Apple's iPad Pro & powerful A9X CPU pose threat to Intel, Cowen says

124678

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 155
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,666member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post



    Does anyone still think it's impossible for Apple to ever use ARM for Mac OS X or a Mac OS X-like OS?

    I'm not seeing the business reason to push OS X to ARM.

     

    Apple's sales margins are fine for Mac's and there isn't any pressing reason that Apple can't wait for Intel to provide the low power/fanless updates already in the Intel roadmaps to Mac Book Pro's. Apple will abandon x86 when it makes business sense, but that won't happen anytime soon.

     

    There isn't going to be a OS X tablet; that space is iOS only, and either the big companies will ultimately move their products over, or smaller companies in the mobile space, like Pixelmaker, will quickly fill the gap. This is how competition works.

     

    Apple's OS X products are around 20 M units a year; it's iOS products are going to top out over 300 m units for 2016. If you just assume that developer's of these products are looking at another 300 m Android devices, it makes no sense to screw around with OS X.

     

    The only way this makes sense is if you believe that MS is on the right path; I don't believe that they are. I believe that MS will continue to fail in mobile and mobile will continue as a duopoly of iOS and Android OS.

     

    I also believe that Adobe will fully support CC on the iPad Pro at some point in the future; just not tomorrow. 

  • Reply 62 of 155
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • Reply 63 of 155
    Apple would need to give developers a heads up, unless it would be seamless transition somehow.

    They didn't give any lengthy warning for AArm64, 3D Touch, split screen, and many others, so I'm not sur they would need to if they look at it as a long term goal. We're not talking about the same situation as as PPC to Intel here. We have a Mac App Store, great tools with Xcode, and since this would be for the low-end traditional "PC" line, not starting with the high-end, I'd argue that the default apps plus some easily updated Mac App Store apps would be more than sufficient for this initial release.
    Probably not much.  They would use the savings to pad their margins.

    I'm pretty sure Apple is very happy with their margins, but would also like to 1) gain more traditional "PC" sales, 2) eat away at their competitor's traditional "PC" sales even faster, and, most of all, 3) make more profit. A cheaper Mac or Mac-like device that doesn't just get them a little extra direct profit from their low-end customers, but instead gets them millions of new customers is probably going to be the better option every time.
  • Reply 64 of 155
    tmay wrote: »
    I'm not seeing the business reason to push OS X to ARM.

    Apple's sales margins are fine for Mac's and there isn't any pressing reason that Apple can't wait for Intel to provide the low power/fanless updates already in the Intel roadmaps to Mac Book Pro's. Apple will abandon x86 when it makes business sense, but that won't happen anytime soon.

    There isn't going to be a OS X tablet; that space is iOS only, and either the big companies will ultimately move their products over, or smaller companies in the mobile space, like Pixelmaker, will quickly fill the gap. This is how competition works.

    Apple's OS X products are around 20 M units a year; it's iOS products are going to top out over 300 m units for 2016. If you just assume that developer's of these products are looking at another 300 m Android devices, it makes no sense to screw around with OS X.

    The only way this makes sense is if you believe that MS is on the right path; I don't believe that they are. I believe that MS will continue to fail in mobile and mobile will continue as a duopoly of iOS and Android OS.

    I also believe that Adobe will fully support CC on the iPad Pro at some point in the future; just not tomorrow. 

    Why are you making this binary? This is 2015. There is no reason Apple would have to abandon Intel to use ARM on some $700–800 entry-level Mac or Mac-like device that opens up the platform to millions of new customers who would love to abandon Windows but can't justify the initial cost, even when informed about the TCO. This would be that opportunity. Do you recall what Cook said about the typical WinPC's HW performance at the last event? If you do, no compare that to the efficiency of their OS X sub-system running on their HW. This is a win-win for Apple and customers without power users having to give up their Intel-based Mac Pros and MacBook Pros.
  • Reply 65 of 155
    They don't.  Look how expensive iPhones are.

    same price as other flagship phones.

    but that point is irrelevant -- i stated that Apple does indeed lower its mac prices from time to time. you can't refute that (probably ignorant of this fact) and are now talking about phones for some reason. try again.
  • Reply 66 of 155
    nolamacguy wrote: »
    same price as other flagship phones.

    but that point is irrelevant -- i stated that Apple does indeed lower its mac prices from time to time. you can't refute that (probably ignorant of this fact) and are now talking about phones for some reason. try again.

