I doubt that Apple will give up that relationship with TSMC, who have done everything that Apple has requested, year over year, to deliver a class dominating processor, and in extremely high volumes. For the near term, Intel may find more opportunity on the SOC rather than on the A series die.
Still, there is that transitional area between the iPad Pro and the Mac Book that would be an ideal area for Apple and Intel to create an ARM desktop class processor, at 3x to 5x TDP of the A series, with or without x64.
Not certain Apple has much of a choice. Intel wants Apple’s business exclusively and Otellini himself regretted turning Jobs down for the opportunity to build the original iPhone SOC.
Intel offers Apple something no other company outside of Qualcomm can. A chance to integrate a state of the art modem into the SOC. Qualcomm of course won’t allow Apple to do so, but Intel is willing. However, the cost will consist of getting Apple’s business in fabricating the entire SOC.
Intel isn’t exactly a slouch in fabrication technology. Though TSMC, Samsung and even Global Foundries have essentially caught up, Intel hasn’t exactly fallen behind. Apple has little to lose and much more to gain in switching to Intel from TSMC. Doing so will bring additional advantages that Qualcomm will have difficulty competing with. An Apple/Intel modem partnership will be awfully difficult to compete against over the long term even for a company such as Qualcomm.
Qualcomm already has plans on moving back to TSMC from Samsung anyway so the loss of Apple shouldn’t sting TSMC too badly. Besides TSMC will build CPUs for anyone while Intel offers far more exclusivity for Apple. I just don’t see TSMC as a long term Apple partner. They only got Apple’s business in the first place because of the row with Samsung.
By the way a laptop class A series processor with 3x the TDP of the current designs built in conjunction with Intel would utterly dominate in performance. Add x64 capability and even Microsoft’s surface line of machines would be toast. I would love to see such a development but it’s unlikely. Apple seems focused on keeping the TDP of their current designs unchanged but continually wringing out additional performance. If the upcoming A11X performs at core i7 levels, there’s little reason to devote additional resources to building another class of CPU. Apple has billions in the bank. They could easily do it. It just seems that it would be more of a distraction than anything else. Apple’s main focus is the iPhone and its CPU. The watch is starting to share the limelight and the tablets are tagging along. While Apple remains dedicated to their legacy laptop and desktop platforms, the level of focus and effort is just not the same. Hence an A series CPU for a dedicated laptop line seems far fetched.
The A11x isn’t going to perform at i7 core levels. Get over that idea quickly. Let’s not overdo things. The A11x will give performance at levels of the i5 ultra low power chips that are used in mobile, in a number of areas. Don’t even think about desktop chips with their far higher power consumption.
I doubt that Apple will give up that relationship with TSMC, who have done everything that Apple has requested, year over year, to deliver a class dominating processor, and in extremely high volumes. For the near term, Intel may find more opportunity on the SOC rather than on the A series die.
Still, there is that transitional area between the iPad Pro and the Mac Book that would be an ideal area for Apple and Intel to create an ARM desktop class processor, at 3x to 5x TDP of the A series, with or without x64.
Not certain Apple has much of a choice. Intel wants Apple’s business exclusively and Otellini himself regretted turning Jobs down for the opportunity to build the original iPhone SOC.
Intel offers Apple something no other company outside of Qualcomm can. A chance to integrate a state of the art modem into the SOC. Qualcomm of course won’t allow Apple to do so, but Intel is willing. However, the cost will consist of getting Apple’s business in fabricating the entire SOC.
Intel isn’t exactly a slouch in fabrication technology. Though TSMC, Samsung and even Global Foundries have essentially caught up, Intel hasn’t exactly fallen behind. Apple has little to lose and much more to gain in switching to Intel from TSMC. Doing so will bring additional advantages that Qualcomm will have difficulty competing with. An Apple/Intel modem partnership will be awfully difficult to compete against over the long term even for a company such as Qualcomm.
Qualcomm already has plans on moving back to TSMC from Samsung anyway so the loss of Apple shouldn’t sting TSMC too badly. Besides TSMC will build CPUs for anyone while Intel offers far more exclusivity for Apple. I just don’t see TSMC as a long term Apple partner. They only got Apple’s business in the first place because of the row with Samsung.
By the way a laptop class A series processor with 3x the TDP of the current designs built in conjunction with Intel would utterly dominate in performance. Add x64 capability and even Microsoft’s surface line of machines would be toast. I would love to see such a development but it’s unlikely. Apple seems focused on keeping the TDP of their current designs unchanged but continually wringing out additional performance. If the upcoming A11X performs at core i7 levels, there’s little reason to devote additional resources to building another class of CPU. Apple has billions in the bank. They could easily do it. It just seems that it would be more of a distraction than anything else. Apple’s main focus is the iPhone and its CPU. The watch is starting to share the limelight and the tablets are tagging along. While Apple remains dedicated to their legacy laptop and desktop platforms, the level of focus and effort is just not the same. Hence an A series CPU for a dedicated laptop line seems far fetched.
I was with you -- till the last line... As you point out, soon an A series will compete not with the bread and butter I5 but with the star of the line -- the I7.
So why would Apple restrict itself to x86 based processors in its so called "computer" line? It seems most people who take that line (both for hardware and for software) do so based on the logic that "it's always been this way". But, the truth is: it hasn't always been that way. Not at all.... In fact, Apple has changed base processor technology in their "computers" three times.
While I think it will be awhile before Apple's A series can really take over for the high end x86 line (mostly because the high end will keep moving higher), the A series is clearly positioned to take over for the lower and mid level lines that most people use...
I doubt that Apple will give up that relationship with TSMC, who have done everything that Apple has requested, year over year, to deliver a class dominating processor, and in extremely high volumes. For the near term, Intel may find more opportunity on the SOC rather than on the A series die.
Still, there is that transitional area between the iPad Pro and the Mac Book that would be an ideal area for Apple and Intel to create an ARM desktop class processor, at 3x to 5x TDP of the A series, with or without x64.
Not certain Apple has much of a choice. Intel wants Apple’s business exclusively and Otellini himself regretted turning Jobs down for the opportunity to build the original iPhone SOC.
Intel offers Apple something no other company outside of Qualcomm can. A chance to integrate a state of the art modem into the SOC. Qualcomm of course won’t allow Apple to do so, but Intel is willing. However, the cost will consist of getting Apple’s business in fabricating the entire SOC.
Intel isn’t exactly a slouch in fabrication technology. Though TSMC, Samsung and even Global Foundries have essentially caught up, Intel hasn’t exactly fallen behind. Apple has little to lose and much more to gain in switching to Intel from TSMC. Doing so will bring additional advantages that Qualcomm will have difficulty competing with. An Apple/Intel modem partnership will be awfully difficult to compete against over the long term even for a company such as Qualcomm.
