In terms of Thunderbolt, I think it's integrated into the Intel processor that they've removed and not in the iPad processor that they've added. I think I've got that right.
The 'real' Apple Silicon Macs are set to have dedicated Apple processors rather than iPad hand-me-downs and I expect that's where it will reappear. They won't want to spend any of the hard won cost/power savings on a separate device. It won't have gone away.
I wouldn't be surprised if they move away from PCIe eventually, since it's a cross-platform technology they don't control and they don't like compatibility things they don't control.
Apple likes to move fast on things. As well as be able to take them in new directions which give them a competitive advantage. If you have to run all your ideas by a standards committee, you lose both of those. I'm personally pretty excited to see what Apple can do now that they'll be free to take things in any direction they can think of.
They do, and it will. But standards allow compatibility, the world is more than just Apple. A competitive advantage can be easily eroded if it results in lesser usability through lack of compatibility or higher costs.
They are taking on a lot of risk with this switch. They are assuming they can always keep ahead of the competition. AMD are steaming along right now even if Intel aren't - and if Apple can't keep up, it will be very embarrassing and even more so if there's an eventual switch from Apple Silicon to AMD (or back to Intel).
I had a good laugh when I read this. I guess if you ignore the past decade of incredible advancements they've made with their SoCs on iPhone/iPad/Watch.
There is no guarantee that previous success is an indicator of continued success. Both Intel and the AIM alliance made pretty good progress in the 2000s on both x86 and PPC. PPC slowed by the early 2000s, and Intel's pretty terrible Prescott microarchitecture overtook but then slowed too by about 2005. The new Core microarchitecture was a jump forward, but that has also run its course now, with no major advancements in the roadmap. Apple has of course made some incredible advancements in their A series CPUs. I'm not trying to diminish their achievements. But that doesn't mean it will continue forever. Moore's law is well and truly broken, and physics applies to everyone.
I realise this is old - but Apple themselves showed the CPU speed increases were slowing when the iPhone 6 was released. They no longer seem to publish these kinds of graphs themselves, but Geekbench scores the iPhone 6 at 308, and the 11 Pro at 1327. that's 4x faster in 6 years, vs 50x faster in 8 years. That's a pretty similar trajectory that Intel has had, just a few years later.
This attitude is very reminiscent of Blackberry circa 2011, and we all know how that worked out
Not really, they were amazed what Apple could do with the optimisation of iPhoneOS on a pretty slow ARM CPU - they thought it was a pre-rendered video. They realised they needed an overhaul, but went totally the wrong direction, misjudging completely that people didn't want a silly physical keyboard.
Planning to get one but one thing concerns me: How long will Apple support this device with future MacOS updates? I would like to use it as a Plex server after I am done using it but if Apple drops OS support after a year, that would suck.
You have to return it when Apple asks you to, presumably after ARM Macs are released.
randominternetperson said: I think the bigger issue is that you have to give the hardware back. You're not buying a new Mac for $500; you're paying $500 to borrow development hardware.
The original Intel DTK, which cost $999, was also a loaner. When Apple requested return of the systems, it offered a "free" Intel iMac in exchange. I suspect most developers were happy with that and we'll see something offered in exchange this time, too.
I wouldn't be surprised if they move away from PCIe eventually, since it's a cross-platform technology they don't control and they don't like compatibility things they don't control.
Apple likes to move fast on things. As well as be able to take them in new directions which give them a competitive advantage. If you have to run all your ideas by a standards committee, you lose both of those. I'm personally pretty excited to see what Apple can do now that they'll be free to take things in any direction they can think of.
They do, and it will. But standards allow compatibility, the world is more than just Apple. A competitive advantage can be easily eroded if it results in lesser usability through lack of compatibility or higher costs.
Right, but this is internal architecture not external/expansion ports. That's where consumers need compatibility. As long as Apple can bridge their internal architecture with standard ports, consumers won't know (or care) about the difference.
They are taking on a lot of risk with this switch. They are assuming they can always keep ahead of the competition. AMD are steaming along right now even if Intel aren't - and if Apple can't keep up, it will be very embarrassing and even more so if there's an eventual switch from Apple Silicon to AMD (or back to Intel).
I had a good laugh when I read this. I guess if you ignore the past decade of incredible advancements they've made with their SoCs on iPhone/iPad/Watch.