    Sometimes they lower it even while doing a great HW update, all while maintaining their dominance in that market category. I think the Retina MBPs had a $300(?) drop in 2014(?).

    edit: It looks like a $200 drop from Ivy Bridge to Haskell between Early-2013 and Late-2013 devices, which also coincides with the PCIe SSDs. The ODD was removed back in 2012.
  • Reply 67 of 155
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,666member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post





    Why are you making this binary? This is 2015. There is no reason Apple would have to abandon Intel to use ARM on some $700–800 entry-level Mac or Mac-like device that opens up the platform to millions of new customers who would love to abandon Windows but can't justify the initial cost, even when informed about the TCO. This would be that opportunity. Do you recall what Cook said about the typical WinPC's HW performance at the last event? If you do, no compare that to the efficiency of their OS X sub-system running on their HW. This is a win-win for Apple and customers without power users having to give up their Intel-based Mac Pros and MacBook Pros.

    Grow iOS to cover more or most of what their requirements are; fix the basic text issues that John Gruber has lined out . It has to be done anyway. Why throw resources at shifting OS X to ARM for relatively small numbers of desktop users; it really will just confuses the market. Attack the mobile space in a broader way with those same resources.

  • Reply 68 of 155
    tmay wrote: »
    Why throw resources at shifting OS X to ARM for relatively small numbers of desktop users;

    Each pricing tier below the current minimum is like a new base on a pyramid; it's larger and wider thereby resulting in even more potential sales. If you can do this without sacrificing quality and profit margins you need to work to attack it. That's what Apple's chip designs are leading towards.
    it really will just confuses the market.

    People are confused that Mac apps don't run the iPad? :rolleyes:
    Attack the mobile space in a broader way with those same resources.

    Do give up on the traditional "PC" market? **** that! The Mac is NOT going away!!!
  • Reply 69 of 155
    maxitmaxit Posts: 212member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jameskatt2 View Post





    Wrong. It won't have the software nor OS X to even compare. IO S is not optimized for laptop use.



    who spoke about iOS ? 

  • Reply 70 of 155
    haggarhaggar Posts: 1,568member

    If the reports of USB 3.0 transfer speed are true,  how about also adding hardware support for Target Display Mode?  As much as Duet is a nifty app, first party hardware support is still preferred.

  • Reply 71 of 155
    haggar wrote: »
    If the reports of USB 3.0 transfer speed are true,  how about also adding hardware support for Target Display Mode?  As much as Duet is a nifty app, first party hardware support is still preferred.

    I guess we'll have to see if they support that at some point. I'd like to see built-in remote access, especially since that's a common troubleshooting tool in the enterprise.
  • Reply 72 of 155
    "Arcuri was quick to point out that software developers will ultimately determine how much the iPad Pro can replace a PC"
    And yet the iPad Pro cannot be used by software developers to develop software unlike a Macbook Pro or Microsoft Surface Pro.
  • Reply 73 of 155
    maxit wrote: »
    who spoke about iOS ? 

    There is this weird assumption that ARM equals IOS, as well as the weird assumption that if you mention an ARM-based traditional "PC" from Apple that it immediately gets people to make comments about the MBP and Mac Pro.
  • Reply 74 of 155
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,799member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post





    They kept the keys from jamming by slowing the typist down. Back in the day mechanical type writers where in fact very slow.