Qualcomm already has plans on moving back to TSMC from Samsung anyway so the loss of Apple shouldn’t sting TSMC too badly. Besides TSMC will build CPUs for anyone while Intel offers far more exclusivity for Apple. I just don’t see TSMC as a long term Apple partner. They only got Apple’s business in the first place because of the row with Samsung.
By the way a laptop class A series processor with 3x the TDP of the current designs built in conjunction with Intel would utterly dominate in performance. Add x64 capability and even Microsoft’s surface line of machines would be toast. I would love to see such a development but it’s unlikely. Apple seems focused on keeping the TDP of their current designs unchanged but continually wringing out additional performance. If the upcoming A11X performs at core i7 levels, there’s little reason to devote additional resources to building another class of CPU. Apple has billions in the bank. They could easily do it. It just seems that it would be more of a distraction than anything else. Apple’s main focus is the iPhone and its CPU. The watch is starting to share the limelight and the tablets are tagging along. While Apple remains dedicated to their legacy laptop and desktop platforms, the level of focus and effort is just not the same. Hence an A series CPU for a dedicated laptop line seems far fetched.
The A11x isn’t going to perform at i7 core levels. Get over that idea quickly. Let’s not overdo things. The A11x will give performance at levels of the i5 ultra low power chips that are used in mobile, in a number of areas. Don’t even think about desktop chips with their far higher power consumption.
I doubt that Apple will give up that relationship with TSMC, who have done everything that Apple has requested, year over year, to deliver a class dominating processor, and in extremely high volumes. For the near term, Intel may find more opportunity on the SOC rather than on the A series die.
Still, there is that transitional area between the iPad Pro and the Mac Book that would be an ideal area for Apple and Intel to create an ARM desktop class processor, at 3x to 5x TDP of the A series, with or without x64.
Not certain Apple has much of a choice. Intel wants Apple’s business exclusively and Otellini himself regretted turning Jobs down for the opportunity to build the original iPhone SOC.
Intel offers Apple something no other company outside of Qualcomm can. A chance to integrate a state of the art modem into the SOC. Qualcomm of course won’t allow Apple to do so, but Intel is willing. However, the cost will consist of getting Apple’s business in fabricating the entire SOC.
Intel isn’t exactly a slouch in fabrication technology. Though TSMC, Samsung and even Global Foundries have essentially caught up, Intel hasn’t exactly fallen behind. Apple has little to lose and much more to gain in switching to Intel from TSMC. Doing so will bring additional advantages that Qualcomm will have difficulty competing with. An Apple/Intel modem partnership will be awfully difficult to compete against over the long term even for a company such as Qualcomm.
Qualcomm already has plans on moving back to TSMC from Samsung anyway so the loss of Apple shouldn’t sting TSMC too badly. Besides TSMC will build CPUs for anyone while Intel offers far more exclusivity for Apple. I just don’t see TSMC as a long term Apple partner. They only got Apple’s business in the first place because of the row with Samsung.
By the way a laptop class A series processor with 3x the TDP of the current designs built in conjunction with Intel would utterly dominate in performance. Add x64 capability and even Microsoft’s surface line of machines would be toast. I would love to see such a development but it’s unlikely. Apple seems focused on keeping the TDP of their current designs unchanged but continually wringing out additional performance. If the upcoming A11X performs at core i7 levels, there’s little reason to devote additional resources to building another class of CPU. Apple has billions in the bank. They could easily do it. It just seems that it would be more of a distraction than anything else. Apple’s main focus is the iPhone and its CPU. The watch is starting to share the limelight and the tablets are tagging along. While Apple remains dedicated to their legacy laptop and desktop platforms, the level of focus and effort is just not the same. Hence an A series CPU for a dedicated laptop line seems far fetched.
I was with you -- till the last line... As you point out, soon an A series will compete not with the bread and butter I5 but with the star of the line -- the I7.
So why would Apple restrict itself to x86 based processors in its so called "computer" line? It seems most people who take that line (both for hardware and for software) do so based on the logic that "it's always been this way". But, the truth is: it hasn't always been that way. Not at all.... In fact, Apple has changed base processor technology in their "computers" three times.
While I think it will be awhile before Apple's A series can really take over for the high end x86 line (mostly because the high end will keep moving higher), the A series is clearly positioned to take over for the lower and mid level lines that most people use...
No, it isn’t. Seriously folks, you’re getting way too far ahead with this idea. The A series isn’t ready to take over any x86, including the M series in the Macbook. Even though that’s a 5-6 watt chip, similarly to what the A11x will be. Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series.
doesn’t anyone here remember x86 emulation on Macs? They ran at about 20% of the speed. That’s because a chip doing the emulation needs to be about 5 times faster than the chip being emulated. Once you have software duplicate hardware instructions, everything bogs down. There’s no software way around that.
if your’re going to say that Apple will run macOS natively, and their apps will also run natively, well, the OS sure, but the apps from Apple will be there natively, in some cases, the rest will take time, as always. Will large third party developers be overjoyed at this? No, they won’t. I doubt they will even consider it.
Would love to see an Apple logo on that chip instead.
What next Apple as a carrier? Mobile (I wish!)
I wished the same for a long time. A Mobile Carrier that:
Acts as 24 Months Financial Payments to iPhone. Visual VoiceMail Included. iCloud Storage of your iPhone Capacity included. ( Free Backup ) Carrier Grade Spam Call Blocking. Free Data usage for Apple Music, Maps, iCloud, Auto iCloud Backup at night via 4G / 5G. AppleCare+
It will basically be what I called Apple as a Services, much like the current iPhone upgrade program, a single monthly payments that comprise of everything from iPhone, Mobile Carrier, iCloud, AppleCare+, with options for Apple Music and Apple TV / Steaming in the future.
A Global MVNO.
Although it is hard to think any current Carrier are willing to give out these amount of control to Apple.
1. There isn't some magic advantage of bundling Baseband Modem within SoC. 2. Intel isn't king in Low Power Node / Density / Performance, at least not yet. 3. Apple's isn't desperate for Intel's modem. 4. Intel 's Fab offer no flexibility. 5. Business is long term, I really like the post about business is business and TSMC partnership is a piece of crap.
1. There isn't some magic advantage of bundling Baseband Modem within SoC. 2. Intel isn't king in Low Power Node / Density / Performance, at least not yet. 3. Apple's isn't desperate for Intel's modem. 4. Intel 's Fab offer no flexibility. 5. Business is long term, I really like the post about business is business and TSMC partnership is a piece of crap.
