Very interesting. Apple just killed the Hackintoshes that runs on cheap Intel PC's.
That’s not really the case until macOS no longer supports Intel, which is a ways off given they’re still going to be releasing Intel Macs for the next year or two.
I am also skeptical. All of this talk about virtualization, Rosetta, etc. Very reminiscent of when we went from PowerPC to Intel. The difference is, going to Intel was a boon because suddenly we had Macs that could run linux, Windows, etc. It was great, and I promptly tossed my Windows machine out a window.
Now? We're going in the opposite direction, hoping all of these virtualization technologies won't take a bit performance hit (I've got news. They always do!). He's talking about getting linux running on a mac, which is great, but are we talking about custom ARM builds? There are only a limited number of distros (granted, all my favorites are there) and even then having ARM support doesn't by any means guarantee compatibility with your arm processor. Nothing has been built for Apple's chips that I know of (yet).
And graphics performance? Anyone here really think Apple is going to magically be able to compete with nVidia hardware, with on-the-fly ray tracing support? I find it hard to swallow. We will need to get AMD or nVidia to create drivers for OSX I suppose if we have their gpu's at all.
Then we have the question of native performance. Until I see some benchmarks I will reserve judgment. I'll be very happy indeed if they can get their chips to compete with the latest Ryzen cpus.
Just so I'm not sounding too negative, I am very excited for the common development across iOS and OSX. This should bring a ton of software across both platforms.
While xCode is huge with iOS development, I am not aware of those outside of that ecosystem being big fans. This turns on getting everyone to use it, no? Otherwise we aren't going to see as many apps from Windows developers who wanted to go cross-platform, but don't want to switch IDE's.
I really appreciated Apples note at the end explaining the precautions it took due to the virus, because I was wondering although it’s slick and the best WWDC keynote ever IMO, did you all really need to go to the Apple campus to make this? So that won some browny points with me.
Trouble I have, is I want a new main computer soon, this year or next, and thus do you buy an end of the era Intel Mac with most of the bugs ironed out? Go mad even and buy a Mac Pro with the hope it’ll last 15 or 20 years? Or do you get a new Apple Silicone Mac with unproven design that no doubt will have issues as most Apple first generation products seem to. Tricky proposition I think.
Why do people think that whenever something new comes out, everything old just stops working. Those people can just buy an Intel Mac, which will still be supported for years. If there aren’t any new ones sold, they can always buy a used one cheaper.
Apples idea of years seems to be 5. Yes it’s correct as it’s ‘years’, but I don’t know many people who buy new Macs every 5 years.
Shhhh - my 2012 MacBook Pro which has been supported for 8 years (& which I'm typing on now) might hear & get all confused!!
Haha, I was thinking of the hardware support I think? My 2010 no longer gets updates though, only the odd security patch..
Unfortunately my MacBook goes obsolete too this year but I'm hoping to get a few more years use out of it.
The new MacBooks must bring touch screens. The interface and iOS compatibility features are screaming for touch.
Mac Pro users lost again - if lucky they might be able to reuse their wheels
Linux compatible but no word on Windows?
If Messages is the most important Mac app and Safari is mainly for Pinterest... then this marks then end of the Mac for corporate use. Tim said PERSONAL computer. Don't expect docks or any focus on knowledge workers beyond group chat. iOS 14 uses AI to organize apps - but macOS doesn't use AI to organize documents or mix them with side panels showing related mails, chats,... that is super disappointing.
Don't get why Apple will launch more hardware using Intel. I don't even get how they will they sell their existing "built on a terrible platform with no future" products?
How do you conclude that MacPro users would be lost? The MacPro has this magical thing called a PCIe slot. Have an Intel MacPro? Get a PCIe card with Apple Silicon. Have a MacPro with Apple Silicon? Get a PCIe card with Intel x86. This is a non-issue.
The potential here is amazing. Apple will truly be the first company creating their own computers for the first time, designing everything under one roof, so they can innovate in brand new ways.
Every Apple event can mean major changes to the industry. They can start making computers with faster chips than anything else that's available. And, Intel will have to start innovating again, so better chip competition and faster chips there. But Apple will have the advantage, building their entire system on the newer technology of the two.
And like they said in the keynote, every Mac can have a great GPU now. Even the Mac Mini and Macbook Air can have a legit GPU in it, not just the Pros.
Plus, Mac will be able to leverage a huge base of info in the iOS ecosystem. The chips from the iPhone will subsidizing the entire operation, and iPhones are probably the most profitable 'computers' in the world. So, no longer will Mac be trying to keep up with off the shelf parts, but will be a first class member of the biggest show in town in it's little brother the iPhone.
I still think we will get discrete GPUs from AMD on some hardware. I can't imagine an IGPU being able to perform the same or better.
Man, Apple knocked it out of the park with this. They addressed all the major concerns people have been having over switching to ARM.
They only left out Bootcamp, but even that was indirectly addressed by saying they’re still making Intel Macs as well. By the time they finish transitioning they might have a solution for that too.