    The type bars were slow because they were mechanical, and because of the nature of the machine in the early days there was a risk they would interfere with each other.  So the most used keys were spaced out to minimise that.  The were not placed in deliberately inconvenient or the slowest possible places, as was the original assertion, they were simply spaced out.  The goal was not to make typing slow, it was to make the experience smooth, and overall faster, as the type bars would not get tangled up.

     

    Since type bars do not exist on computer keyboards, can better layouts than QWERTY be conceived?  Sure.  Can worse layouts than QWERTY be conceived?  Sure.

  • Reply 75 of 155
    appex wrote: »
    "Apple's iPad Pro & powerful A9X CPU pose threat to Intel".
    Only when A9X CPU becomes x86 for obvious reasons. There is something much more important than speed: compatibility withe the rest of the world. That is why is so great, besides its interface.

    That "rest of the world" is becoming more irrelevant with the passing of each day. Now that iOS (as well as OSX) can run MS Office, my main reason for running a PC or any desktop has vanished. I remember the pissing and moaning that went on in the early eighties when office staff were asked to give up their Selectric typewriters...

    Also, all those in-house programs that could "only run on a PC" are now running just fine as a web version, or on iOS, or both. The unsinkable Titanic has left the port...
  • Reply 76 of 155
    solipsismy wrote: »
    haggar wrote: »
    If the reports of USB 3.0 transfer speed are true,  how about also adding hardware support for Target Display Mode?  As much as Duet is a nifty app, first party hardware support is still preferred.

    I guess we'll have to see if they support that at some point. I'd like to see built-in remote access, especially since that's a common troubleshooting tool in the enterprise.

    Go to your iPad App Store and do a search for "IBM". Be prepared to be hear your jaw hit the desk.
  • Reply 77 of 155
    ronboronbo Posts: 669member

    As exciting as the A9X is (it's almost neck and neck with the i5)... what will the A10X be like? There have been considerable leaps with each generation, moreso than intel has lately managed. Even if the A9X -> A10X increment isn't as great, where will its performance stand compared to the x86? I can hardly wait to find out.

  • Reply 78 of 155
    mariomario Posts: 345member

    Only if iOS improves and starts resembling OS X. As it is now, even less powerful Core M + OS X is infinitely more useful than 10 times faster CPU + iOS. Even simple things like selecting some text, reformatting it and pasting it elsewhere are hard and ridiculously slow to do in iOS, let alone more complex things like firing up Terminal and having thousands of versatile and powerful command line utilities (anything from compilers to text filters etc) each of which would have to be a dedicated GUI app in iOS world, but even then sharing data between iOS apps is really hard too. Not everyone wants only email and browser on their "computer". 

  • Reply 79 of 155
    crowley wrote: »

    Since type bars do not exist on computer keyboards, can better layouts than QWERTY be conceived?  Sure.  Can worse layouts than QWERTY be conceived?  Sure.

    A keyboard is still an anachronistic input device from the 1800s. I don't think the layout is as big of an issue as the whole concept.
  • Reply 80 of 155
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post



    Does anyone think the next MacBooks may switch to Apple processors? 

     

    Not a chance and probably never. Just because they could do this, doesn't mean they will or should. Two primary reasons:

     

    1. Software compatibility - Developer already had to port their apps from PowerPC to Intel and this was not a quick process. I realize that PPC apps could run non-native (at least for a while), but the performance of Intel was vastly superior to PPC. This is not the case with Apple's ARM designs, which while they might be on par, would be vastly slower with emulation.

     

    2. MS Windows - A significant number of users run Windows on their Macs and this would likely be difficult if not impossible if they switch to ARM. Also, many enterprises started to support Macs only after Apple could demonstrate Windows support.

     

    There are probably other reasons, and I could be wrong, but I just don't see this happening. Most likely is that iOS will improve in functionality to the point where it becomes irrelevant at some point in the future...

Sign In or Register to comment.