There is no guarantee that previous success is an indicator of continued success. Both Intel and the AIM alliance made pretty good progress in the 2000s on both x86 and PPC. PPC slowed by the early 2000s, and Intel's pretty terrible Prescott microarchitecture overtook but then slowed too by about 2005. The new Core microarchitecture was a jump forward, but that has also run its course now, with no major advancements in the roadmap. Apple has of course made some incredible advancements in their A series CPUs. I'm not trying to diminish their achievements. But that doesn't mean it will continue forever. Moore's law is well and truly broken, and physics applies to everyone.
Apple has shown many times over that they're willing to abandon architectures quickly in the name of progress. Unlike many tech companies who cling desperately to what they know rather than risking to abandon it and venture into the unknown. A progressive rather than conservative mindset, which will serve them well as long as they can continue to recruit the talent to support it. I don't see any signs of that changing anytime soon.
This attitude is very reminiscent of Blackberry circa 2011, and we all know how that worked out
Not really, they were amazed what Apple could do with the optimisation of iPhoneOS on a pretty slow ARM CPU - they thought it was a pre-rendered video. They realised they needed an overhaul, but went totally the wrong direction, misjudging completely that people didn't want a silly physical keyboard.
I was talking about the hubris. Right from the release of the iPhone in 2007, Blackberry (and Microsoft) didn't think Apple was a serious competitor and tried hard to sow seeds of doubt. This feels like the same thing.
You see, it’s the lack of thunderbolt that’s worries me. I know some will say that it’s “just” a developer machine. But that doesn’t explain it. Thunderbolt is part of the PCIe bus. But it’s also an Intel product. It’s the same problem we have with the iPad Pro not having it. I’m sure that I’m not the only iPad Pro user that badly wants this.
if Apple can’t get thunderbolt on ARM Macs, that will be a big problem.
There is no logic for Apple not getting Thunderbolt on public ARM MACs. Likely it will be the USB4 variant, due to thunderbolt being part of the USB4 spec and cheaper for everyone to use.
There are TB controllers that only work with x86. Intel is also going to put it directly into their x86 chips, so no controller needed. But that doesn’t help ARM in the slightest. USB 4 doesn’t resolve the issue.
So you are saying, despite all the experience of Apple designing chips, that they will be unable or unwilling to put Thunderbolt in the ARM computers? Despite all the years of pushing Thunderbolt, and all these massive storage arrays using Thunderbolt? Despite being part of the USB4? Yes I know USB4 doesn't mean Thunderbolt is a given, however Apple will only give up Thunderbolt if there is something better. I'm not saying it will be on all ARM MACs, but I will bet it will be on some ARM MACs. The FUD with Apple not having Thunderbolt on ARM MACs is silly and ridiculous. Give Apple some time to showcase their stuff before complaining.
I wouldn't be surprised if they move away from PCIe eventually, since it's a cross-platform technology they don't control and they don't like compatibility things they don't control.
Apple likes to move fast on things. As well as be able to take them in new directions which give them a competitive advantage. If you have to run all your ideas by a standards committee, you lose both of those. I'm personally pretty excited to see what Apple can do now that they'll be free to take things in any direction they can think of.
They do, and it will. But standards allow compatibility, the world is more than just Apple. A competitive advantage can be easily eroded if it results in lesser usability through lack of compatibility or higher costs.
Right, but this is internal architecture not external/expansion ports. That's where consumers need compatibility. As long as Apple can bridge their internal architecture with standard ports, consumers won't know (or care) about the difference.
They are taking on a lot of risk with this switch. They are assuming they can always keep ahead of the competition. AMD are steaming along right now even if Intel aren't - and if Apple can't keep up, it will be very embarrassing and even more so if there's an eventual switch from Apple Silicon to AMD (or back to Intel).
I had a good laugh when I read this. I guess if you ignore the past decade of incredible advancements they've made with their SoCs on iPhone/iPad/Watch.
There is no guarantee that previous success is an indicator of continued success. Both Intel and the AIM alliance made pretty good progress in the 2000s on both x86 and PPC. PPC slowed by the early 2000s, and Intel's pretty terrible Prescott microarchitecture overtook but then slowed too by about 2005. The new Core microarchitecture was a jump forward, but that has also run its course now, with no major advancements in the roadmap. Apple has of course made some incredible advancements in their A series CPUs. I'm not trying to diminish their achievements. But that doesn't mean it will continue forever. Moore's law is well and truly broken, and physics applies to everyone.