Well, you’ve got pretty much all of that wrong, except the last one.
there are major advantages to putting the modem on die, which is whatmqualcomm does, and Apple has been trying to get Qualcomm to allow them to do, but haven’t been able to. The advantages are fourfold. Less power, less space on the constricted board, less complex assembly, and lower cost, due to those three other reasons.
intel is right there with everyone else. Their 10nm is not really any better, in a number of ways, than Intel’s 14nm process. That been discussed to death. The industry agrees with this. You can read articles in the pro computer journals.
apple is desperate for Intel’s modems. Yes, they are. Maybe your choice of the word “desperate” wasn’t the most accurate, but it will do. Apple is obviously eager, maybe that’s the best word, to get away from Qualcomm. Nobody needs the supposedly 5G compatible modems Qualcomm is making now, for a number of reasons. Believe it or not, there is no real performance issue here. Apple wants to get away from a company they’re not happy with, that’s holding them by the brass round things, and would rather go, with a company that proven to be very accommodating. And that leads into the next issue.
intel has given Apple special mixes and manufactured products that they gave no one else, at first, or at all. Since Qualcomm will never have a chance to sell Apple anything other than modem chips, they have far less skin in the game than Intel does.
I doubt that Apple will give up that relationship with TSMC, who have done everything that Apple has requested, year over year, to deliver a class dominating processor, and in extremely high volumes. For the near term, Intel may find more opportunity on the SOC rather than on the A series die.
Still, there is that transitional area between the iPad Pro and the Mac Book that would be an ideal area for Apple and Intel to create an ARM desktop class processor, at 3x to 5x TDP of the A series, with or without x64.
Not certain Apple has much of a choice. Intel wants Apple’s business exclusively and Otellini himself regretted turning Jobs down for the opportunity to build the original iPhone SOC.
Intel offers Apple something no other company outside of Qualcomm can. A chance to integrate a state of the art modem into the SOC. Qualcomm of course won’t allow Apple to do so, but Intel is willing. However, the cost will consist of getting Apple’s business in fabricating the entire SOC.
Intel isn’t exactly a slouch in fabrication technology. Though TSMC, Samsung and even Global Foundries have essentially caught up, Intel hasn’t exactly fallen behind. Apple has little to lose and much more to gain in switching to Intel from TSMC. Doing so will bring additional advantages that Qualcomm will have difficulty competing with. An Apple/Intel modem partnership will be awfully difficult to compete against over the long term even for a company such as Qualcomm.
Qualcomm already has plans on moving back to TSMC from Samsung anyway so the loss of Apple shouldn’t sting TSMC too badly. Besides TSMC will build CPUs for anyone while Intel offers far more exclusivity for Apple. I just don’t see TSMC as a long term Apple partner. They only got Apple’s business in the first place because of the row with Samsung.
By the way a laptop class A series processor with 3x the TDP of the current designs built in conjunction with Intel would utterly dominate in performance. Add x64 capability and even Microsoft’s surface line of machines would be toast. I would love to see such a development but it’s unlikely. Apple seems focused on keeping the TDP of their current designs unchanged but continually wringing out additional performance. If the upcoming A11X performs at core i7 levels, there’s little reason to devote additional resources to building another class of CPU. Apple has billions in the bank. They could easily do it. It just seems that it would be more of a distraction than anything else. Apple’s main focus is the iPhone and its CPU. The watch is starting to share the limelight and the tablets are tagging along. While Apple remains dedicated to their legacy laptop and desktop platforms, the level of focus and effort is just not the same. Hence an A series CPU for a dedicated laptop line seems far fetched.
I was with you -- till the last line... As you point out, soon an A series will compete not with the bread and butter I5 but with the star of the line -- the I7.
So why would Apple restrict itself to x86 based processors in its so called "computer" line? It seems most people who take that line (both for hardware and for software) do so based on the logic that "it's always been this way". But, the truth is: it hasn't always been that way. Not at all.... In fact, Apple has changed base processor technology in their "computers" three times.
While I think it will be awhile before Apple's A series can really take over for the high end x86 line (mostly because the high end will keep moving higher), the A series is clearly positioned to take over for the lower and mid level lines that most people use...
No, it isn’t. Seriously folks, you’re getting way too far ahead with this idea. The A series isn’t ready to take over any x86, including the M series in the Macbook. Even though that’s a 5-6 watt chip, similarly to what the A11x will be. Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series.
doesn’t anyone here remember x86 emulation on Macs? They ran at about 20% of the speed. That’s because a chip doing the emulation needs to be about 5 times faster than the chip being emulated. Once you have software duplicate hardware instructions, everything bogs down. There’s no software way around that.
if your’re going to say that Apple will run macOS natively, and their apps will also run natively, well, the OS sure, but the apps from Apple will be there natively, in some cases, the rest will take time, as always. Will large third party developers be overjoyed at this? No, they won’t. I doubt they will even consider it.
"Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series." Who said anything about emulation?
Your analogy is: "Once you attach a 40,000 trailer to the Lamborghini, it goes not faster than a Peterbilt" ... You are correct. But irrelevant.
I doubt that Apple will give up that relationship with TSMC, who have done everything that Apple has requested, year over year, to deliver a class dominating processor, and in extremely high volumes. For the near term, Intel may find more opportunity on the SOC rather than on the A series die.
Still, there is that transitional area between the iPad Pro and the Mac Book that would be an ideal area for Apple and Intel to create an ARM desktop class processor, at 3x to 5x TDP of the A series, with or without x64.
Not certain Apple has much of a choice. Intel wants Apple’s business exclusively and Otellini himself regretted turning Jobs down for the opportunity to build the original iPhone SOC.
Intel offers Apple something no other company outside of Qualcomm can. A chance to integrate a state of the art modem into the SOC. Qualcomm of course won’t allow Apple to do so, but Intel is willing. However, the cost will consist of getting Apple’s business in fabricating the entire SOC.
Intel isn’t exactly a slouch in fabrication technology. Though TSMC, Samsung and even Global Foundries have essentially caught up, Intel hasn’t exactly fallen behind. Apple has little to lose and much more to gain in switching to Intel from TSMC. Doing so will bring additional advantages that Qualcomm will have difficulty competing with. An Apple/Intel modem partnership will be awfully difficult to compete against over the long term even for a company such as Qualcomm.
Qualcomm already has plans on moving back to TSMC from Samsung anyway so the loss of Apple shouldn’t sting TSMC too badly. Besides TSMC will build CPUs for anyone while Intel offers far more exclusivity for Apple. I just don’t see TSMC as a long term Apple partner. They only got Apple’s business in the first place because of the row with Samsung.
By the way a laptop class A series processor with 3x the TDP of the current designs built in conjunction with Intel would utterly dominate in performance. Add x64 capability and even Microsoft’s surface line of machines would be toast. I would love to see such a development but it’s unlikely. Apple seems focused on keeping the TDP of their current designs unchanged but continually wringing out additional performance. If the upcoming A11X performs at core i7 levels, there’s little reason to devote additional resources to building another class of CPU. Apple has billions in the bank. They could easily do it. It just seems that it would be more of a distraction than anything else. Apple’s main focus is the iPhone and its CPU. The watch is starting to share the limelight and the tablets are tagging along. While Apple remains dedicated to their legacy laptop and desktop platforms, the level of focus and effort is just not the same. Hence an A series CPU for a dedicated laptop line seems far fetched.
