Why Apple will move Macs to ARM, and what consumers get

123468

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 148
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,323member
    Soli said:
    melgross said:
    MadMat said:
    While a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be able to benefit from a minimal performance boost by switching from Intel to ARM processors, a larger percentage of us that use some Windows-only software (Microsoft Project to name one) and thus need Bootcamp will be left in the cold.  I have owned many Macs (currently a top-spec 2017 MacBook Pro 15"), and I reluctantly will stop buying Macs if Apple halts the Windows compatibility feature.  The current Macs are fantastically powerful in the higher models, and a switch to ARM is not necessary.
    While Bootcamp usage is high in the AppleInsider reading population, it is decidedly not with the vast majority of the Apple user base.

    So, it's more like "while a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be left in the cold from a shift to ARM, the larger percentage that don't or have used the iPhone as a gateway to the the Mac will benefit from the performance boost."
    It used to be a much higher percentage as more Windows users were switching over. But the usage seems to have dropped. But a lot of Mac gamers, such as my daughter and here friends, still use Bootcamp for that, as we still can’t keep up with pc gaming. I wonder how big that crowd is? They can’t use Parallels for that. I’ve tried.
    1) Do you think that Apple cares about a few Bootcamp users that are Windows gamers that they would hinder their entire line by keeping them slow, hot, limited, and expensive with Intel chips compared to what they already offer in something like an iPad (which I don’t think will be the chip they use for any low-end Mac).

    2) Are these Windows gamers using 12" MacBooks without a discreet GPU, which is the type of machine this move to ARM seems most imminent and would very easily trounce what Intel has been able to offer vendors?
    What makes you so certain that it’s just a “few gamers”. It can easily be a few million gamers.

    you are shortsighted. You actually think that Apple will just move to one low end Mac, and end it there? Seriously? There would be no point to it unless Apple is thinking of moving every machine over at some point, except maybe the Mac Pro and iMac Pro. Possibly, even those eventually.
    canukstorm
  • Reply 102 of 148
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,323member

    melgross said:

    MadMat said:
    While a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be able to benefit from a minimal performance boost by switching from Intel to ARM processors, a larger percentage of us that use some Windows-only software (Microsoft Project to name one) and thus need Bootcamp will be left in the cold.  I have owned many Macs (currently a top-spec 2017 MacBook Pro 15"), and I reluctantly will stop buying Macs if Apple halts the Windows compatibility feature.  The current Macs are fantastically powerful in the higher models, and a switch to ARM is not necessary.
    While Bootcamp usage is high in the AppleInsider reading population, it is decidedly not with the vast majority of the Apple user base.

    So, it's more like "while a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be left in the cold from a shift to ARM, the larger percentage that don't or have used the iPhone as a gateway to the the Mac will benefit from the performance boost."
    It used to be a much higher percentage as more Windows users were switching over. But the usage seems to have dropped. But a lot of Mac gamers, such as my daughter and here friends, still use Bootcamp for that, as we still can’t keep up with pc gaming. I wonder how big that crowd is? They can’t use Parallels for that. I’ve tried.
    The service data that I've been collecting for years suggests that it is about 2% and declining right now, even including enterprise.
    What service data are you collecting?
  • Reply 103 of 148
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,544administrator
    melgross said:

    melgross said:

    MadMat said:
    While a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be able to benefit from a minimal performance boost by switching from Intel to ARM processors, a larger percentage of us that use some Windows-only software (Microsoft Project to name one) and thus need Bootcamp will be left in the cold.  I have owned many Macs (currently a top-spec 2017 MacBook Pro 15"), and I reluctantly will stop buying Macs if Apple halts the Windows compatibility feature.  The current Macs are fantastically powerful in the higher models, and a switch to ARM is not necessary.
    While Bootcamp usage is high in the AppleInsider reading population, it is decidedly not with the vast majority of the Apple user base.

    So, it's more like "while a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be left in the cold from a shift to ARM, the larger percentage that don't or have used the iPhone as a gateway to the the Mac will benefit from the performance boost."
    It used to be a much higher percentage as more Windows users were switching over. But the usage seems to have dropped. But a lot of Mac gamers, such as my daughter and here friends, still use Bootcamp for that, as we still can’t keep up with pc gaming. I wonder how big that crowd is? They can’t use Parallels for that. I’ve tried.
    The service data that I've been collecting for years suggests that it is about 2% and declining right now, even including enterprise.
    What service data are you collecting?
    All of it that I can get my hands on from 55 service locations, most of which are sources inside Genius Bars. It's where the keyboard failure rate data came from, and we use it here and there for other things for the last few years.

    Relevant to this particular point, the service data collected counts if there is just a macOS install, or a macOS/Bootcamp install.
    watto_cobracyberzombiepscooter63fastasleepasdasd
  • Reply 104 of 148
    thttht Posts: 4,613member
    melgross said:

    melgross said:

    MadMat said:
    While a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be able to benefit from a minimal performance boost by switching from Intel to ARM processors, a larger percentage of us that use some Windows-only software (Microsoft Project to name one) and thus need Bootcamp will be left in the cold.  I have owned many Macs (currently a top-spec 2017 MacBook Pro 15"), and I reluctantly will stop buying Macs if Apple halts the Windows compatibility feature.  The current Macs are fantastically powerful in the higher models, and a switch to ARM is not necessary.
    While Bootcamp usage is high in the AppleInsider reading population, it is decidedly not with the vast majority of the Apple user base.

    So, it's more like "while a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be left in the cold from a shift to ARM, the larger percentage that don't or have used the iPhone as a gateway to the the Mac will benefit from the performance boost."
    It used to be a much higher percentage as more Windows users were switching over. But the usage seems to have dropped. But a lot of Mac gamers, such as my daughter and here friends, still use Bootcamp for that, as we still can’t keep up with pc gaming. I wonder how big that crowd is? They can’t use Parallels for that. I’ve tried.
    The service data that I've been collecting for years suggests that it is about 2% and declining right now, even including enterprise.
    What service data are you collecting?
    All of it that I can get my hands on from 55 service locations, most of which are sources inside Genius Bars. It's where the keyboard failure rate data came from, and we use it here and there for other things for the last few years.

