If Apple wanted to, they could of redone their AppleTV in to a low cost Mac. I think the USB port is meant to plug in to another computer, vs supporting USB devices off of it. Plenty of power to do the stuff I need. Can already support Bluetooth keyboards.
Apples first Apple TV actually ran an Intel chip and has an internal hard drive, and people have modded them to run full blown Mac OS. So by mistake they’ve already done as you said but with Intel instead it ARM chips.
All this conjecture rides on a ‘performance’ narrative - however, there is a lot more to a purchasing strategy than a linear processor/software agenda.
Business looks at stability first. Apple arguably the worst player in the market in this aspect. With no stated roadmap, ultra-secrecy, 7 years between updates, an unending train of failed proprietary standards, spats with software and hardware developers, platform switching, and ‘bold decisions’ that upend workflows and handicap users - there is a reason Apple isn’t a player in the business universe outside of niche.
Their track record from a stability standpoint is not good - anymore. While general consumers can roll with these punches on 1-off purchases - business can’t and won’t.
If recent history is any indication, I don’t believe Apple even cares - as they become almost solely consumer driven in all their offerings. A platform switch doesn’t mean much to the general consumer. Professionals are stampeding out the door anyways after the MacPro debacle - so I don’t see the switch being that difficult for anyone.
IBM, Deloitte, and others disagree with your assessment. Neither can be considered "niche" in any way.
There is no data suggesting that professionals are "stampeding out the door" either. I do agree with your assessment that Apple has become almost solely consumer driven, but the lines between the two have been blurring for at least 20 years.
To me this move just seems to be made to generate more profit. Arm has a place yes, but not in the Pro market. It makes sense in mobile devices but not a desktop. It makes little sense and Apple should instead research AMD’s professors that are just seemingly getting better and better superseding Intels chips in performance.
If I owned a Mac desktop with an ARM processor I wouldn’t be able stop thinking to myself, it’s got the same processor as my phone has...
And then you have the persuasion of developers to make their X86 platform programmes work on ARM, and no running mobile apps doesn’t cut it on a desktop costing 2 grand or more.
I’m not a fan of this idea.
I'm not a fan of this idea either; thankfully none of it has any basis in reality so I think we're okay.
If Apple does move to ARM on laptops, you can bank on it involving a significant advantage that benefits the end user. I don't think it would be done if it was just "similar" to what a user would experience with an Intel based product. There has to be at least one night/day difference for potential buyers that is high on the list of laptop features.
ARM is great for power saving, and in some tasks they exceed the slower Intel CPUs. But there are other tasks they're much slower at, and generally even the best ARM CPU is miles off the mid range Intel ones. I don't really see the point in switching architecture again, people aren't complaining about the battery life on MacBooks, which is really the only advantage x86 in a laptop has.
Moving from x86 not only means switchers to the Mac won't have the "safety net" of running windows, whether natively or in a VM. The vast numbers of utilities for x86 Linux would also become incompatible, people who want to dabble in the occasional game can't reboot to Windows either. We used to dual boot Macs at the school network I ran for various Windows apps. Switching would mean developers would need fat binaries again (apart from MAS distribution) and no doubt it would be another chance for Apple to apply even more OS restrictions. There are a lot of downsides for essentially no upsides. Don't get me wrong - x86 is a crap architecture and if it wasn't for AMD bodging 64-bit support on we'd probably be back to a form of RISC architecture now, like Itanium, but ARM's disadvantages way outweigh the advantages imo.
VM products existing long before the move to x86. They were not great, but they did work (SoftPC, VirtualPC, etc). Parallels and VMWare will move and if the ARM is fast enough it will work for most. I have fewer and fewer uses for Windows and most of it is maintaining some legacy applications with patches for clients.
I’ve used all of those VMs. All of the ones for x86 to PPC we’re almost useless for most software. There is now nostalgia twoards those products, particularly from those who never used them. But we ran software at about 20% speed with those. Never any better than that. Word would usually run ok, as long as you weren’t writing, or editing a l9ng book. But most everything else was so severely compromized that you could only run it if you were desperate.
apple’s own emulation ran better, at about half speed, because the processors we were going to were much more powerful than the ones we were coming from. That’s not going to be true with ARM.
i think Apple can pull this off if they do. But it won’t be easy. It never is. We will lose more developers. We’ve already lost more than a few going to Catalina, and that’s mainly just from going to 64 bits. Though, Apple is showing signs of tightening up developer rules even further, which is a bad thing. Truthfully, the Mac can’t survive if tightened the way iOS is.
X64 has double the general purpose and floating point registers of X86. AArch64/ARM64 has double the GP and FP registers of X64. More registers decreases the need for the CPU to access CPU caches and (to a lesser extent) main memory => big improvement in speed.