I was with you -- till the last line... As you point out, soon an A series will compete not with the bread and butter I5 but with the star of the line -- the I7.
So why would Apple restrict itself to x86 based processors in its so called "computer" line? It seems most people who take that line (both for hardware and for software) do so based on the logic that "it's always been this way". But, the truth is: it hasn't always been that way. Not at all.... In fact, Apple has changed base processor technology in their "computers" three times.
While I think it will be awhile before Apple's A series can really take over for the high end x86 line (mostly because the high end will keep moving higher), the A series is clearly positioned to take over for the lower and mid level lines that most people use...
No, it isn’t. Seriously folks, you’re getting way too far ahead with this idea. The A series isn’t ready to take over any x86, including the M series in the Macbook. Even though that’s a 5-6 watt chip, similarly to what the A11x will be. Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series.
doesn’t anyone here remember x86 emulation on Macs? They ran at about 20% of the speed. That’s because a chip doing the emulation needs to be about 5 times faster than the chip being emulated. Once you have software duplicate hardware instructions, everything bogs down. There’s no software way around that.
if your’re going to say that Apple will run macOS natively, and their apps will also run natively, well, the OS sure, but the apps from Apple will be there natively, in some cases, the rest will take time, as always. Will large third party developers be overjoyed at this? No, they won’t. I doubt they will even consider it.
"Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series." Who said anything about emulation?
Your analogy is: "Once you attach a 40,000 trailer to the Lamborghini, it goes not faster than a Peterbilt" ... You are correct. But irrelevant.
Once Windows 10 is on ARM, well that's coming, Intel knows that the bottom of the market and their low power market, will be very vulnerable.
That's coming and Intel must prepare for that day.
Apple is already ready for this transition on the OS X side, with Windows being run on ARM, there is no reason for Apple to not release a OS X based ARM laptop.
I expect it to arrive within the next 2 years tops.
I doubt that Apple will give up that relationship with TSMC, who have done everything that Apple has requested, year over year, to deliver a class dominating processor, and in extremely high volumes. For the near term, Intel may find more opportunity on the SOC rather than on the A series die.
Still, there is that transitional area between the iPad Pro and the Mac Book that would be an ideal area for Apple and Intel to create an ARM desktop class processor, at 3x to 5x TDP of the A series, with or without x64.
Not certain Apple has much of a choice. Intel wants Apple’s business exclusively and Otellini himself regretted turning Jobs down for the opportunity to build the original iPhone SOC.
Intel offers Apple something no other company outside of Qualcomm can. A chance to integrate a state of the art modem into the SOC. Qualcomm of course won’t allow Apple to do so, but Intel is willing. However, the cost will consist of getting Apple’s business in fabricating the entire SOC.
Intel isn’t exactly a slouch in fabrication technology. Though TSMC, Samsung and even Global Foundries have essentially caught up, Intel hasn’t exactly fallen behind. Apple has little to lose and much more to gain in switching to Intel from TSMC. Doing so will bring additional advantages that Qualcomm will have difficulty competing with. An Apple/Intel modem partnership will be awfully difficult to compete against over the long term even for a company such as Qualcomm.
Qualcomm already has plans on moving back to TSMC from Samsung anyway so the loss of Apple shouldn’t sting TSMC too badly. Besides TSMC will build CPUs for anyone while Intel offers far more exclusivity for Apple. I just don’t see TSMC as a long term Apple partner. They only got Apple’s business in the first place because of the row with Samsung.
By the way a laptop class A series processor with 3x the TDP of the current designs built in conjunction with Intel would utterly dominate in performance. Add x64 capability and even Microsoft’s surface line of machines would be toast. I would love to see such a development but it’s unlikely. Apple seems focused on keeping the TDP of their current designs unchanged but continually wringing out additional performance. If the upcoming A11X performs at core i7 levels, there’s little reason to devote additional resources to building another class of CPU. Apple has billions in the bank. They could easily do it. It just seems that it would be more of a distraction than anything else. Apple’s main focus is the iPhone and its CPU. The watch is starting to share the limelight and the tablets are tagging along. While Apple remains dedicated to their legacy laptop and desktop platforms, the level of focus and effort is just not the same. Hence an A series CPU for a dedicated laptop line seems far fetched.
I was with you -- till the last line... As you point out, soon an A series will compete not with the bread and butter I5 but with the star of the line -- the I7.
So why would Apple restrict itself to x86 based processors in its so called "computer" line? It seems most people who take that line (both for hardware and for software) do so based on the logic that "it's always been this way". But, the truth is: it hasn't always been that way. Not at all.... In fact, Apple has changed base processor technology in their "computers" three times.
While I think it will be awhile before Apple's A series can really take over for the high end x86 line (mostly because the high end will keep moving higher), the A series is clearly positioned to take over for the lower and mid level lines that most people use...
No, it isn’t. Seriously folks, you’re getting way too far ahead with this idea. The A series isn’t ready to take over any x86, including the M series in the Macbook. Even though that’s a 5-6 watt chip, similarly to what the A11x will be. Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series.
doesn’t anyone here remember x86 emulation on Macs? They ran at about 20% of the speed. That’s because a chip doing the emulation needs to be about 5 times faster than the chip being emulated. Once you have software duplicate hardware instructions, everything bogs down. There’s no software way around that.
if your’re going to say that Apple will run macOS natively, and their apps will also run natively, well, the OS sure, but the apps from Apple will be there natively, in some cases, the rest will take time, as always. Will large third party developers be overjoyed at this? No, they won’t. I doubt they will even consider it.
"Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series." Who said anything about emulation?
Your analogy is: "Once you attach a 40,000 trailer to the Lamborghini, it goes not faster than a Peterbilt" ... You are correct. But irrelevant.
You need emulation. You haven’t given one reason why it doesn’t. Your example is just silly.
I doubt that Apple will give up that relationship with TSMC, who have done everything that Apple has requested, year over year, to deliver a class dominating processor, and in extremely high volumes. For the near term, Intel may find more opportunity on the SOC rather than on the A series die.
Still, there is that transitional area between the iPad Pro and the Mac Book that would be an ideal area for Apple and Intel to create an ARM desktop class processor, at 3x to 5x TDP of the A series, with or without x64.
Not certain Apple has much of a choice. Intel wants Apple’s business exclusively and Otellini himself regretted turning Jobs down for the opportunity to build the original iPhone SOC.
Intel offers Apple something no other company outside of Qualcomm can. A chance to integrate a state of the art modem into the SOC. Qualcomm of course won’t allow Apple to do so, but Intel is willing. However, the cost will consist of getting Apple’s business in fabricating the entire SOC.
Intel isn’t exactly a slouch in fabrication technology. Though TSMC, Samsung and even Global Foundries have essentially caught up, Intel hasn’t exactly fallen behind. Apple has little to lose and much more to gain in switching to Intel from TSMC. Doing so will bring additional advantages that Qualcomm will have difficulty competing with. An Apple/Intel modem partnership will be awfully difficult to compete against over the long term even for a company such as Qualcomm.