    Relevant to this particular point, the service data collected counts if there is just a macOS install, or a macOS/Bootcamp install.
    Any updates on keyboard repairs for the 2018 and 2019 models?
  • Reply 105 of 148
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,033member
    melgross said:
    Soli said:
    melgross said:
    MadMat said:
    While a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be able to benefit from a minimal performance boost by switching from Intel to ARM processors, a larger percentage of us that use some Windows-only software (Microsoft Project to name one) and thus need Bootcamp will be left in the cold.  I have owned many Macs (currently a top-spec 2017 MacBook Pro 15"), and I reluctantly will stop buying Macs if Apple halts the Windows compatibility feature.  The current Macs are fantastically powerful in the higher models, and a switch to ARM is not necessary.
    While Bootcamp usage is high in the AppleInsider reading population, it is decidedly not with the vast majority of the Apple user base.

    So, it's more like "while a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be left in the cold from a shift to ARM, the larger percentage that don't or have used the iPhone as a gateway to the the Mac will benefit from the performance boost."
    It used to be a much higher percentage as more Windows users were switching over. But the usage seems to have dropped. But a lot of Mac gamers, such as my daughter and here friends, still use Bootcamp for that, as we still can’t keep up with pc gaming. I wonder how big that crowd is? They can’t use Parallels for that. I’ve tried.
    1) Do you think that Apple cares about a few Bootcamp users that are Windows gamers that they would hinder their entire line by keeping them slow, hot, limited, and expensive with Intel chips compared to what they already offer in something like an iPad (which I don’t think will be the chip they use for any low-end Mac).

    2) Are these Windows gamers using 12" MacBooks without a discreet GPU, which is the type of machine this move to ARM seems most imminent and would very easily trounce what Intel has been able to offer vendors?
    What makes you so certain that it’s just a “few gamers”. It can easily be a few million gamers.

    you are shortsighted. You actually think that Apple will just move to one low end Mac, and end it there? Seriously? There would be no point to it unless Apple is thinking of moving every machine over at some point, except maybe the Mac Pro and iMac Pro. Possibly, even those eventually.
    1) Compared to the number of Mac users dedicated Windows gamers using low-end Macs with integrated GPUs do account for "a few."

    2) Where do you think I said it would only be a single low-end Mac?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 106 of 148
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,544administrator
    tht said:
    melgross said:

    melgross said:

    MadMat said:
    While a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be able to benefit from a minimal performance boost by switching from Intel to ARM processors, a larger percentage of us that use some Windows-only software (Microsoft Project to name one) and thus need Bootcamp will be left in the cold.  I have owned many Macs (currently a top-spec 2017 MacBook Pro 15"), and I reluctantly will stop buying Macs if Apple halts the Windows compatibility feature.  The current Macs are fantastically powerful in the higher models, and a switch to ARM is not necessary.
    While Bootcamp usage is high in the AppleInsider reading population, it is decidedly not with the vast majority of the Apple user base.

    So, it's more like "while a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be left in the cold from a shift to ARM, the larger percentage that don't or have used the iPhone as a gateway to the the Mac will benefit from the performance boost."
    It used to be a much higher percentage as more Windows users were switching over. But the usage seems to have dropped. But a lot of Mac gamers, such as my daughter and here friends, still use Bootcamp for that, as we still can’t keep up with pc gaming. I wonder how big that crowd is? They can’t use Parallels for that. I’ve tried.
    The service data that I've been collecting for years suggests that it is about 2% and declining right now, even including enterprise.
    What service data are you collecting?
    All of it that I can get my hands on from 55 service locations, most of which are sources inside Genius Bars. It's where the keyboard failure rate data came from, and we use it here and there for other things for the last few years.

    Relevant to this particular point, the service data collected counts if there is just a macOS install, or a macOS/Bootcamp install.
    Any updates on keyboard repairs for the 2018 and 2019 models?
    We spoke about the 2018 before, but first-year failures are at about the same rate as the 2012-2015 design. The pre-redesign 2019 appears to be a bit lower than even that with the limited data set that we have.
    edited February 2020 watto_cobra
  • Reply 107 of 148
    thttht Posts: 4,613member
    tht said:
    melgross said:

    melgross said:

    MadMat said:
    While a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be able to benefit from a minimal performance boost by switching from Intel to ARM processors, a larger percentage of us that use some Windows-only software (Microsoft Project to name one) and thus need Bootcamp will be left in the cold.  I have owned many Macs (currently a top-spec 2017 MacBook Pro 15"), and I reluctantly will stop buying Macs if Apple halts the Windows compatibility feature.  The current Macs are fantastically powerful in the higher models, and a switch to ARM is not necessary.
    While Bootcamp usage is high in the AppleInsider reading population, it is decidedly not with the vast majority of the Apple user base.

    So, it's more like "while a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be left in the cold from a shift to ARM, the larger percentage that don't or have used the iPhone as a gateway to the the Mac will benefit from the performance boost."
    It used to be a much higher percentage as more Windows users were switching over. But the usage seems to have dropped. But a lot of Mac gamers, such as my daughter and here friends, still use Bootcamp for that, as we still can’t keep up with pc gaming. I wonder how big that crowd is? They can’t use Parallels for that. I’ve tried.
    The service data that I've been collecting for years suggests that it is about 2% and declining right now, even including enterprise.
    What service data are you collecting?
    All of it that I can get my hands on from 55 service locations, most of which are sources inside Genius Bars. It's where the keyboard failure rate data came from, and we use it here and there for other things for the last few years.