X64 has double the general purpose and floating point registers of X86. AArch64/ARM64 has double the GP and FP registers of X64. More registers decreases the need for the CPU to access CPU caches and (to a lesser extent) main memory => big improvement in speed.
A-ple also has a high 2nd level cache. That decreases hits to RAM significantly.
X64 has double the general purpose and floating point registers of X86. AArch64/ARM64 has double the GP and FP registers of X64. More registers decreases the need for the CPU to access CPU caches and (to a lesser extent) main memory => big improvement in speed.
A-ple also has a high 2nd level cache. That decreases hits to RAM significantly.
Anyone else notice Apple’s built-in spellchecking in iOS has completely gone to hell recently? It seems to get worse and worse.
ARM is great for power saving, and in some tasks they exceed the slower Intel CPUs. But there are other tasks they're much slower at, and generally even the best ARM CPU is miles off the mid range Intel ones. I don't really see the point in switching architecture again, people aren't complaining about the battery life on MacBooks, which is really the only advantage x86 in a laptop has.
Moving from x86 not only means switchers to the Mac won't have the "safety net" of running windows, whether natively or in a VM. The vast numbers of utilities for x86 Linux would also become incompatible, people who want to dabble in the occasional game can't reboot to Windows either. We used to dual boot Macs at the school network I ran for various Windows apps. Switching would mean developers would need fat binaries again (apart from MAS distribution) and no doubt it would be another chance for Apple to apply even more OS restrictions. There are a lot of downsides for essentially no upsides. Don't get me wrong - x86 is a crap architecture and if it wasn't for AMD bodging 64-bit support on we'd probably be back to a form of RISC architecture now, like Itanium, but ARM's disadvantages way outweigh the advantages imo.
I really don't see the basis of your claims. Let's address this from both a single core and multi-core perspective. Using Geekbench 5 as the example, the best single core score recorded for an Intel chip is 1415 for the Intel Core i9-10900K chip. By comparison, Apple's A13 in the iPhone 11 Pro scores 1328. The last time I checked, a 6% speed advantage hardly qualifies your "miles off" claim. As for multi-core, surely, Apple would use a chip with a much higher core count for something like a Mac Pro machine. Also, desktop machines are not constrained for heat or power like an iPhone. The fact that they are even that close is downright embarrassing for Intel and should surely signal why Apple would change architecture platforms.
x86 compatibility has been a "safety net" for a few switchers perhaps, but I'm quite sure the vast majority Mac users never use that feature much less care about it. I'm a multi-platform user and I don't care about it. Yes, the Intel architecture is crap with a lot of baggage. While it is technically RISC under the hood, it has to emulate CISC instructions. Intel has really dropped the ball both in terms of architecture and in terms of manufacturing process. They just aren't competitive anymore. While AMD is currently doing a better job, it's not enough to save the architecture in my opinion. It's long past time to cut the cord from that legacy baggage.
X64 has double the general purpose and floating point registers of X86. AArch64/ARM64 has double the GP and FP registers of X64. More registers decreases the need for the CPU to access CPU caches and (to a lesser extent) main memory => big improvement in speed.
A-ple also has a high 2nd level cache. That decreases hits to RAM significantly.
Anyone else notice Apple’s built-in spellchecking in iOS has completely gone to hell recently? It seems to get worse and worse.
I’m getting situations when after I’ve checked everything, and I post, I notice errors that weren’t in the post as I wrote it. That’s really unexpected, so I don’t always check my list after uploading it. That’s why some of my posts have those errors, though I’ll admit I miss one or two occasionally. If I do catch them later, I’ll sometimes correct them then, as long as it’s not too much later.
X64 has double the general purpose and floating point registers of X86. AArch64/ARM64 has double the GP and FP registers of X64. More registers decreases the need for the CPU to access CPU caches and (to a lesser extent) main memory => big improvement in speed.
A-ple also has a high 2nd level cache. That decreases hits to RAM significantly.
Anyone else notice Apple’s built-in spellchecking in iOS has completely gone to hell recently? It seems to get worse and worse.
I’m getting situations when after I’ve checked everything, and I post, I notice errors that weren’t in the post as I wrote it. That’s really unexpected, so I don’t always check my list after uploading it. That’s why some of my posts have those errors, though I’ll admit I miss one or two occasionally. If I do catch them later, I’ll sometimes correct them then, as long as it’s not too much later.
Glad I’m not the only one. My writing is far from perfect but lately I’d be better off writing stuff with pen and paper and mailing it in.
X64 has double the general purpose and floating point registers of X86. AArch64/ARM64 has double the GP and FP registers of X64. More registers decreases the need for the CPU to access CPU caches and (to a lesser extent) main memory => big improvement in speed.
A-ple also has a high 2nd level cache. That decreases hits to RAM significantly.
Anyone else notice Apple’s built-in spellchecking in iOS has completely gone to hell recently? It seems to get worse and worse.