Apple has shown many times over that they're willing to abandon architectures quickly in the name of progress. Unlike many tech companies who cling desperately to what they know rather than risking to abandon it and venture into the unknown. A progressive rather than conservative mindset, which will serve them well as long as they can continue to recruit the talent to support it. I don't see any signs of that changing anytime soon.
In the context of Thunderbolt, internal architecture does make a difference, since TB is essentially just an extension of PCIe. Apple could of course translate their own interconnect with PCIe, but for now - that's likely a long way off.
They have, and the externally-facing changes have often been met with a fair bit of resistance, partly by the way they go about it. USB A -> USB C for example. I'd much rather a forward thinking Apple, but one that abandons tech that people have a lot invested in never goes down well; especially as it's often arbitrary and the abandonment not entirely necessary. The potential new sales Apple makes due to incompatibilities (i.e. dongles, headphones etc) no doubt play into their decision. They are in the business of making profit after all.
You see, it’s the lack of thunderbolt that’s worries me. I know some will say that it’s “just” a developer machine. But that doesn’t explain it. Thunderbolt is part of the PCIe bus. But it’s also an Intel product. It’s the same problem we have with the iPad Pro not having it. I’m sure that I’m not the only iPad Pro user that badly wants this.
if Apple can’t get thunderbolt on ARM Macs, that will be a big problem.
There is no logic for Apple not getting Thunderbolt on public ARM MACs. Likely it will be the USB4 variant, due to thunderbolt being part of the USB4 spec and cheaper for everyone to use.
There are TB controllers that only work with x86. Intel is also going to put it directly into their x86 chips, so no controller needed. But that doesn’t help ARM in the slightest. USB 4 doesn’t resolve the issue.
So you are saying, despite all the experience of Apple designing chips, that they will be unable or unwilling to put Thunderbolt in the ARM computers? Despite all the years of pushing Thunderbolt, and all these massive storage arrays using Thunderbolt? Despite being part of the USB4? Yes I know USB4 doesn't mean Thunderbolt is a given, however Apple will only give up Thunderbolt if there is something better. I'm not saying it will be on all ARM MACs, but I will bet it will be on some ARM MACs. The FUD with Apple not having Thunderbolt on ARM MACs is silly and ridiculous. Give Apple some time to showcase their stuff before complaining.
You're saying this like Apple hasn't done similar in the past, remember just put two middle fingers up to people who just bought the $5000 MP expecting it to last 10 years.
You see, it’s the lack of thunderbolt that’s worries me. I know some will say that it’s “just” a developer machine. But that doesn’t explain it. Thunderbolt is part of the PCIe bus. But it’s also an Intel product. It’s the same problem we have with the iPad Pro not having it. I’m sure that I’m not the only iPad Pro user that badly wants this.
if Apple can’t get thunderbolt on ARM Macs, that will be a big problem.
There is no logic for Apple not getting Thunderbolt on public ARM MACs. Likely it will be the USB4 variant, due to thunderbolt being part of the USB4 spec and cheaper for everyone to use.
There are TB controllers that only work with x86. Intel is also going to put it directly into their x86 chips, so no controller needed. But that doesn’t help ARM in the slightest. USB 4 doesn’t resolve the issue.
So you are saying, despite all the experience of Apple designing chips, that they will be unable or unwilling to put Thunderbolt in the ARM computers? Despite all the years of pushing Thunderbolt, and all these massive storage arrays using Thunderbolt? Despite being part of the USB4? Yes I know USB4 doesn't mean Thunderbolt is a given, however Apple will only give up Thunderbolt if there is something better. I'm not saying it will be on all ARM MACs, but I will bet it will be on some ARM MACs. The FUD with Apple not having Thunderbolt on ARM MACs is silly and ridiculous. Give Apple some time to showcase their stuff before complaining.
You're saying this like Apple hasn't done similar in the past, remember just put two middle fingers up to people who just bought the $5000 MP expecting it to last 10 years.
The Mac Pros will last ten years. It is unlikely to get os updates for ten years but the hardware will more than likely last I have a 2009 iMac i now run Linux on. Those Mac Pros will continue to generate revenue for the professionals for many years to come. I think most of the people buying the Mac Pros didn’t buy them with the intent to keep them for ten years. Did you want Apple to delay the Mac Pro for another one or two years?