    Relevant to this particular point, the service data collected counts if there is just a macOS install, or a macOS/Bootcamp install.
    Any updates on keyboard repairs for the 2018 and 2019 models?
    We spoke about the 2018 before, but first-year failures are at about the same rate as the 2012-2015 design. The pre-redesign 2019 appears to be a bit lower than even that with the limited data set that we have.
    Well, I guess it is too bad it took them 3 years to get the reliability to the levels from prior Mac models. It should have been this reliable from the very beginning. Maybe they get a 1 year mulligan, but 3 years meant the butterfly keyboard become toxic. The book on Apple, especially Macs, from 2012 to 2017 is going to be quite interesting. Hopefully a few people will try to find out and write a few books.
  • Reply 108 of 148
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,323member
    melgross said:

    melgross said:

    MadMat said:
    While a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be able to benefit from a minimal performance boost by switching from Intel to ARM processors, a larger percentage of us that use some Windows-only software (Microsoft Project to name one) and thus need Bootcamp will be left in the cold.  I have owned many Macs (currently a top-spec 2017 MacBook Pro 15"), and I reluctantly will stop buying Macs if Apple halts the Windows compatibility feature.  The current Macs are fantastically powerful in the higher models, and a switch to ARM is not necessary.
    While Bootcamp usage is high in the AppleInsider reading population, it is decidedly not with the vast majority of the Apple user base.

    So, it's more like "while a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be left in the cold from a shift to ARM, the larger percentage that don't or have used the iPhone as a gateway to the the Mac will benefit from the performance boost."
    It used to be a much higher percentage as more Windows users were switching over. But the usage seems to have dropped. But a lot of Mac gamers, such as my daughter and here friends, still use Bootcamp for that, as we still can’t keep up with pc gaming. I wonder how big that crowd is? They can’t use Parallels for that. I’ve tried.
    The service data that I've been collecting for years suggests that it is about 2% and declining right now, even including enterprise.
    What service data are you collecting?
    All of it that I can get my hands on from 55 service locations, most of which are sources inside Genius Bars. It's where the keyboard failure rate data came from, and we use it here and there for other things for the last few years.

    Relevant to this particular point, the service data collected counts if there is just a macOS install, or a macOS/Bootcamp install.
    I’m trying to understand. You’re saying that you get information from Apple service centers, possibly in Apple stores about repairs and such, including info on numbers of Bootcamp installations?
  • Reply 109 of 148
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,323member
    Soli said:
    melgross said:

    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    jkdsteve said:
    There's also the issue of I/O - PCIe and Thunderebolt etc.

    The consumer will no doubt suffer through quite a lot of teething issues in software and hardware.
    How is Intel making Thunderbolt royalty-free for other chip makers an issue for Apple?
    About 2 years ago, Intel made Thunderbolt 3 a Royalty-Free, Open Standard, and just gave it to the USB Standards Consortium.

    That's what USB 4.0 actually is:

    https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-releases-thunderbolt-to-the-industry.html

    I'll ask again, "How is Intel making Thunderbolt royalty-free for other chip makers an issue for Apple?" Everything you wrote backs up my reply to jkdsteve.
    There is one little problem for Apple if they do move to ARM. How is Thunderbolt going to work with ARM? That’s an engineering problem Apple is going to have to work out, and it’s a real one.
    Again, why do you think USB4 is a problem for Apple?
    It still requires Thunderbolt. Right now, Intel makes TB controller chips, but they’re beginning to put it directly into their x86 chips. At some point, they said they won’t make the controller chips anymore. When that happens, I don’t know. Without a controller, which only works with the PCIe bus anyway, how will Apple implement this in an iPad?
  • Reply 110 of 148
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,323member
    Soli said:
    melgross said:
    Soli said:
    melgross said:
    MadMat said:
    While a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be able to benefit from a minimal performance boost by switching from Intel to ARM processors, a larger percentage of us that use some Windows-only software (Microsoft Project to name one) and thus need Bootcamp will be left in the cold.  I have owned many Macs (currently a top-spec 2017 MacBook Pro 15"), and I reluctantly will stop buying Macs if Apple halts the Windows compatibility feature.  The current Macs are fantastically powerful in the higher models, and a switch to ARM is not necessary.
    While Bootcamp usage is high in the AppleInsider reading population, it is decidedly not with the vast majority of the Apple user base.

    So, it's more like "while a tiny percentage of extreme power users may be left in the cold from a shift to ARM, the larger percentage that don't or have used the iPhone as a gateway to the the Mac will benefit from the performance boost."
    It used to be a much higher percentage as more Windows users were switching over. But the usage seems to have dropped. But a lot of Mac gamers, such as my daughter and here friends, still use Bootcamp for that, as we still can’t keep up with pc gaming. I wonder how big that crowd is? They can’t use Parallels for that. I’ve tried.
    1) Do you think that Apple cares about a few Bootcamp users that are Windows gamers that they would hinder their entire line by keeping them slow, hot, limited, and expensive with Intel chips compared to what they already offer in something like an iPad (which I don’t think will be the chip they use for any low-end Mac).

    2) Are these Windows gamers using 12" MacBooks without a discreet GPU, which is the type of machine this move to ARM seems most imminent and would very easily trounce what Intel has been able to offer vendors?
    What makes you so certain that it’s just a “few gamers”. It can easily be a few million gamers.

    you are shortsighted. You actually think that Apple will just move to one low end Mac, and end it there? Seriously? There would be no point to it unless Apple is thinking of moving every machine over at some point, except maybe the Mac Pro and iMac Pro. Possibly, even those eventually.
    1) Compared to the number of Mac users dedicated Windows gamers using low-end Macs with integrated GPUs do account for "a few."

    2) Where do you think I said it would only be a single low-end Mac?
    Well, maybe, maybe not. At any rate, the percentage may not matter if it’s several million. I Mime is right, and maybe he is, it’s about 2%, which would be, according to Apple’s latest numbers regarding Macs in use, 2 million. I think it’s higher.