I’m getting situations when after I’ve checked everything, and I post, I notice errors that weren’t in the post as I wrote it. That’s really unexpected, so I don’t always check my list after uploading it. That’s why some of my posts have those errors, though I’ll admit I miss one or two occasionally. If I do catch them later, I’ll sometimes correct them then, as long as it’s not too much later.
Glad I’m not the only one. My writing is far from perfect but lately I’d be better off writing stuff with pen and paper and mailing it in.
Yeah. You can see it in the post above. It changed the word “post” to “list”. This never used to happen. It’s been the past three, or so, ios upgrades. And just now, iOS should be iOS.
If Apple wanted to, they could of redone their AppleTV in to a low cost Mac. I think the USB port is meant to plug in to another computer, vs supporting USB devices off of it. Plenty of power to do the stuff I need. Can already support Bluetooth keyboards.
Apples first Apple TV actually ran an Intel chip and has an internal hard drive, and people have modded them to run full blown Mac OS. So by mistake they’ve already done as you said but with Intel instead it ARM chips.
Yes I know. The problem with that is Apple didn't make the changes, so the effort was limited to those with the technical knowledge to make it work and keep it updated.
I am saying that Apple can make the software changes on the Apple TVs they now sell, to make them in to nearly dirt cheap, ARM based MacXS if they wanted to.
If Apple wanted to, they could of redone their AppleTV in to a low cost Mac. I think the USB port is meant to plug in to another computer, vs supporting USB devices off of it. Plenty of power to do the stuff I need. Can already support Bluetooth keyboards.
Apples first Apple TV actually ran an Intel chip and has an internal hard drive, and people have modded them to run full blown Mac OS. So by mistake they’ve already done as you said but with Intel instead it ARM chips.
Yes I know. The problem with that is Apple didn't make the changes, so the effort was limited to those with the technical knowledge to make it work and keep it updated.
I am saying that Apple can make the software changes on the Apple TVs they now sell, to make them in to nearly dirt cheap, ARM based MacXS if they wanted to.
They could make software changes to the iPhone to make it a super portable MacNano if they wanted to. But why would they?
To me this move just seems to be made to generate more profit. Arm has a place yes, but not in the Pro market. It makes sense in mobile devices but not a desktop. It makes little sense and Apple should instead research AMD’s professors that are just seemingly getting better and better superseding Intels chips in performance.
If I owned a Mac desktop with an ARM processor I wouldn’t be able stop thinking to myself, it’s got the same processor as my phone has...
And then you have the persuasion of developers to make their X86 platform programmes work on ARM, and no running mobile apps doesn’t cut it on a desktop costing 2 grand or more.
I’m not a fan of this idea.
Realistically, this is going to be a win / win for Apple. Here are a couple thoughts for you to consider.
Yes, Apple will be able to produce more cost effective chips than they can buy from Intel. This can manifest itself in several forms: A) Same performance at a cheaper price and using less power. More powerful chips for the same price and same power budget. C) A combination of the A and B.
Increased performance per watt leads to better overall solutions. Less thermal issues. Better battery life. Higher overall performance.
Less work in terms of supporting operating systems and libraries across multiple CPU architectures. Optimize for ARM. Simplify compiler tools, etc.
Instead of worrying about a phone class chip on your desktop, maybe you should think in terms of ... if they can make a desktop class chip for a mobile device, imagine what they could do for a desktop variant with no such thermal constraints!
In terms of developer support, etc. This has all been done before. Catalina is actually the first step in this migration by jettisoning 32 bit apps and libraries. Apple has encouraged developers to use their accelerate framework so there shouldn't really be any code with hand optimized Intel assembly anymore. For most developers, little more than a recompile would be required.
The only negatives are:
No dual booting into Intel based Windows anymore. Honestly, who cares? I'm a dual platform user and I've never used my Macs for that.
Yes, there will be a transition. It will take some time before all code is ARM native, etc. However, transitions have been smooth in the past and are well positioned to be smooth now as well.
If Apple wanted to, they could of redone their AppleTV in to a low cost Mac. I think the USB port is meant to plug in to another computer, vs supporting USB devices off of it. Plenty of power to do the stuff I need. Can already support Bluetooth keyboards.
Apples first Apple TV actually ran an Intel chip and has an internal hard drive, and people have modded them to run full blown Mac OS. So by mistake they’ve already done as you said but with Intel instead it ARM chips.
Yes I know. The problem with that is Apple didn't make the changes, so the effort was limited to those with the technical knowledge to make it work and keep it updated.
I am saying that Apple can make the software changes on the Apple TVs they now sell, to make them in to nearly dirt cheap, ARM based MacXS if they wanted to.
They could make software changes to the iPhone to make it a super portable MacNano if they wanted to. But why would they?