Apple never does anything without a long term roadmap, which none of us have access to, but you will know if there is a Bootcamp in less than two years.
I'm just going to pretend that I didn't watch the first minute or two of the keynote and ignore any politics.
How horrible that someone considers human rights of others. This wouldn't be political to you if you started believing that people of color deserve equal rights.
It's political crap and I reject it.
Funny how only racists think equal rights for people of color is "political." Everyone else just things it's ethical.
I agree. Racism, and bigotry in general, is so deeply integrated in so many places, it has to be attacked everywhere. It’s not just the right thing to do, diversity of people brings diversity of ideas which leads to strength. Everyone wins.
No word on Windows support? That's gonna be a deal breaker for some.
Ima not sure why they didn’t say anything about Windows virtualization, but they demoed enough Intel-native apps to show you that current Windows virtualization software should continue to run on Apple Silicon machines...
If the road this ends up going down means the same apps on a Mac are the same apps on an iPad, then surely Apples PC market share is going to shrink even further, everyone will just buy a much cheaper iPad.
I’m not questioning Apples silicone prowess here, I’m questioning if developers will follow them down the path.
That isn’t how apps are developed. Apple are not changing the silicon so they can write the same apps for both, as was explained in the Keynote. They are doing it for a lot of other reasons. Thinner laptops being one I’d imagine!
Apple already have Safari, Keynote, Photos, Mail, Maps, etc, etc, etc running on both platforms. They are not the same apps and putting the same processors in each won’t change that at all.
Maybe I missed it, but I haven't heard them say ARM once. I wonder if that means anything.
It’s not their brand. They’re Apple-designed chips. Why would they?
Because that's the name of the architecture, obviously. They have no issue using the names of other brands.
I also looked for an image with UNIX and POSIX on it, because Steve certainly wasn't afraid of name dropping those non-Apple brands that Apple built products on too. Image search came up short though, annoyingly.
Everyone else, yes I get that "Apple Silicon" is ARM based, but I found the fact that they didn't name check it interesting. Maybe a greater divergence is on the cards.
The new MacBooks must bring touch screens. The interface and iOS compatibility features are screaming for touch.
I thought about this when he showed off the Finder menu items having “more room to breathe” or whatever. Touch targets, possibly?
If Messages is the most important Mac app and Safari is mainly for Pinterest... then this marks then end of the Mac for corporate use. Tim said PERSONAL computer. Don't expect docks or any focus on knowledge workers beyond group chat. iOS 14 uses AI to organize apps - but macOS doesn't use AI to organize documents or mix them with side panels showing related mails, chats,... that is super disappointing.
Lol what? Corporations use Office and Adobe CC and Maya. What on earth do you mean?
Don't get why Apple will launch more hardware using Intel. I don't even get how they will they sell their existing "built on a terrible platform with no future" products?
Transition is 2 years, meanwhile people need computers to do work.
If the road this ends up going down means the same apps on a Mac are the same apps on an iPad, then surely Apples PC market share is going to shrink even further, everyone will just buy a much cheaper iPad.
I’m not questioning Apples silicone prowess here, I’m questioning if developers will follow them down the path.
That isn’t how apps are developed. Apple are not changing the silicon so they can write the same apps for both, as was explained in the Keynote. They are doing it for a lot of other reasons. Thinner laptops being one I’d imagine!
Apple already have Safari, Keynote, Photos, Mail, Maps, etc, etc, etc running on both platforms. They are not the same apps and putting the same processors in each won’t change that at all.
It will take effort, money and resources for a developer to make their programme that runs on X86 PCs also run on Mac OS Apple Silicone machines, and when Apple has a single digit market share, how many are going to do that? Even more so if they have an iOS app I think most will just let that be the programme for the new Macs instead, better value for the company and those share holders, Mac users get a lesser experience though.
No word on Windows support? That's gonna be a deal breaker for some.
Why do people think that whenever something new comes out, everything old just stops working. Those people can just buy an Intel Mac, which will still be supported for years. If there aren’t any new ones sold, they can always buy a used one cheaper.
Apples idea of years seems to be 5. Yes it’s correct as it’s ‘years’, but I don’t know many people who buy new Macs every 5 years.
5 years!?
My Mac mini from 2012 is running the latest version of macOS... that’s umm... give me a second to do the arithmetic... 8 years.
The virtualization strategy isn’t 100% clear at this point, with respect to running Windows VMs, but I did see the window title on the Linux VM said Parallels so I suspect they’ll have a general purpose environment for x86 VMs using Rosetta 2 and not a baked-in approach just for Linux.
This presentation addressed most of my concerns. Can’t wait to test drive an Apple Silicon powered Mac.
The fact that Apple’s Dev sites are all clogged up right now tells me a lot of Devs are trying to get profiles for iOS14/iPadOS14 and give the new bits a whirl.
No word on Windows support? That's gonna be a deal breaker for some.
Ima not sure why they didn’t say anything about Windows virtualization, but they demoed enough Intel-native apps to show you that current Windows virtualization software should continue to run on Apple Silicon machines...