    Yeah, I reread what you said. You didn’t say it would be only a low end Macbook but that they would start with that. I don’t know how I misread that.
    edited February 2020
  • Reply 111 of 148
    Herbivore2Herbivore2 Posts: 367member
    Apple will be moving their entire computing line up over to ARM CPUs. It's a no-brainer. 

    Intel is stuck at 10 nm and TSMC is down to 5 nm. That is an enormous advantage that Intel cannot overcome. In any scenario, including their high end Xeon CPU lineup. If Apple decides to build a high performance server chip based on the ARM ISA and TSMC's processes, Intel's Xeon is toast. 

    For laptops, ARM CPUs will decimate Intel's lineup. There was a very good reason Intel left the mobile CPU market. Apple's ARM units enable better performance, lower cost and better battery life than any portable Intel CPU. Especially with Intel stuck at 10 nm. And I will say it now. Intel will NOT leapfrog TSMC in Fabrication technology. Not going to happen. Take that one to the bank. And Apple's CPU design team is better than Intel's. That is a killer combination that Intel will never overcome. Ever. Intel will be lucky if they can stay competitive with AMD. In addition Intel's integrated graphics units perform abysmally. 

    Moving the laptop lineup over to ARM is absolutely going to happen. Apple may continue to offer x86 based units for a time. But eventually, the entire line up will be moving. The market will decide that. Most people will take a higher performance ARM based laptop with better battery life and lower cost than an x86 based laptop where the only advantage is the ability to run Parallels, VMWare or Boot camp. 

    Face the facts, the majority of computing is already done on ARM. Mostly on phones and tablets, but it is what it is. Developing for a single common CPU architecture makes more sense than doing so simultaneously for two platforms. One for x86 based Macbooks and Macs along with another for ARM based iphones and iPads not to mention all of the Android development going on exclusively for ARM. Android on x86 died years ago. 

    I just don't see thunderbolt as being a problem with Intel open sourcing the technology. Apple could just adopt it or dust off FireWire again. 

    Intel is one messed up company. But they were the ones that turned down Steve Jobs offer to build a CPU for the iPhone. They had no vision. Even after benefiting from Apple switching to x86 from PowerPC. But that's another story for another time. 

    Apple is relentlessly pushing development of the ARM platform. Pushed more by Android, Samsung and Qualcomm to a far greater degree than Intel and Windows. But the gap is becoming ridiculous. It makes no sense to stay on x86 just for backwards compatibility when the advantages of ARM are superior in every other sense. And Apple is always focused on the future, not the past and backwards compatibility. Otherwise, we would still be using ADB based mice and SCSI interfaces. I personally would love an OS 10.6 upgrade for my dual G5 machine. But sadly it won't be forthcoming. Which means I will never get a USB3 interface. At least the G5 is far more secure hooked up to the internet running ten4fox than any Intel based Mac running Safari. I doubt that even the NSA is looking for zero day exploits on the PowerPC platform at this time. But that is also another discussion for another time.

    Apple abandoned the powerpc and never looked back. Even at a time when the G5 was better than x86 on the desktop. X86 was just that much better for laptops. Now, ARM is superior to x86 for portable computing. The discrepancy is even bigger than it was for the G4 against Intel's Core solo. 

    Let those who want x86 and Windows compatibility purchase the slower and power hungry Intel based machines. I will choose an ARM based MacBook. At least the ARM CPUs won't have the inherent security flaws which were literally baked into Intel CPUs. With the ability to design chips for all of their computing devices, Apple could spread the costs of CPU development, integrate low power GPUs, enhance security, improve battery life and all kinds of things that they absolutely cannot do using off the shelf generic Intel parts. 

    So for those who are in denial over the upcoming switch to an all ARM based line up. It's time to come to grips with reality. The upcoming move is a poorly kept secret. 

    I hated the move to x86 from PowerPC. Even today, I remain committed to the PowerPC line up. But I still won't be purchasing an x86 based machine. I will purchase an ARM based machine, however, when Apple finally releases one. My powerbook g4 even at 1.67 GHz feels like a dinosaur. Amazingly, it is still useful. Thankfully Apple did give us an iPad pro but I would like to have a real laptop again. Something that does not come with an x86 CPU. Who knows what kind of zero day exploits the NSA already has found for that dog of a CPU. Even if running Mac OS. 

    As an aside, I have been looking for an xserve G5. They just aren't available. My suspicion is that IT personnel familiar with them know what they have and aren't letting them go. At least the aluminum encased work station
     beasts are widely available. Even G4 based xserves are difficult to find. Intel based xserves are widely available. That tells me a lot about the security and peformance of the two platforms. G4 mac minis are still available and I have one running my home automation network. I have absolutely no trust in the security of the Intel x86 platform. 

    I have waited for a long time for Apple to give me a non x86 based laptop. It seems that the wait will soon be over. That is, if Covid19 doesn't destroy the economy. Which is looking more and more likely. Again, another story for another time. 
    cyberzombiepscooter63
  • Reply 112 of 148
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 1,945member
    melgross said:
    Soli said:
    melgross said:

    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    jkdsteve said:
    There's also the issue of I/O - PCIe and Thunderebolt etc.

    The consumer will no doubt suffer through quite a lot of teething issues in software and hardware.
    How is Intel making Thunderbolt royalty-free for other chip makers an issue for Apple?
    About 2 years ago, Intel made Thunderbolt 3 a Royalty-Free, Open Standard, and just gave it to the USB Standards Consortium.

    That's what USB 4.0 actually is:

    https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-releases-thunderbolt-to-the-industry.html

    I'll ask again, "How is Intel making Thunderbolt royalty-free for other chip makers an issue for Apple?" Everything you wrote backs up my reply to jkdsteve.
    There is one little problem for Apple if they do move to ARM. How is Thunderbolt going to work with ARM? That’s an engineering problem Apple is going to have to work out, and it’s a real one.
    Again, why do you think USB4 is a problem for Apple?
    It still requires Thunderbolt. Right now, Intel makes TB controller chips, but they’re beginning to put it directly into their x86 chips. At some point, they said they won’t make the controller chips anymore. When that happens, I don’t know. Without a controller, which only works with the PCIe bus anyway, how will Apple implement this in an iPad?