That was a horrible example of yours. Who wants a Mac screen crammed in to an iPhone? You say in one post that the specs are hardly used of the AppleTV and now this? They probably won't do it. As to why as I already touched on, low cost, the hardware design is already done, which you can attach it to the keyboard, monitor, and mouse that you want, or already have. There is already enough power in these Apple TVs to run some laptops. That is enough power for most users. Another reason to do it, is people can't complain there isn't a low cost option for Macs.
If Apple wanted to, they could of redone their AppleTV in to a low cost Mac. I think the USB port is meant to plug in to another computer, vs supporting USB devices off of it. Plenty of power to do the stuff I need. Can already support Bluetooth keyboards.
Apples first Apple TV actually ran an Intel chip and has an internal hard drive, and people have modded them to run full blown Mac OS. So by mistake they’ve already done as you said but with Intel instead it ARM chips.
Yes I know. The problem with that is Apple didn't make the changes, so the effort was limited to those with the technical knowledge to make it work and keep it updated.
I am saying that Apple can make the software changes on the Apple TVs they now sell, to make them in to nearly dirt cheap, ARM based MacXS if they wanted to.
They could make software changes to the iPhone to make it a super portable MacNano if they wanted to. But why would they?
because the hardware is done, cheap, and good enough for a lot of people. Decent sized screen, etc can be used.
X64 has double the general purpose and floating point registers of X86. AArch64/ARM64 has double the GP and FP registers of X64. More registers decreases the need for the CPU to access CPU caches and (to a lesser extent) main memory => big improvement in speed.
A-ple also has a high 2nd level cache. That decreases hits to RAM significantly.
Anyone else notice Apple’s built-in spellchecking in iOS has completely gone to hell recently? It seems to get worse and worse.
I’m getting situations when after I’ve checked everything, and I post, I notice errors that weren’t in the post as I wrote it. That’s really unexpected, so I don’t always check my list after uploading it. That’s why some of my posts have those errors, though I’ll admit I miss one or two occasionally. If I do catch them later, I’ll sometimes correct them then, as long as it’s not too much later.
Glad I’m not the only one. My writing is far from perfect but lately I’d be better off writing stuff with pen and paper and mailing it in.
Yeah. You can see it in the post above. It changed the word “post” to “list”. This never used to happen. It’s been the past three, or so, ios upgrades. And just now, iOS should be iOS.
Comments
There is no data suggesting that professionals are "stampeding out the door" either. I do agree with your assessment that Apple has become almost solely consumer driven, but the lines between the two have been blurring for at least 20 years.
apple’s own emulation ran better, at about half speed, because the processors we were going to were much more powerful than the ones we were coming from. That’s not going to be true with ARM.
i think Apple can pull this off if they do. But it won’t be easy. It never is. We will lose more developers. We’ve already lost more than a few going to Catalina, and that’s mainly just from going to 64 bits. Though, Apple is showing signs of tightening up developer rules even further, which is a bad thing. Truthfully, the Mac can’t survive if tightened the way iOS is.
AArch64/ARM64 has double the GP and FP registers of X64.
More registers decreases the need for the CPU to access CPU caches and (to a lesser extent) main memory => big improvement in speed.
x86 compatibility has been a "safety net" for a few switchers perhaps, but I'm quite sure the vast majority Mac users never use that feature much less care about it. I'm a multi-platform user and I don't care about it. Yes, the Intel architecture is crap with a lot of baggage. While it is technically RISC under the hood, it has to emulate CISC instructions. Intel has really dropped the ball both in terms of architecture and in terms of manufacturing process. They just aren't competitive anymore. While AMD is currently doing a better job, it's not enough to save the architecture in my opinion. It's long past time to cut the cord from that legacy baggage.
I am saying that Apple can make the software changes on the Apple TVs they now sell, to make them in to nearly dirt cheap, ARM based MacXS if they wanted to.
- Yes, Apple will be able to produce more cost effective chips than they can buy from Intel. This can manifest itself in several forms: A) Same performance at a cheaper price and using less power.
More powerful chips for the same price and same power budget. C) A combination of the A and B. - Increased performance per watt leads to better overall solutions. Less thermal issues. Better battery life. Higher overall performance.
- Less work in terms of supporting operating systems and libraries across multiple CPU architectures. Optimize for ARM. Simplify compiler tools, etc.
- Instead of worrying about a phone class chip on your desktop, maybe you should think in terms of ... if they can make a desktop class chip for a mobile device, imagine what they could do for a desktop variant with no such thermal constraints!
- In terms of developer support, etc. This has all been done before. Catalina is actually the first step in this migration by jettisoning 32 bit apps and libraries. Apple has encouraged developers to use their accelerate framework so there shouldn't really be any code with hand optimized Intel assembly anymore. For most developers, little more than a recompile would be required.
The only negatives are:I am a fan of this idea.