In terms of Thunderbolt, I think it's integrated into the Intel processor that they've removed and not in the iPad processor that they've added. I think I've got that right.
The 'real' Apple Silicon Macs are set to have dedicated Apple processors rather than iPad hand-me-downs and I expect that's where it will reappear. They won't want to spend any of the hard won cost/power savings on a separate device. It won't have gone away.
if Apple can’t get thunderbolt on ARM Macs, that will be a big problem.
TB3 is working great on an AMD + Ubuntu 20.04 system and I suspect there will be no real problem bringing TB4 to ARM Macs.
Only under USB4. Before that no and systems had TB of any generation. Intel didn’t license and to use it. With USB4, they gave the license to the USB organization to use, though it’s still Intel’s. A manufacturer can choose to implement TB under USB4, or not. If it’s using AMD then they need a controller chip.
You see, it’s the lack of thunderbolt that’s worries me. I know some will say that it’s “just” a developer machine. But that doesn’t explain it. Thunderbolt is part of the PCIe bus. But it’s also an Intel product. It’s the same problem we have with the iPad Pro not having it. I’m sure that I’m not the only iPad Pro user that badly wants this.
if Apple can’t get thunderbolt on ARM Macs, that will be a big problem.
There is no logic for Apple not getting Thunderbolt on public ARM MACs. Likely it will be the USB4 variant, due to thunderbolt being part of the USB4 spec and cheaper for everyone to use.
There are TB controllers that only work with x86. Intel is also going to put it directly into their x86 chips, so no controller needed. But that doesn’t help ARM in the slightest. USB 4 doesn’t resolve the issue.
So you are saying, despite all the experience of Apple designing chips, that they will be unable or unwilling to put Thunderbolt in the ARM computers? Despite all the years of pushing Thunderbolt, and all these massive storage arrays using Thunderbolt? Despite being part of the USB4? Yes I know USB4 doesn't mean Thunderbolt is a given, however Apple will only give up Thunderbolt if there is something better. I'm not saying it will be on all ARM MACs, but I will bet it will be on some ARM MACs. The FUD with Apple not having Thunderbolt on ARM MACs is silly and ridiculous. Give Apple some time to showcase their stuff before complaining.
This has to do with licensing. So, without USB4, Apple would have to buy controller chips from Intel. With USB4, if it’s possible, and Apple really wants to bother, then yes, they would have to engineer it into their ARM chips. But remember that it’s really an x86 PCIE technology right now. It’s not explicitly forbidden under USB4, it’s allowed. But it would take a lot of work. It took Intel themselves years to engineer it into their own CPU. Remember that Intel doesn’t have to help. Normally, it’s expected that systems will have a PCIE bus, and an Intel chip with controller chips. Or now, a gen 10 Intel chip. Or, with USB4, an AMD chip with controller.
The general information given out says that manufacturers of phones, or other devices, meaning ARM, could, if they wanted to, design it in, but it’s considered not likely. With Apple, it’s not really their phones or iPads, but Macs. I just recently bought a 32TB raid. I would be annoyed if I bought a new ARM Mac and couldn’t use it.
You see, it’s the lack of thunderbolt that’s worries me. I know some will say that it’s “just” a developer machine. But that doesn’t explain it. Thunderbolt is part of the PCIe bus. But it’s also an Intel product. It’s the same problem we have with the iPad Pro not having it. I’m sure that I’m not the only iPad Pro user that badly wants this.
if Apple can’t get thunderbolt on ARM Macs, that will be a big problem.
There is no logic for Apple not getting Thunderbolt on public ARM MACs. Likely it will be the USB4 variant, due to thunderbolt being part of the USB4 spec and cheaper for everyone to use.
There are TB controllers that only work with x86. Intel is also going to put it directly into their x86 chips, so no controller needed. But that doesn’t help ARM in the slightest. USB 4 doesn’t resolve the issue.
So you are saying, despite all the experience of Apple designing chips, that they will be unable or unwilling to put Thunderbolt in the ARM computers? Despite all the years of pushing Thunderbolt, and all these massive storage arrays using Thunderbolt? Despite being part of the USB4? Yes I know USB4 doesn't mean Thunderbolt is a given, however Apple will only give up Thunderbolt if there is something better. I'm not saying it will be on all ARM MACs, but I will bet it will be on some ARM MACs. The FUD with Apple not having Thunderbolt on ARM MACs is silly and ridiculous. Give Apple some time to showcase their stuff before complaining.