    Apple is fully aware of how thunderbolt works given they were an instrumental part of it. Maybe part of the reason they added PCIe to the Aseries chips a few years ago to support standard USB chips including one with full thunderbolt support. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 113 of 148
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,033member
    melgross said:
    Soli said:
    melgross said:

    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    jkdsteve said:
    There's also the issue of I/O - PCIe and Thunderebolt etc.

    The consumer will no doubt suffer through quite a lot of teething issues in software and hardware.
    How is Intel making Thunderbolt royalty-free for other chip makers an issue for Apple?
    About 2 years ago, Intel made Thunderbolt 3 a Royalty-Free, Open Standard, and just gave it to the USB Standards Consortium.

    That's what USB 4.0 actually is:

    https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-releases-thunderbolt-to-the-industry.html

    I'll ask again, "How is Intel making Thunderbolt royalty-free for other chip makers an issue for Apple?" Everything you wrote backs up my reply to jkdsteve.
    There is one little problem for Apple if they do move to ARM. How is Thunderbolt going to work with ARM? That’s an engineering problem Apple is going to have to work out, and it’s a real one.
    Again, why do you think USB4 is a problem for Apple?
    It still requires Thunderbolt. Right now, Intel makes TB controller chips, but they’re beginning to put it directly into their x86 chips. At some point, they said they won’t make the controller chips anymore. When that happens, I don’t know. Without a controller, which only works with the PCIe bus anyway, how will Apple implement this in an iPad?
    I'm under the impression that Intel has open sourced Thunderbolt for USB 4.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 114 of 148
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,323member
    Apple will be moving their entire computing line up over to ARM CPUs. It's a no-brainer. 

    Intel is stuck at 10 nm and TSMC is down to 5 nm. That is an enormous advantage that Intel cannot overcome. In any scenario, including their high end Xeon CPU lineup. If Apple decides to build a high performance server chip based on the ARM ISA and TSMC's processes, Intel's Xeon is toast. 

    For laptops, ARM CPUs will decimate Intel's lineup. There was a very good reason Intel left the mobile CPU market. Apple's ARM units enable better performance, lower cost and better battery life than any portable Intel CPU. Especially with Intel stuck at 10 nm. And I will say it now. Intel will NOT leapfrog TSMC in Fabrication technology. Not going to happen. Take that one to the bank. And Apple's CPU design team is better than Intel's. That is a killer combination that Intel will never overcome. Ever. Intel will be lucky if they can stay competitive with AMD. In addition Intel's integrated graphics units perform abysmally. 

    Moving the laptop lineup over to ARM is absolutely going to happen. Apple may continue to offer x86 based units for a time. But eventually, the entire line up will be moving. The market will decide that. Most people will take a higher performance ARM based laptop with better battery life and lower cost than an x86 based laptop where the only advantage is the ability to run Parallels, VMWare or Boot camp. 

    Face the facts, the majority of computing is already done on ARM. Mostly on phones and tablets, but it is what it is. Developing for a single common CPU architecture makes more sense than doing so simultaneously for two platforms. One for x86 based Macbooks and Macs along with another for ARM based iphones and iPads not to mention all of the Android development going on exclusively for ARM. Android on x86 died years ago. 

    I just don't see thunderbolt as being a problem with Intel open sourcing the technology. Apple could just adopt it or dust off FireWire again. 

    Intel is one messed up company. But they were the ones that turned down Steve Jobs offer to build a CPU for the iPhone. They had no vision. Even after benefiting from Apple switching to x86 from PowerPC. But that's another story for another time. 

    Apple is relentlessly pushing development of the ARM platform. Pushed more by Android, Samsung and Qualcomm to a far greater degree than Intel and Windows. But the gap is becoming ridiculous. It makes no sense to stay on x86 just for backwards compatibility when the advantages of ARM are superior in every other sense. And Apple is always focused on the future, not the past and backwards compatibility. Otherwise, we would still be using ADB based mice and SCSI interfaces. I personally would love an OS 10.6 upgrade for my dual G5 machine. But sadly it won't be forthcoming. Which means I will never get a USB3 interface. At least the G5 is far more secure hooked up to the internet running ten4fox than any Intel based Mac running Safari. I doubt that even the NSA is looking for zero day exploits on the PowerPC platform at this time. But that is also another discussion for another time.

    Apple abandoned the powerpc and never looked back. Even at a time when the G5 was better than x86 on the desktop. X86 was just that much better for laptops. Now, ARM is superior to x86 for portable computing. The discrepancy is even bigger than it was for the G4 against Intel's Core solo. 

    Let those who want x86 and Windows compatibility purchase the slower and power hungry Intel based machines. I will choose an ARM based MacBook. At least the ARM CPUs won't have the inherent security flaws which were literally baked into Intel CPUs. With the ability to design chips for all of their computing devices, Apple could spread the costs of CPU development, integrate low power GPUs, enhance security, improve battery life and all kinds of things that they absolutely cannot do using off the shelf generic Intel parts. 

    So for those who are in denial over the upcoming switch to an all ARM based line up. It's time to come to grips with reality. The upcoming move is a poorly kept secret. 

    I hated the move to x86 from PowerPC. Even today, I remain committed to the PowerPC line up. But I still won't be purchasing an x86 based machine. I will purchase an ARM based machine, however, when Apple finally releases one. My powerbook g4 even at 1.67 GHz feels like a dinosaur. Amazingly, it is still useful. Thankfully Apple did give us an iPad pro but I would like to have a real laptop again. Something that does not come with an x86 CPU. Who knows what kind of zero day exploits the NSA already has found for that dog of a CPU. Even if running Mac OS. 