Qualcomm already has plans on moving back to TSMC from Samsung anyway so the loss of Apple shouldn’t sting TSMC too badly. Besides TSMC will build CPUs for anyone while Intel offers far more exclusivity for Apple. I just don’t see TSMC as a long term Apple partner. They only got Apple’s business in the first place because of the row with Samsung.
By the way a laptop class A series processor with 3x the TDP of the current designs built in conjunction with Intel would utterly dominate in performance. Add x64 capability and even Microsoft’s surface line of machines would be toast. I would love to see such a development but it’s unlikely. Apple seems focused on keeping the TDP of their current designs unchanged but continually wringing out additional performance. If the upcoming A11X performs at core i7 levels, there’s little reason to devote additional resources to building another class of CPU. Apple has billions in the bank. They could easily do it. It just seems that it would be more of a distraction than anything else. Apple’s main focus is the iPhone and its CPU. The watch is starting to share the limelight and the tablets are tagging along. While Apple remains dedicated to their legacy laptop and desktop platforms, the level of focus and effort is just not the same. Hence an A series CPU for a dedicated laptop line seems far fetched.
I was with you -- till the last line... As you point out, soon an A series will compete not with the bread and butter I5 but with the star of the line -- the I7.
So why would Apple restrict itself to x86 based processors in its so called "computer" line? It seems most people who take that line (both for hardware and for software) do so based on the logic that "it's always been this way". But, the truth is: it hasn't always been that way. Not at all.... In fact, Apple has changed base processor technology in their "computers" three times.
While I think it will be awhile before Apple's A series can really take over for the high end x86 line (mostly because the high end will keep moving higher), the A series is clearly positioned to take over for the lower and mid level lines that most people use...
No, it isn’t. Seriously folks, you’re getting way too far ahead with this idea. The A series isn’t ready to take over any x86, including the M series in the Macbook. Even though that’s a 5-6 watt chip, similarly to what the A11x will be. Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series.
doesn’t anyone here remember x86 emulation on Macs? They ran at about 20% of the speed. That’s because a chip doing the emulation needs to be about 5 times faster than the chip being emulated. Once you have software duplicate hardware instructions, everything bogs down. There’s no software way around that.
if your’re going to say that Apple will run macOS natively, and their apps will also run natively, well, the OS sure, but the apps from Apple will be there natively, in some cases, the rest will take time, as always. Will large third party developers be overjoyed at this? No, they won’t. I doubt they will even consider it.
"Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series." Who said anything about emulation?
Your analogy is: "Once you attach a 40,000 trailer to the Lamborghini, it goes not faster than a Peterbilt" ... You are correct. But irrelevant.
Once Windows 10 is on ARM, well that's coming, Intel knows that the bottom of the market and their low power market, will be very vulnerable.
That's coming and Intel must prepare for that day.
Apple is already ready for this transition on the OS X side, with Windows being run on ARM, there is no reason for Apple to not release a OS X based ARM laptop.
I expect it to arrive within the next 2 years tops.
Windows 10 won’t be on ARM. I’ll explain what Microsoft is doing. They have an entirely different programming model for Windows on ARM. It requires that developers run their x86 software through it like a compiler. Then, they need to fix all the bugs, and take care of programming that Microsoft’s software doesn’t take care of. Once all that is finished, their software will run under Windows on ARM. But that software won’t run under Windows on x86. So, there is no real compatibility between the two.
Microsoft, as usual, is trying to obfuscate this issue. But in reality, it’s not Windows. If an OS can’t run the software of another OS, no matter what they both are called, then it’s a different OS.
apple has the same problem. macOS on ARM won’t be the same OS. If Apple does have it run natively, then good for that, as Microsoft is doing (sort of), if they have some of their apps run natively, that’s good too. But getting third parties to reprogram their software is a different thing. Some small developers will, but it’s not likely that we will ever see most macOS x86 software ported over. There’s good reasons for that.
first of all, this will be a low end machine. If developers are expected to port all of their software, with some software being 100 million lines of code, there there had better be a lot of machines that can run it. So if Apple has one model, that’s not an incentive. And there’s no evidence that the A series will be in contention with any mid level Intel/AMD chips.mthey are in contention with the ultra low power i5 series. But that’s running testing software native to each platform. It means that iOS ARM software can give some software running macOS on low end Macs on x86 a run for the money, specifically the Macbook with the M series of CPUs.
Intel might actually do what Otellini originally turned down, fabricate Apple’s mobile CPUs.
Perhaps Intel might regain its lead in fab technology again partnered up with Apple.
It’s going to be a devastating loss for TSMC. But Intel offers Apple the opportunity to integrate a modem into the SOC.
This was coming all along. Qualcomm’s Snapdragon is going to fall further and further behind also. They are already getting killed in single core performance.
I doubt that Apple will give up that relationship with TSMC, who have done everything that Apple has requested, year over year, to deliver a class dominating processor, and in extremely high volumes. For the near term, Intel may find more opportunity on the SOC rather than on the A series die.
Business is Business.... I doubt Apple cares how responsive and reliable TSMC has been "year over year" when there's an opportunity to make iPhones easier to assemble, potentially more compact, and putting Apple more firmly in the driver's seat in controlling both supply and profit. Partnerships go only so far. At the end of the day it comes down to money as it always does.
If I were TSMC I'd be reviewing the business plan for "after Apple", as I'd expect any responsible company to do.
No Apple will never abandon it’s parter, like PowerVR did to Apple.
I doubt that Apple will give up that relationship with TSMC, who have done everything that Apple has requested, year over year, to deliver a class dominating processor, and in extremely high volumes. For the near term, Intel may find more opportunity on the SOC rather than on the A series die.
Still, there is that transitional area between the iPad Pro and the Mac Book that would be an ideal area for Apple and Intel to create an ARM desktop class processor, at 3x to 5x TDP of the A series, with or without x64.
Not certain Apple has much of a choice. Intel wants Apple’s business exclusively and Otellini himself regretted turning Jobs down for the opportunity to build the original iPhone SOC.
Intel offers Apple something no other company outside of Qualcomm can. A chance to integrate a state of the art modem into the SOC. Qualcomm of course won’t allow Apple to do so, but Intel is willing. However, the cost will consist of getting Apple’s business in fabricating the entire SOC.
Intel isn’t exactly a slouch in fabrication technology. Though TSMC, Samsung and even Global Foundries have essentially caught up, Intel hasn’t exactly fallen behind. Apple has little to lose and much more to gain in switching to Intel from TSMC. Doing so will bring additional advantages that Qualcomm will have difficulty competing with. An Apple/Intel modem partnership will be awfully difficult to compete against over the long term even for a company such as Qualcomm.
Qualcomm already has plans on moving back to TSMC from Samsung anyway so the loss of Apple shouldn’t sting TSMC too badly. Besides TSMC will build CPUs for anyone while Intel offers far more exclusivity for Apple. I just don’t see TSMC as a long term Apple partner. They only got Apple’s business in the first place because of the row with Samsung.