This has to do with licensing. So, without USB4, Apple would have to buy controller chips from Intel. With USB4, if it’s possible, and Apple really wants to bother, then yes, they would have to engineer it into their ARM chips. But remember that it’s really an x86 PCIE technology right now. It’s not explicitly forbidden under USB4, it’s allowed. But it would take a lot of work. It took Intel themselves years to engineer it into their own CPU. Remember that Intel doesn’t have to help. Normally, it’s expected that systems will have a PCIE bus, and an Intel chip with controller chips. Or now, a gen 10 Intel chip. Or, with USB4, an AMD chip with controller.
The general information given out says that manufacturers of phones, or other devices, meaning ARM, could, if they wanted to, design it in, but it’s considered not likely. With Apple, it’s not really their phones or iPads, but Macs. I just recently bought a 32TB raid. I would be annoyed if I bought a new ARM Mac and couldn’t use it.
This entire thread, you have been worried and saying it isn’t likely that ARM MACs are going to have Thunderbolt. The point is it is possible for ARM MACs to have Thunderbolt. Period. Apple isn’t going to have Thunderbolt in this ARM MAC simply because they are not ready to reveal new hardware at this point. They don’t want us to know the shipping chips. Apple knows these machines are going to be tested. Apple has been working on this for years now and it is entirely possible for Apple to have Thunderbolt on the shipping ARM MACs. Apple thinks they can replace their entire MAC line and yet you are worried that they will not have Thunderbolt on the ARM MACs? Really? You really think they won’t have Thunderbolt on at least the iMac PROs and Mac Pros? You haven’t pointed out anywhere that Apple can’t have Thunderbolt on the ARM MACs.
... TB is still an x86 implementation. Will Intel bring it to ARM? Maybe, maybe not.
How so? Intel manufactures quite a lot of Thunderbolt controller chips that are not integrated with any CPU (x86 or otherwise). They only need PCI Express lanes to connect to.
Intel's integration of TB3 with CPUs is a new thing. It is not the only viable implementation. Apple dosn't need to put Thunderbolt on their SoC. If they provide PCIe lanes, they can use off-the-shelf Thunderbolt interface chips to them.
In terms of Thunderbolt, I think it's integrated into the Intel processor that they've removed and not in the iPad processor that they've added. I think I've got that right.
They're integrated into Intel's latest and greatest processors. All prior processors use external interface chips, which only require PCI Express lanes to connect to the CPU.
In the context of Thunderbolt, internal architecture does make a difference, since TB is essentially just an extension of PCIe. Apple could of course translate their own interconnect with PCIe, but for now - that's likely a long way off.
Why do you assume it's "a long way off"?
Apple has already shipped non-Intel computers with PCIe slots (the last-generation PowerMac G5), which proves that it can be done. Why is it unreasonable to assume that Apple's silicon will also have support for PCIe? And once you have PCIe, you can buy Intel Thunderbolt interface chips to attach to PCIe lanes, just like Apple has been doing for years.
We don't know what features will be in the shipping product, but I don't think it's right to assume that they will match what's shipping on those developer kit computers.
You see, it’s the lack of thunderbolt that’s worries me. I know some will say that it’s “just” a developer machine. But that doesn’t explain it. Thunderbolt is part of the PCIe bus. But it’s also an Intel product. It’s the same problem we have with the iPad Pro not having it. I’m sure that I’m not the only iPad Pro user that badly wants this.
if Apple can’t get thunderbolt on ARM Macs, that will be a big problem.
There is no logic for Apple not getting Thunderbolt on public ARM MACs. Likely it will be the USB4 variant, due to thunderbolt being part of the USB4 spec and cheaper for everyone to use.
There are TB controllers that only work with x86. Intel is also going to put it directly into their x86 chips, so no controller needed. But that doesn’t help ARM in the slightest. USB 4 doesn’t resolve the issue.
So you are saying, despite all the experience of Apple designing chips, that they will be unable or unwilling to put Thunderbolt in the ARM computers? Despite all the years of pushing Thunderbolt, and all these massive storage arrays using Thunderbolt? Despite being part of the USB4? Yes I know USB4 doesn't mean Thunderbolt is a given, however Apple will only give up Thunderbolt if there is something better. I'm not saying it will be on all ARM MACs, but I will bet it will be on some ARM MACs. The FUD with Apple not having Thunderbolt on ARM MACs is silly and ridiculous. Give Apple some time to showcase their stuff before complaining.