    As an aside, I have been looking for an xserve G5. They just aren't available. My suspicion is that IT personnel familiar with them know what they have and aren't letting them go. At least the aluminum encased work station
     beasts are widely available. Even G4 based xserves are difficult to find. Intel based xserves are widely available. That tells me a lot about the security and peformance of the two platforms. G4 mac minis are still available and I have one running my home automation network. I have absolutely no trust in the security of the Intel x86 platform. 

    I have waited for a long time for Apple to give me a non x86 based laptop. It seems that the wait will soon be over. That is, if Covid19 doesn't destroy the economy. Which is looking more and more likely. Again, another story for another time. 
    Intel isn’t “stuck” at 10nm.
  • Reply 115 of 148
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,323member

    mattinoz said:
    melgross said:
    Soli said:
    melgross said:

    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    jkdsteve said:
    There's also the issue of I/O - PCIe and Thunderebolt etc.

    The consumer will no doubt suffer through quite a lot of teething issues in software and hardware.
    How is Intel making Thunderbolt royalty-free for other chip makers an issue for Apple?
    About 2 years ago, Intel made Thunderbolt 3 a Royalty-Free, Open Standard, and just gave it to the USB Standards Consortium.

    That's what USB 4.0 actually is:

    https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-releases-thunderbolt-to-the-industry.html

    I'll ask again, "How is Intel making Thunderbolt royalty-free for other chip makers an issue for Apple?" Everything you wrote backs up my reply to jkdsteve.
    There is one little problem for Apple if they do move to ARM. How is Thunderbolt going to work with ARM? That’s an engineering problem Apple is going to have to work out, and it’s a real one.
    Again, why do you think USB4 is a problem for Apple?
    It still requires Thunderbolt. Right now, Intel makes TB controller chips, but they’re beginning to put it directly into their x86 chips. At some point, they said they won’t make the controller chips anymore. When that happens, I don’t know. Without a controller, which only works with the PCIe bus anyway, how will Apple implement this in an iPad?

    Apple is fully aware of how thunderbolt works given they were an instrumental part of it. Maybe part of the reason they added PCIe to the Aseries chips a few years ago to support standard USB chips including one with full thunderbolt support. 
    According g to Intel, and later by Apple, the only instrumental part Apple played was to urge Intel to come up with a faster interface, which Intel did.

    please do t tell us what Apple does things, seeing as how you don’t know. What “standard USB chips are out there that support TB? There are TB chips that support USB. And as how Intel said that their CPUs will support TB directly, which they are now beginning to do, and that TB controller chips may go away, please tell me how Apple Apple is going to use that for their ARM based devices?
  • Reply 116 of 148
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,033member
    melgross said:

    mattinoz said:
    melgross said:
    Soli said:
    melgross said:

    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    jkdsteve said:
    There's also the issue of I/O - PCIe and Thunderebolt etc.

    The consumer will no doubt suffer through quite a lot of teething issues in software and hardware.
    How is Intel making Thunderbolt royalty-free for other chip makers an issue for Apple?
    About 2 years ago, Intel made Thunderbolt 3 a Royalty-Free, Open Standard, and just gave it to the USB Standards Consortium.

    That's what USB 4.0 actually is:

    https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-releases-thunderbolt-to-the-industry.html

    I'll ask again, "How is Intel making Thunderbolt royalty-free for other chip makers an issue for Apple?" Everything you wrote backs up my reply to jkdsteve.
    There is one little problem for Apple if they do move to ARM. How is Thunderbolt going to work with ARM? That’s an engineering problem Apple is going to have to work out, and it’s a real one.
    Again, why do you think USB4 is a problem for Apple?
    It still requires Thunderbolt. Right now, Intel makes TB controller chips, but they’re beginning to put it directly into their x86 chips. At some point, they said they won’t make the controller chips anymore. When that happens, I don’t know. Without a controller, which only works with the PCIe bus anyway, how will Apple implement this in an iPad?

    Apple is fully aware of how thunderbolt works given they were an instrumental part of it. Maybe part of the reason they added PCIe to the Aseries chips a few years ago to support standard USB chips including one with full thunderbolt support. 
    According g to Intel, and later by Apple, the only instrumental part Apple played was to urge Intel to come up with a faster interface, which Intel did.

    please do t tell us what Apple does things, seeing as how you don’t know. What “standard USB chips are out there that support TB? There are TB chips that support USB. And as how Intel said that their CPUs will support TB directly, which they are now beginning to do, and that TB controller chips may go away, please tell me how Apple Apple is going to use that for their ARM based devices?
    This has been discussed ad nauseam at this point, but here's another link:


    Or are you claiming that Apple won't be able to ever support USB4?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 117 of 148
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,323member
    Soli said:
    melgross said:

    mattinoz said:
    melgross said:
    Soli said:
    melgross said:

    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    jkdsteve said:
    There's also the issue of I/O - PCIe and Thunderebolt etc.

    The consumer will no doubt suffer through quite a lot of teething issues in software and hardware.
    How is Intel making Thunderbolt royalty-free for other chip makers an issue for Apple?
    About 2 years ago, Intel made Thunderbolt 3 a Royalty-Free, Open Standard, and just gave it to the USB Standards Consortium.

    That's what USB 4.0 actually is:

    https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-releases-thunderbolt-to-the-industry.html

    I'll ask again, "How is Intel making Thunderbolt royalty-free for other chip makers an issue for Apple?" Everything you wrote backs up my reply to jkdsteve.
    There is one little problem for Apple if they do move to ARM. How is Thunderbolt going to work with ARM? That’s an engineering problem Apple is going to have to work out, and it’s a real one.
    Again, why do you think USB4 is a problem for Apple?
    It still requires Thunderbolt. Right now, Intel makes TB controller chips, but they’re beginning to put it directly into their x86 chips. At some point, they said they won’t make the controller chips anymore. When that happens, I don’t know. Without a controller, which only works with the PCIe bus anyway, how will Apple implement this in an iPad?