By the way a laptop class A series processor with 3x the TDP of the current designs built in conjunction with Intel would utterly dominate in performance. Add x64 capability and even Microsoft’s surface line of machines would be toast. I would love to see such a development but it’s unlikely. Apple seems focused on keeping the TDP of their current designs unchanged but continually wringing out additional performance. If the upcoming A11X performs at core i7 levels, there’s little reason to devote additional resources to building another class of CPU. Apple has billions in the bank. They could easily do it. It just seems that it would be more of a distraction than anything else. Apple’s main focus is the iPhone and its CPU. The watch is starting to share the limelight and the tablets are tagging along. While Apple remains dedicated to their legacy laptop and desktop platforms, the level of focus and effort is just not the same. Hence an A series CPU for a dedicated laptop line seems far fetched.
I was with you -- till the last line... As you point out, soon an A series will compete not with the bread and butter I5 but with the star of the line -- the I7.
So why would Apple restrict itself to x86 based processors in its so called "computer" line? It seems most people who take that line (both for hardware and for software) do so based on the logic that "it's always been this way". But, the truth is: it hasn't always been that way. Not at all.... In fact, Apple has changed base processor technology in their "computers" three times.
While I think it will be awhile before Apple's A series can really take over for the high end x86 line (mostly because the high end will keep moving higher), the A series is clearly positioned to take over for the lower and mid level lines that most people use...
No, it isn’t. Seriously folks, you’re getting way too far ahead with this idea. The A series isn’t ready to take over any x86, including the M series in the Macbook. Even though that’s a 5-6 watt chip, similarly to what the A11x will be. Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series.
doesn’t anyone here remember x86 emulation on Macs? They ran at about 20% of the speed. That’s because a chip doing the emulation needs to be about 5 times faster than the chip being emulated. Once you have software duplicate hardware instructions, everything bogs down. There’s no software way around that.
if your’re going to say that Apple will run macOS natively, and their apps will also run natively, well, the OS sure, but the apps from Apple will be there natively, in some cases, the rest will take time, as always. Will large third party developers be overjoyed at this? No, they won’t. I doubt they will even consider it.
"Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series." Who said anything about emulation?
Your analogy is: "Once you attach a 40,000 trailer to the Lamborghini, it goes not faster than a Peterbilt" ... You are correct. But irrelevant.
Once Windows 10 is on ARM, well that's coming, Intel knows that the bottom of the market and their low power market, will be very vulnerable.
That's coming and Intel must prepare for that day.
Apple is already ready for this transition on the OS X side, with Windows being run on ARM, there is no reason for Apple to not release a OS X based ARM laptop.
I expect it to arrive within the next 2 years tops.
Didn't Microsoft do that 5 years ago with Windows 8 -- and then abandon the effort with Windows 10?
But, a failure to execute properly (which is typically where MS fails) is not a proof that the concept is misguided.
But, I do see Apple either producing an ARM based MacBook OR an iPad with increased functionality (such as a touchpad on its external keyboard) that will enable it to fulfill its promise as a laptop killer. Or, very likely, both. At this point, there is no reason not to do both.
I doubt that Apple will give up that relationship with TSMC, who have done everything that Apple has requested, year over year, to deliver a class dominating processor, and in extremely high volumes. For the near term, Intel may find more opportunity on the SOC rather than on the A series die.
Still, there is that transitional area between the iPad Pro and the Mac Book that would be an ideal area for Apple and Intel to create an ARM desktop class processor, at 3x to 5x TDP of the A series, with or without x64.
Not certain Apple has much of a choice. Intel wants Apple’s business exclusively and Otellini himself regretted turning Jobs down for the opportunity to build the original iPhone SOC.
Intel offers Apple something no other company outside of Qualcomm can. A chance to integrate a state of the art modem into the SOC. Qualcomm of course won’t allow Apple to do so, but Intel is willing. However, the cost will consist of getting Apple’s business in fabricating the entire SOC.
Intel isn’t exactly a slouch in fabrication technology. Though TSMC, Samsung and even Global Foundries have essentially caught up, Intel hasn’t exactly fallen behind. Apple has little to lose and much more to gain in switching to Intel from TSMC. Doing so will bring additional advantages that Qualcomm will have difficulty competing with. An Apple/Intel modem partnership will be awfully difficult to compete against over the long term even for a company such as Qualcomm.
Qualcomm already has plans on moving back to TSMC from Samsung anyway so the loss of Apple shouldn’t sting TSMC too badly. Besides TSMC will build CPUs for anyone while Intel offers far more exclusivity for Apple. I just don’t see TSMC as a long term Apple partner. They only got Apple’s business in the first place because of the row with Samsung.
By the way a laptop class A series processor with 3x the TDP of the current designs built in conjunction with Intel would utterly dominate in performance. Add x64 capability and even Microsoft’s surface line of machines would be toast. I would love to see such a development but it’s unlikely. Apple seems focused on keeping the TDP of their current designs unchanged but continually wringing out additional performance. If the upcoming A11X performs at core i7 levels, there’s little reason to devote additional resources to building another class of CPU. Apple has billions in the bank. They could easily do it. It just seems that it would be more of a distraction than anything else. Apple’s main focus is the iPhone and its CPU. The watch is starting to share the limelight and the tablets are tagging along. While Apple remains dedicated to their legacy laptop and desktop platforms, the level of focus and effort is just not the same. Hence an A series CPU for a dedicated laptop line seems far fetched.
I was with you -- till the last line... As you point out, soon an A series will compete not with the bread and butter I5 but with the star of the line -- the I7.
So why would Apple restrict itself to x86 based processors in its so called "computer" line? It seems most people who take that line (both for hardware and for software) do so based on the logic that "it's always been this way". But, the truth is: it hasn't always been that way. Not at all.... In fact, Apple has changed base processor technology in their "computers" three times.
While I think it will be awhile before Apple's A series can really take over for the high end x86 line (mostly because the high end will keep moving higher), the A series is clearly positioned to take over for the lower and mid level lines that most people use...
No, it isn’t. Seriously folks, you’re getting way too far ahead with this idea. The A series isn’t ready to take over any x86, including the M series in the Macbook. Even though that’s a 5-6 watt chip, similarly to what the A11x will be. Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series.
doesn’t anyone here remember x86 emulation on Macs? They ran at about 20% of the speed. That’s because a chip doing the emulation needs to be about 5 times faster than the chip being emulated. Once you have software duplicate hardware instructions, everything bogs down. There’s no software way around that.
if your’re going to say that Apple will run macOS natively, and their apps will also run natively, well, the OS sure, but the apps from Apple will be there natively, in some cases, the rest will take time, as always. Will large third party developers be overjoyed at this? No, they won’t. I doubt they will even consider it.
"Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series." Who said anything about emulation?