This has to do with licensing. So, without USB4, Apple would have to buy controller chips from Intel. With USB4, if it’s possible, and Apple really wants to bother, then yes, they would have to engineer it into their ARM chips. But remember that it’s really an x86 PCIE technology right now. It’s not explicitly forbidden under USB4, it’s allowed. But it would take a lot of work. It took Intel themselves years to engineer it into their own CPU. Remember that Intel doesn’t have to help. Normally, it’s expected that systems will have a PCIE bus, and an Intel chip with controller chips. Or now, a gen 10 Intel chip. Or, with USB4, an AMD chip with controller.
The general information given out says that manufacturers of phones, or other devices, meaning ARM, could, if they wanted to, design it in, but it’s considered not likely. With Apple, it’s not really their phones or iPads, but Macs. I just recently bought a 32TB raid. I would be annoyed if I bought a new ARM Mac and couldn’t use it.
This entire thread, you have been worried and saying it isn’t likely that ARM MACs are going to have Thunderbolt. The point is it is possible for ARM MACs to have Thunderbolt. Period. Apple isn’t going to have Thunderbolt in this ARM MAC simply because they are not ready to reveal new hardware at this point. They don’t want us to know the shipping chips. Apple knows these machines are going to be tested. Apple has been working on this for years now and it is entirely possible for Apple to have Thunderbolt on the shipping ARM MACs. Apple thinks they can replace their entire MAC line and yet you are worried that they will not have Thunderbolt on the ARM MACs? Really? You really think they won’t have Thunderbolt on at least the iMac PROs and Mac Pros? You haven’t pointed out anywhere that Apple can’t have Thunderbolt on the ARM MACs.
I didn’t say anywhere that it’s unlikely that ARM Macs will get TB. I’m saying to those who are incorrectly saying that TB comes with USB4 automatically, that it doesn’t. It’s optional. It’s also basically an x86 based technology. Can it be converted over to ARM? Sure, but for a good amount of R&D and cost. The truth is you don’t know any more about what Apple is planning than anyone else here. I don’t know. I hope they will have it. But how? It’s not a trivial question, and until we see it, we can’t assume it will be there. Apparently, USB4 can be just as fast. It has the same 40Gb/s speed available. It’s not like Apple hasn’t dropped a technology they heavily supported before. Remember FireWire, that they developed? It was on every digital video camera. But Apple lost interest. We never got the 1.6GHz version, much less the 3.2GHz version Apple had talked about. If USB4 is cheaper, which likely it is, and easier to implement, very possible, and if it, unlike TB, will be supported on every new computer, then they could to just drop TB.
how many other transport technologies have they dropped when they thought something better came along? It’s foolish to think they won’t do it again if it suits them. I’m hoping, for selfish reasons, after having spent over $1,700 for a new TB raid and upgraded software, that they will keep supporting it. But I’m under no illusion that it’s a definite thing, though I hope it is.
... TB is still an x86 implementation. Will Intel bring it to ARM? Maybe, maybe not.
How so? Intel manufactures quite a lot of Thunderbolt controller chips that are not integrated with any CPU (x86 or otherwise). They only need PCI Express lanes to connect to.
Intel's integration of TB3 with CPUs is a new thing. It is not the only viable implementation. Apple dosn't need to put Thunderbolt on their SoC. If they provide PCIe lanes, they can use off-the-shelf Thunderbolt interface chips to them.
Apple has already shipped non-Intel computers with PCIe slots (the last-generation PowerMac G5), which proves that it can be done. Why is it unreasonable to assume that Apple's silicon will also have support for PCIe? And once you have PCIe, you can buy Intel Thunderbolt interface chips to attach to PCIe lanes, just like Apple has been doing for years.
We don't know what features will be in the shipping product, but I don't think it's right to assume that they will match what's shipping on those developer kit computers.
Because we have to ask ourselves what Apple is thinking now. As I pointed out in my last post, USB4 has the same speeds as TB. Apple could decide to take that up without TB, which is optional. Apple has dropped what some thought as established technologies numerous times before. If it takes more work, more expense and the alternate is just about as good, for less work and expense, Apple could very possibly decide that’s the way to go. It’s interesting that the USB group made TB optional in USB4, rather than required. Expense is a major reason.
apple could figure that with the very likely situation of every new pc having USB4, but few having TB, with about equal performance, there will be far more USB4 peripherals, at lower prices than there will ever be TB 3 models, particularly with Intel’s promise of 100Gb/s in ten years fading into the distance.