    Apple is fully aware of how thunderbolt works given they were an instrumental part of it. Maybe part of the reason they added PCIe to the Aseries chips a few years ago to support standard USB chips including one with full thunderbolt support. 
    According g to Intel, and later by Apple, the only instrumental part Apple played was to urge Intel to come up with a faster interface, which Intel did.

    please do t tell us what Apple does things, seeing as how you don’t know. What “standard USB chips are out there that support TB? There are TB chips that support USB. And as how Intel said that their CPUs will support TB directly, which they are now beginning to do, and that TB controller chips may go away, please tell me how Apple Apple is going to use that for their ARM based devices?
    This has been discussed ad nauseam at this point, but here's another link:


    Or are you claiming that Apple won't be able to ever support USB4?
    They can support USB 4 without supporting the TB component. It isn’t required.
  • Reply 118 of 148
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,033member
    melgross said:
    Soli said:
    melgross said:

    mattinoz said:
    melgross said:
    Soli said:
    melgross said:

    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    jkdsteve said:
    There's also the issue of I/O - PCIe and Thunderebolt etc.

    The consumer will no doubt suffer through quite a lot of teething issues in software and hardware.
    How is Intel making Thunderbolt royalty-free for other chip makers an issue for Apple?
    About 2 years ago, Intel made Thunderbolt 3 a Royalty-Free, Open Standard, and just gave it to the USB Standards Consortium.

    That's what USB 4.0 actually is:

    https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/intel-releases-thunderbolt-to-the-industry.html

    I'll ask again, "How is Intel making Thunderbolt royalty-free for other chip makers an issue for Apple?" Everything you wrote backs up my reply to jkdsteve.
    There is one little problem for Apple if they do move to ARM. How is Thunderbolt going to work with ARM? That’s an engineering problem Apple is going to have to work out, and it’s a real one.
    Again, why do you think USB4 is a problem for Apple?
    It still requires Thunderbolt. Right now, Intel makes TB controller chips, but they’re beginning to put it directly into their x86 chips. At some point, they said they won’t make the controller chips anymore. When that happens, I don’t know. Without a controller, which only works with the PCIe bus anyway, how will Apple implement this in an iPad?

    Apple is fully aware of how thunderbolt works given they were an instrumental part of it. Maybe part of the reason they added PCIe to the Aseries chips a few years ago to support standard USB chips including one with full thunderbolt support. 
    According g to Intel, and later by Apple, the only instrumental part Apple played was to urge Intel to come up with a faster interface, which Intel did.

    please do t tell us what Apple does things, seeing as how you don’t know. What “standard USB chips are out there that support TB? There are TB chips that support USB. And as how Intel said that their CPUs will support TB directly, which they are now beginning to do, and that TB controller chips may go away, please tell me how Apple Apple is going to use that for their ARM based devices?
    This has been discussed ad nauseam at this point, but here's another link:


    Or are you claiming that Apple won't be able to ever support USB4?
    They can support USB 4 without supporting the TB component. It isn’t required.
    I seem to recall years ago when I mentioned that Apple didn't have to offer TB for an ARM-based Mac that you said that TB was required. Are you saying that TB wouldn't be required? Now that it's open source and the chipsets are available I'd be surprised if Apple doesn't, but I can still see it going ether way.
  • Reply 119 of 148
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    melgross said:
    Apple will be moving their entire computing line up over to ARM CPUs. It's a no-brainer. 

    Intel is stuck at 10 nm and TSMC is down to 5 nm. That is an enormous advantage that Intel cannot overcome. In any scenario, including their high end Xeon CPU lineup. If Apple decides to build a high performance server chip based on the ARM ISA and TSMC's processes, Intel's Xeon is toast. 

    For laptops, ARM CPUs will decimate Intel's lineup. There was a very good reason Intel left the mobile CPU market. Apple's ARM units enable better performance, lower cost and better battery life than any portable Intel CPU. Especially with Intel stuck at 10 nm. And I will say it now. Intel will NOT leapfrog TSMC in Fabrication technology. Not going to happen. Take that one to the bank. And Apple's CPU design team is better than Intel's. That is a killer combination that Intel will never overcome. Ever. Intel will be lucky if they can stay competitive with AMD. In addition Intel's integrated graphics units perform abysmally. 

    Moving the laptop lineup over to ARM is absolutely going to happen. Apple may continue to offer x86 based units for a time. But eventually, the entire line up will be moving. The market will decide that. Most people will take a higher performance ARM based laptop with better battery life and lower cost than an x86 based laptop where the only advantage is the ability to run Parallels, VMWare or Boot camp. 

    Face the facts, the majority of computing is already done on ARM. Mostly on phones and tablets, but it is what it is. Developing for a single common CPU architecture makes more sense than doing so simultaneously for two platforms. One for x86 based Macbooks and Macs along with another for ARM based iphones and iPads not to mention all of the Android development going on exclusively for ARM. Android on x86 died years ago. 

    I just don't see thunderbolt as being a problem with Intel open sourcing the technology. Apple could just adopt it or dust off FireWire again. 

    Intel is one messed up company. But they were the ones that turned down Steve Jobs offer to build a CPU for the iPhone. They had no vision. Even after benefiting from Apple switching to x86 from PowerPC. But that's another story for another time. 

    Apple is relentlessly pushing development of the ARM platform. Pushed more by Android, Samsung and Qualcomm to a far greater degree than Intel and Windows. But the gap is becoming ridiculous. It makes no sense to stay on x86 just for backwards compatibility when the advantages of ARM are superior in every other sense. And Apple is always focused on the future, not the past and backwards compatibility. Otherwise, we would still be using ADB based mice and SCSI interfaces. I personally would love an OS 10.6 upgrade for my dual G5 machine. But sadly it won't be forthcoming. Which means I will never get a USB3 interface. At least the G5 is far more secure hooked up to the internet running ten4fox than any Intel based Mac running Safari. I doubt that even the NSA is looking for zero day exploits on the PowerPC platform at this time. But that is also another discussion for another time.