Your analogy is: "Once you attach a 40,000 trailer to the Lamborghini, it goes not faster than a Peterbilt" ... You are correct. But irrelevant.
You need emulation. You haven’t given one reason why it doesn’t. Your example is just silly.
The fact is: You DON'T need emulation. That's ridiculous. The example stands...
4. Intel 's Fab offer no flexibility. 5. Business is long term, I really like the post about business is business and TSMC partnership is a piece of crap.
This sure reads like intel are being more flexible to offer what customers like Apple want not just what they can offer from in house. I think it prompts some interesting possiblities for all of Apples lines Macs and I's.
I doubt that Apple will give up that relationship with TSMC, who have done everything that Apple has requested, year over year, to deliver a class dominating processor, and in extremely high volumes. For the near term, Intel may find more opportunity on the SOC rather than on the A series die.
Still, there is that transitional area between the iPad Pro and the Mac Book that would be an ideal area for Apple and Intel to create an ARM desktop class processor, at 3x to 5x TDP of the A series, with or without x64.
Not certain Apple has much of a choice. Intel wants Apple’s business exclusively and Otellini himself regretted turning Jobs down for the opportunity to build the original iPhone SOC.
Intel offers Apple something no other company outside of Qualcomm can. A chance to integrate a state of the art modem into the SOC. Qualcomm of course won’t allow Apple to do so, but Intel is willing. However, the cost will consist of getting Apple’s business in fabricating the entire SOC.
Intel isn’t exactly a slouch in fabrication technology. Though TSMC, Samsung and even Global Foundries have essentially caught up, Intel hasn’t exactly fallen behind. Apple has little to lose and much more to gain in switching to Intel from TSMC. Doing so will bring additional advantages that Qualcomm will have difficulty competing with. An Apple/Intel modem partnership will be awfully difficult to compete against over the long term even for a company such as Qualcomm.
Qualcomm already has plans on moving back to TSMC from Samsung anyway so the loss of Apple shouldn’t sting TSMC too badly. Besides TSMC will build CPUs for anyone while Intel offers far more exclusivity for Apple. I just don’t see TSMC as a long term Apple partner. They only got Apple’s business in the first place because of the row with Samsung.
By the way a laptop class A series processor with 3x the TDP of the current designs built in conjunction with Intel would utterly dominate in performance. Add x64 capability and even Microsoft’s surface line of machines would be toast. I would love to see such a development but it’s unlikely. Apple seems focused on keeping the TDP of their current designs unchanged but continually wringing out additional performance. If the upcoming A11X performs at core i7 levels, there’s little reason to devote additional resources to building another class of CPU. Apple has billions in the bank. They could easily do it. It just seems that it would be more of a distraction than anything else. Apple’s main focus is the iPhone and its CPU. The watch is starting to share the limelight and the tablets are tagging along. While Apple remains dedicated to their legacy laptop and desktop platforms, the level of focus and effort is just not the same. Hence an A series CPU for a dedicated laptop line seems far fetched.
I was with you -- till the last line... As you point out, soon an A series will compete not with the bread and butter I5 but with the star of the line -- the I7.
So why would Apple restrict itself to x86 based processors in its so called "computer" line? It seems most people who take that line (both for hardware and for software) do so based on the logic that "it's always been this way". But, the truth is: it hasn't always been that way. Not at all.... In fact, Apple has changed base processor technology in their "computers" three times.
While I think it will be awhile before Apple's A series can really take over for the high end x86 line (mostly because the high end will keep moving higher), the A series is clearly positioned to take over for the lower and mid level lines that most people use...
No, it isn’t. Seriously folks, you’re getting way too far ahead with this idea. The A series isn’t ready to take over any x86, including the M series in the Macbook. Even though that’s a 5-6 watt chip, similarly to what the A11x will be. Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series.
doesn’t anyone here remember x86 emulation on Macs? They ran at about 20% of the speed. That’s because a chip doing the emulation needs to be about 5 times faster than the chip being emulated. Once you have software duplicate hardware instructions, everything bogs down. There’s no software way around that.
if your’re going to say that Apple will run macOS natively, and their apps will also run natively, well, the OS sure, but the apps from Apple will be there natively, in some cases, the rest will take time, as always. Will large third party developers be overjoyed at this? No, they won’t. I doubt they will even consider it.
"Once emulation is included, that M chip will wipe the floor with the A series." Who said anything about emulation?
Your analogy is: "Once you attach a 40,000 trailer to the Lamborghini, it goes not faster than a Peterbilt" ... You are correct. But irrelevant.
You need emulation. You haven’t given one reason why it doesn’t. Your example is just silly.
The fact is: You DON'T need emulation. That's ridiculous. The example stands...
You keep on making a statement that’s not true, without giving any good reason why not. I’ve been giving detailed reasons why things won’t work, or why they would if certain solutions are delivered. On the other hand, you’re giving - nothing.
if you want to have a real debate about this, then I’m ready for it. But you need to debate each point with a good reason why you disagree, or agree, as well as carefully explaining your own position. That’s what these forums are about. Possibly you don’t have any reasons for your position other than you want it to be true. If that’s so, then I really can’t help you.
Most people don’t consider 2 things. Back in 2005, when the Intel transition happened, LLVM and CLANG werent very robust and sophisticated. So Apple had to support emulation for some time. But in 2-3 years, they ended emulation completely.
There is a market for devices that don’t need much additional software. Kind of like the Chromebook, with everything run from browser, and with access to software from the iOS App Store.
the fact that an ARM Mac book can run all the software for iOS, means there isn’t any lack of software. More than enough software available at launch.
No emulation required. None whatsoever. ARM macs are coming, and it’s just a matter of time. And I think prices, weight will drop massively, with battery life getting way better.
Most people don’t consider 2 things. Back in 2005, when the Intel transition happened, LLVM and CLANG werent very robust and sophisticated. So Apple had to support emulation for some time. But in 2-3 years, they ended emulation completely.
There is a market for devices that don’t need much additional software. Kind of like the Chromebook, with everything run from browser, and with access to software from the iOS App Store.
the fact that an ARM Mac book can run all the software for iOS, means there isn’t any lack of software. More than enough software available at launch.
No emulation required. None whatsoever. ARM macs are coming, and it’s just a matter of time. And I think prices, weight will drop massively, with battery life getting way better.
The only thing you're probably right about that Macs with Apple CPUs are coming. Beyond that:
1. The first intel Macs were released in 2006.
2. PowerPC emulation was part of OS X for FIVE YEARS after the release of the first intel machines in 2006, until 10.7 replaced Snow Leopard in summer 2011.
3. Macs do not and will not run iOS apps. Macs run macOS, which is a different operating system that has no way to deal with much of how iOS interface works.
4. Browser-based apps really aren't good.
5. Changing the processor without offering emulation means that instantly, no third-party apps, drivers, and frameworks will run. None. And especially none of the apps that people actually buy Macs for. None of those will run at all until the companies completely recompile, test, and partially rewrite their stuff. No graphics software, no audio software, no interface drivers, nothing.
