple can keep it on or not, as they have done with several "education only" products over the years. Meanwhile Apple can gain valuable feedback on how important Intel/WIntel compatibility is as well. This kind of limited release should not upset the Apple/Intel relationship. Whatever happens down the future timeline, I see Apple retaining the Intel/Wintel compatibility in all their professional products for the next few years.
Finally, I see no reason for an iOS laptop to have a touch-enabled screen. The Apple trac pad gets the job done with no loss of function, and no change of iOS app code. We all envision the A-series chip slowly growing in power over a number of revisions. Apple could also be working on a big "bump" that will be more like a "leap" We can't know what is going on behind the Apple cone of silence.
this is a dumb article and a dumb hypothesis, high end users be they Apple or Microsoft customers have been loosing out of late due to Intel shifting focus to the low end of the market where the volume and the money is, Apple replacing risc with cisc will only be of benefit to the low end market these chips will never replace Oct core sever processors and we at the high end will be left hanging. Worse, if the OS transitions to the new architecture and all the high end pro apps are still on Intel I predict a huge mass exodus of high end professional users migrating to Windows just as fast as they can.
Right. Apple losing the high end to Windows.
If you had tried, really hard, you couldn't have come up with a dumber statement.
Chromebooks seem to be finding a niche out there
Based on what? Show me your data.
Chromebook's are a failure. The only people that buy them do on impulse due to price, and then have extreme buyer's remorse when they realize its not Windows, or anything remotely familiar, and runs nothing.
The original Apple TV sold between 2007 and 2010 was essentially a scaled down Mac, running a modified OS X on an Intel x86 processor and Nvidia CPU.
In late 2010, Apple released a "second generation" successor running a version of iOS on its own A4 processor (incorporating the same GPU cores iOS devices use). That shift (involving a complete hardware architecture overhaul) helped Apple to drop the price from $299 to $99.
I’ll mention it, since you didn’t:
The first-gen Apple TV idled at around 100 watts (and/or 100ºF; I forget). The second and third-gen max out at roughly 6 watts. And they’re much cooler.
That saves money on all ends.
And that was a 1 GHz processor, If I remember correctly, that felt slower to you
Apple also uses Intel chips in their datacenters (or so I assume -- there really aren't any realistic alternatives other than Power7/8, and I seriously doubt they use that).
I'd love to see some informed speculation as to how many Xeons Apple buys from Intel every year to go into those data centers. Those server-grade Xeons are the highest profit margin chips Intel sells.
It's not crazy to suggest that Apple could develop an ARM-based core that could scale from an iPad pro all the way to the Mac Pro and datacenter. Intel does this today -- their Core architecture is used in everything from the MS Surface Pro up to data centers.
If you add up all those chips -- iPad, Mac, and datacenter -- I think we're talking about a volume that really is sufficient to provide the economies of scale necessary for a switch.
I think the thing that might push this over the edge into making sense is the opportunity to add customized circuitry to various SOCs targeting different devices. In an iPhone/iPad, you add a bunch of transistors supporting the camera. In the Mac, you swap those out for transistors supporting 3d UI (or whatever). In the server market, maybe you swap that out and replace it with more cores.
Apple has always been platform agnostic with regards to architecture. For their back-end data center servers, Apple uses a combination of OS X, Solaris, AIX, considering that AIX is exclusively for POWER, Apple at least uses both x86 and POWER chips, and possibly some sparc chips as well.
http://www.macworld.com/article/1167512/help_wanted_apple_using_oracle_ibm_servers_in_data_center.html
Slower to who? I never had a first gen. I still love the idea behind it, though: storage ON the device.
WHY CAN’T I USE HOME SHARING WITH MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS AT ONCE?! I should be able to get to at least TWO different libraries from an Apple TV without having to log in every time.
I want to see “X’s Library”, “Y’s Library”, and “Z’s Library” in a list. Click, boom, you’re there. Different computers in the same home, different content, accessible from any Apple TV in the house.
Oh, and I’d love if the Computers view was a grid of artwork, not a list. Specifically for my sister, who would benefit from the pictorial association of more than one thing at once.
Geez, if they’re going to force the Apple TV to be a device dependent on network-connected storage (using it as just a dumb terminal, basically, with only network-accessed “accounts”), you should be able to actually get to those accounts.
I’m going to stop here. I have too many suggestions for change to the Apple TV for an ARM thread to handle.
Are there not higher end computers than Apple's?
No, just the secure element thereof. Apple could just build a standalone chip for it and throw it on the motherboard. That might also do something about Hackintoshing.
Though I’m less against their work these days since they mean I can get new graphics cards.
Can you name ONE?
Nope, but I know they exist.
this is a dumb article and a dumb hypothesis, high end users be they Apple or Microsoft customers have been loosing out of late due to Intel shifting focus to the low end of the market where the volume and the money is, Apple replacing risc with cisc will only be of benefit to the low end market these chips will never replace Oct core sever processors and we at the high end will be left hanging. Worse, if the OS transitions to the new architecture and all the high end pro apps are still on Intel I predict a huge mass exodus of high end professional users migrating to Windows just as fast as they can.
AMD is already set to release octo-core server chips. AppliedMicro, Huawei and Cavium are set to release 16-core server chips.