    Apple abandoned the powerpc and never looked back. Even at a time when the G5 was better than x86 on the desktop. X86 was just that much better for laptops. Now, ARM is superior to x86 for portable computing. The discrepancy is even bigger than it was for the G4 against Intel's Core solo. 

    Let those who want x86 and Windows compatibility purchase the slower and power hungry Intel based machines. I will choose an ARM based MacBook. At least the ARM CPUs won't have the inherent security flaws which were literally baked into Intel CPUs. With the ability to design chips for all of their computing devices, Apple could spread the costs of CPU development, integrate low power GPUs, enhance security, improve battery life and all kinds of things that they absolutely cannot do using off the shelf generic Intel parts. 

    So for those who are in denial over the upcoming switch to an all ARM based line up. It's time to come to grips with reality. The upcoming move is a poorly kept secret. 

    I hated the move to x86 from PowerPC. Even today, I remain committed to the PowerPC line up. But I still won't be purchasing an x86 based machine. I will purchase an ARM based machine, however, when Apple finally releases one. My powerbook g4 even at 1.67 GHz feels like a dinosaur. Amazingly, it is still useful. Thankfully Apple did give us an iPad pro but I would like to have a real laptop again. Something that does not come with an x86 CPU. Who knows what kind of zero day exploits the NSA already has found for that dog of a CPU. Even if running Mac OS. 

    As an aside, I have been looking for an xserve G5. They just aren't available. My suspicion is that IT personnel familiar with them know what they have and aren't letting them go. At least the aluminum encased work station
     beasts are widely available. Even G4 based xserves are difficult to find. Intel based xserves are widely available. That tells me a lot about the security and peformance of the two platforms. G4 mac minis are still available and I have one running my home automation network. I have absolutely no trust in the security of the Intel x86 platform. 

    I have waited for a long time for Apple to give me a non x86 based laptop. It seems that the wait will soon be over. That is, if Covid19 doesn't destroy the economy. Which is looking more and more likely. Again, another story for another time. 
    Intel isn’t “stuck” at 10nm.

      Yes they are, but AMD will soon be 5nm/3nm. This no-brainer Apple is moving to ARM speaks volumes to people who know nothing about development on hardware CPU designs. Apple is diversifying, not moving to ARM. The Intel days are being eclipsed by the rise of AMD and Apple will move to AMD and expand its professional lines.

    When you sell 15-20 million Macs per year your install base isn't shrinking. It's being massively augmented by its embedded space that has a consistent 18-24 month replacement cycle. Macs have a 36-60 month replacement cycle, and even longer in the professional markets.

    Gaming is massive, but not on Macs. To offset this without building out a gaming solution for the masses Apple added Arcade to it's iOS mass consumption segment. Game development is heavily dependent upon Macs and more with the new Mac Pro. The Year of the Console begins this August and it's going to suck all the oxygen out of the room more than people even realize--Arcade isn't going to dominate and people will understand that a machine tailored for heavy gaming costs less than their smartphone of today. The days of $399 consoles are over. These AMD SoC custom ASIC designed Zen 2 APUs are beasts and Apple knows all about what they're producing. But these beasts are still half the price of the highest model iPhone 11 Pro. There is no one tool for all. We are seeing specialization in computing for consumers finally arriving.

    Nothing Apple can produce will even touch those offerings which focus strictly on Gaming and have their custom FreeBSD/Windows OS [Sony and Microsoft, respectively] builds tied heavily down to real-time processing of gaming, not like an ARM based OS has paired down large applications for their tiny cousins to do several dozen actions in just one app [the obvious large app sizes be damned for what they actually do as many apps like Facebook don't leverage Apple frameworks, but their own private frameworks]. Will they serve as General Purpose Computing for the masses. No. Will they serve for productivity computing for professionals, students and small businesses? No. Neither do iOS applications. Much like people who read magazines and skim them, iPads and iPhones etc., are quick and accessible devices for getting the latest vacuous information.

    Sure, the iPad has some decently capable drawing programs, but no graphic artist worth their salt isn't also coordinating their drawings with the Mac and extending them on the Mac before making a finished product. People talk about Xcode on iPadOS but will be disappointed it's just an accessory to allow for more rapid prototyping with XCode development on the Mac.

    This isn't Apple shit canning x86. This is Apple augmenting ARM with other markets while working on solutions in x86_64 for professional Workflows.

    If people believe it took 5 years just to have a Final Cut Pro/Logic Pro X workflow [Neither of which had new versions of the software released showing off these efforts] they don't really understand my old company. There are dozens of workflows professional segments have and Apple working with IBM should be a clue that it isn't about Office productivity suites on desktops for IBM employees, but designing more custom solutions for the Enterprise space, for the Education space, for the Applied Sciences space, etc.

    Anyone like the person you replied still stuck in the mindset of PowerPC isn't worth discussing computing futures or anything computing related. He seems to think AMD and Intel x86 are the same, thus their chip designs are the same with the same exploits, yet somehow ARM is a miracle.

    He's wrong on all counts. ARM is superior in one area, as a tightly coupled embedded OS solutions because Apple paired down a subset of OS X called iOS and its children for the design constraints that is ARM.


  • Reply 120 of 148

    For laptops, ARM CPUs will decimate Intel's lineup. There was a very good reason Intel left the mobile CPU market. Apple's ARM units enable better performance, lower cost and better battery life than any portable Intel CPU. Especially with Intel stuck at 10 nm. And I will say it now. Intel will NOT leapfrog TSMC in Fabrication technology. Not going to happen. Take that one to the bank. And Apple's CPU design team is better than Intel's. That is a killer combination that Intel will never overcome. Ever. Intel will be lucky if they can stay competitive with AMD. In addition Intel's integrated graphics units perform abysmally. 
    Nice to see a comment from you after a long long time. So how about your predictions about "Google is doomed" that you copy & pasted in each and every thread for about couple of years (May be in 2017 & 18)? And Samsung moving to Tizen?????
Sign In or Register to comment.