Comments
The 'real' Apple Silicon Macs are set to have dedicated Apple processors rather than iPad hand-me-downs and I expect that's where it will reappear. They won't want to spend any of the hard won cost/power savings on a separate device. It won't have gone away.
There is no guarantee that previous success is an indicator of continued success. Both Intel and the AIM alliance made pretty good progress in the 2000s on both x86 and PPC. PPC slowed by the early 2000s, and Intel's pretty terrible Prescott microarchitecture overtook but then slowed too by about 2005. The new Core microarchitecture was a jump forward, but that has also run its course now, with no major advancements in the roadmap. Apple has of course made some incredible advancements in their A series CPUs. I'm not trying to diminish their achievements. But that doesn't mean it will continue forever. Moore's law is well and truly broken, and physics applies to everyone.
I realise this is old - but Apple themselves showed the CPU speed increases were slowing when the iPhone 6 was released. They no longer seem to publish these kinds of graphs themselves, but Geekbench scores the iPhone 6 at 308, and the 11 Pro at 1327. that's 4x faster in 6 years, vs 50x faster in 8 years. That's a pretty similar trajectory that Intel has had, just a few years later.
Not really, they were amazed what Apple could do with the optimisation of iPhoneOS on a pretty slow ARM CPU - they thought it was a pre-rendered video. They realised they needed an overhaul, but went totally the wrong direction, misjudging completely that people didn't want a silly physical keyboard.
Apple has shown many times over that they're willing to abandon architectures quickly in the name of progress. Unlike many tech companies who cling desperately to what they know rather than risking to abandon it and venture into the unknown. A progressive rather than conservative mindset, which will serve them well as long as they can continue to recruit the talent to support it. I don't see any signs of that changing anytime soon.
They have, and the externally-facing changes have often been met with a fair bit of resistance, partly by the way they go about it. USB A -> USB C for example. I'd much rather a forward thinking Apple, but one that abandons tech that people have a lot invested in never goes down well; especially as it's often arbitrary and the abandonment not entirely necessary. The potential new sales Apple makes due to incompatibilities (i.e. dongles, headphones etc) no doubt play into their decision. They are in the business of making profit after all.
You're saying this like Apple hasn't done similar in the past, remember just put two middle fingers up to people who just bought the $5000 MP expecting it to last 10 years.
Only under USB4. Before that no and systems had TB of any generation. Intel didn’t license and to use it. With USB4, they gave the license to the USB organization to use, though it’s still Intel’s. A manufacturer can choose to implement TB under USB4, or not. If it’s using AMD then they need a controller chip.
This has to do with licensing. So, without USB4, Apple would have to buy controller chips from Intel. With USB4, if it’s possible, and Apple really wants to bother, then yes, they would have to engineer it into their ARM chips. But remember that it’s really an x86 PCIE technology right now. It’s not explicitly forbidden under USB4, it’s allowed. But it would take a lot of work. It took Intel themselves years to engineer it into their own CPU. Remember that Intel doesn’t have to help. Normally, it’s expected that systems will have a PCIE bus, and an Intel chip with controller chips. Or now, a gen 10 Intel chip. Or, with USB4, an AMD chip with controller.
how many other transport technologies have they dropped when they thought something better came along? It’s foolish to think they won’t do it again if it suits them. I’m hoping, for selfish reasons, after having spent over $1,700 for a new TB raid and upgraded software, that they will keep supporting it. But I’m under no illusion that it’s a definite thing, though I hope it is.
Because we have to ask ourselves what Apple is thinking now. As I pointed out in my last post, USB4 has the same speeds as TB. Apple could decide to take that up without TB, which is optional. Apple has dropped what some thought as established technologies numerous times before. If it takes more work, more expense and the alternate is just about as good, for less work and expense, Apple could very possibly decide that’s the way to go. It’s interesting that the USB group made TB optional in USB4, rather than required. Expense is a major reason.
apple could figure that with the very likely situation of every new pc having USB4, but few having TB, with about equal performance, there will be far more USB4 peripherals, at lower prices than there will ever be TB 3 models, particularly with Intel’s promise of 100Gb/s in ten years fading into the distance.