Now that I've written that out: it actually sounds like exactly the sort of stunt Apple would pull, even if it costs them what's left of the pro market (that isn't exclusively using Logic, Mainstage, and Final Cut).
Comments
The A11x isn’t going to perform at i7 core levels. Get over that idea quickly. Let’s not overdo things. The A11x will give performance at levels of the i5 ultra low power chips that are used in mobile, in a number of areas. Don’t even think about desktop chips with their far higher power consumption.
As you point out, soon an A series will compete not with the bread and butter I5 but with the star of the line -- the I7.
So why would Apple restrict itself to x86 based processors in its so called "computer" line?
It seems most people who take that line (both for hardware and for software) do so based on the logic that "it's always been this way". But, the truth is: it hasn't always been that way. Not at all.... In fact, Apple has changed base processor technology in their "computers" three times.
While I think it will be awhile before Apple's A series can really take over for the high end x86 line (mostly because the high end will keep moving higher), the A series is clearly positioned to take over for the lower and mid level lines that most people use...
doesn’t anyone here remember x86 emulation on Macs? They ran at about 20% of the speed. That’s because a chip doing the emulation needs to be about 5 times faster than the chip being emulated. Once you have software duplicate hardware instructions, everything bogs down. There’s no software way around that.
if your’re going to say that Apple will run macOS natively, and their apps will also run natively, well, the OS sure, but the apps from Apple will be there natively, in some cases, the rest will take time, as always. Will large third party developers be overjoyed at this? No, they won’t. I doubt they will even consider it.
Acts as 24 Months Financial Payments to iPhone.
Visual VoiceMail Included.
iCloud Storage of your iPhone Capacity included. ( Free Backup )
Carrier Grade Spam Call Blocking.
Free Data usage for Apple Music, Maps, iCloud,
Auto iCloud Backup at night via 4G / 5G.
AppleCare+
It will basically be what I called Apple as a Services, much like the current iPhone upgrade program, a single monthly payments that comprise of everything from iPhone, Mobile Carrier, iCloud, AppleCare+, with options for Apple Music and Apple TV / Steaming in the future.
A Global MVNO.
Although it is hard to think any current Carrier are willing to give out these amount of control to Apple.
1. There isn't some magic advantage of bundling Baseband Modem within SoC.
2. Intel isn't king in Low Power Node / Density / Performance, at least not yet.
3. Apple's isn't desperate for Intel's modem.
4. Intel 's Fab offer no flexibility.
5. Business is long term, I really like the post about business is business and TSMC partnership is a piece of crap.
there are major advantages to putting the modem on die, which is whatmqualcomm does, and Apple has been trying to get Qualcomm to allow them to do, but haven’t been able to. The advantages are fourfold. Less power, less space on the constricted board, less complex assembly, and lower cost, due to those three other reasons.
intel is right there with everyone else. Their 10nm is not really any better, in a number of ways, than Intel’s 14nm process. That been discussed to death. The industry agrees with this. You can read articles in the pro computer journals.
apple is desperate for Intel’s modems. Yes, they are. Maybe your choice of the word “desperate” wasn’t the most accurate, but it will do. Apple is obviously eager, maybe that’s the best word, to get away from Qualcomm. Nobody needs the supposedly 5G compatible modems Qualcomm is making now, for a number of reasons. Believe it or not, there is no real performance issue here. Apple wants to get away from a company they’re not happy with, that’s holding them by the brass round things, and would rather go, with a company that proven to be very accommodating. And that leads into the next issue.
intel has given Apple special mixes and manufactured products that they gave no one else, at first, or at all. Since Qualcomm will never have a chance to sell Apple anything other than modem chips, they have far less skin in the game than Intel does.
Who said anything about emulation?
Your analogy is: "Once you attach a 40,000 trailer to the Lamborghini, it goes not faster than a Peterbilt"
... You are correct. But irrelevant.
Microsoft, as usual, is trying to obfuscate this issue. But in reality, it’s not Windows. If an OS can’t run the software of another OS, no matter what they both are called, then it’s a different OS.
apple has the same problem. macOS on ARM won’t be the same OS. If Apple does have it run natively, then good for that, as Microsoft is doing (sort of), if they have some of their apps run natively, that’s good too. But getting third parties to reprogram their software is a different thing. Some small developers will, but it’s not likely that we will ever see most macOS x86 software ported over. There’s good reasons for that.
first of all, this will be a low end machine. If developers are expected to port all of their software, with some software being 100 million lines of code, there there had better be a lot of machines that can run it. So if Apple has one model, that’s not an incentive. And there’s no evidence that the A series will be in contention with any mid level Intel/AMD chips.mthey are in contention with the ultra low power i5 series. But that’s running testing software native to each platform. It means that iOS ARM software can give some software running macOS on low end Macs on x86 a run for the money, specifically the Macbook with the M series of CPUs.
not so long ago.
But, a failure to execute properly (which is typically where MS fails) is not a proof that the concept is misguided.
But, I do see Apple either producing an ARM based MacBook OR an iPad with increased functionality (such as a touchpad on its external keyboard) that will enable it to fulfill its promise as a laptop killer. Or, very likely, both. At this point, there is no reason not to do both.
This sure reads like intel are being more flexible to offer what customers like Apple want not just what they can offer from in house.
I think it prompts some interesting possiblities for all of Apples lines Macs and I's.
if you want to have a real debate about this, then I’m ready for it. But you need to debate each point with a good reason why you disagree, or agree, as well as carefully explaining your own position. That’s what these forums are about. Possibly you don’t have any reasons for your position other than you want it to be true. If that’s so, then I really can’t help you.
There is a market for devices that don’t need much additional software. Kind of like the Chromebook, with everything run from browser, and with access to software from the iOS App Store.
the fact that an ARM Mac book can run all the software for iOS, means there isn’t any lack of software. More than enough software available at launch.
No emulation required. None whatsoever. ARM macs are coming, and it’s just a matter of time. And I think prices, weight will drop massively, with battery life getting way better.
1. The first intel Macs were released in 2006.
2. PowerPC emulation was part of OS X for FIVE YEARS after the release of the first intel machines in 2006, until 10.7 replaced Snow Leopard in summer 2011.
3. Macs do not and will not run iOS apps. Macs run macOS, which is a different operating system that has no way to deal with much of how iOS interface works.
4. Browser-based apps really aren't good.
5. Changing the processor without offering emulation means that instantly, no third-party apps, drivers, and frameworks will run. None. And especially none of the apps that people actually buy Macs for. None of those will run at all until the companies completely recompile, test, and partially rewrite their stuff. No graphics software, no audio software, no interface drivers, nothing.
Now that I've written that out: it actually sounds like exactly the sort of stunt Apple would pull, even if it costs them what's left of the pro market (that isn't exclusively using Logic, Mainstage, and Final Cut).