Yes, but... strangely enough when you had Craig I think talking, when you saw the desktop it also has Parallels shrunk down running Windows.. in the lower left hand corner, that’s what it looked like to me anyway.
Why would Apple even build MacBooks or iMacs anymore! They will probably build larger screen iPads! Cook has been a fan of the iPad as a computer replacement anyway! It appears that the Apple computer line up will be just a few iPads and iPhones! Mac Pro might still have a Intel Xeon Chips for a brief time but I do not see the pro line up existing but a few years! Apple computers will not exist much longer! All Tim Cook wants is a mobile device environment with limited pro features! Apple wants to go into services as well! It’s all about sales margins! Cook claims innovation but it really is about money! Apple is not dead but will be totally different in a few years!
If the road this ends up going down means the same apps on a Mac are the same apps on an iPad, then surely Apples PC market share is going to shrink even further, everyone will just buy a much cheaper iPad.
I’m not questioning Apples silicone prowess here, I’m questioning if developers will follow them down the path.
Ummm, there’s over a hundred million Mac users. Developers will follow - it’s not a “hire a new team and rewrite all your code” obstacle. It’s a click-a-button and recompile inconvenience for 99% of developers.
Marketshare is not a metric you use to decide if you’re going to take time and develop software for a particular platform - what’s more important is user base and which versions of the OS is being used the most.
Well this was the best WEDC keynote they’ve ever done, probably the best use of that new theatre since it was built too. I do like the new Apple Watch, iPhone and iPads features, even if they are ripped straight from Android..
But.. I think Apple could have just killed the Mac, they are asking a lot from development houses here. And when your total market share globally is in single digits, I’m not sure many will comply, most did it for Intel as that’s the platform PCs use anyway, so it was easy, but now asking them to make effectively two apps, one for PC’s and one for Macs and iPads and iPhones, I’m not so sure many will want to do that, or, you’ll end up with a severely less capable app from the iPhone running in your new Max with Apple silicone.
Yeah, if you didn't understand it then it's probably best not to comment.
Comments
Now? We're going in the opposite direction, hoping all of these virtualization technologies won't take a bit performance hit (I've got news. They always do!). He's talking about getting linux running on a mac, which is great, but are we talking about custom ARM builds? There are only a limited number of distros (granted, all my favorites are there) and even then having ARM support doesn't by any means guarantee compatibility with your arm processor. Nothing has been built for Apple's chips that I know of (yet).
And graphics performance? Anyone here really think Apple is going to magically be able to compete with nVidia hardware, with on-the-fly ray tracing support? I find it hard to swallow. We will need to get AMD or nVidia to create drivers for OSX I suppose if we have their gpu's at all.
Then we have the question of native performance. Until I see some benchmarks I will reserve judgment. I'll be very happy indeed if they can get their chips to compete with the latest Ryzen cpus.
Just so I'm not sounding too negative, I am very excited for the common development across iOS and OSX. This should bring a ton of software across both platforms.
While xCode is huge with iOS development, I am not aware of those outside of that ecosystem being big fans. This turns on getting everyone to use it, no? Otherwise we aren't going to see as many apps from Windows developers who wanted to go cross-platform, but don't want to switch IDE's.
Trouble I have, is I want a new main computer soon, this year or next, and thus do you buy an end of the era Intel Mac with most of the bugs ironed out? Go mad even and buy a Mac Pro with the hope it’ll last 15 or 20 years? Or do you get a new Apple Silicone Mac with unproven design that no doubt will have issues as most Apple first generation products seem to.
Tricky proposition I think.
I still think we will get discrete GPUs from AMD on some hardware. I can't imagine an IGPU being able to perform the same or better.
Apple already have Safari, Keynote, Photos, Mail, Maps, etc, etc, etc running on both platforms. They are not the same apps and putting the same processors in each won’t change that at all.
I also looked for an image with UNIX and POSIX on it, because Steve certainly wasn't afraid of name dropping those non-Apple brands that Apple built products on too. Image search came up short though, annoyingly.
Everyone else, yes I get that "Apple Silicon" is ARM based, but I found the fact that they didn't name check it interesting. Maybe a greater divergence is on the cards.
Lol what? Corporations use Office and Adobe CC and Maya. What on earth do you mean?
Transition is 2 years, meanwhile people need computers to do work.
5 years!?
My Mac mini from 2012 is running the latest version of macOS... that’s umm... give me a second to do the arithmetic... 8 years.
This presentation addressed most of my concerns. Can’t wait to test drive an Apple Silicon powered Mac.
The fact that Apple’s Dev sites are all clogged up right now tells me a lot of Devs are trying to get profiles for iOS14/iPadOS14 and give the new bits a whirl.
Yes, but... strangely enough when you had Craig I think talking, when you saw the desktop it also has Parallels shrunk down running Windows.. in the lower left hand corner, that’s what it looked like to me anyway.
Ummm, there’s over a hundred million Mac users. Developers will follow - it’s not a “hire a new team and rewrite all your code” obstacle. It’s a click-a-button and recompile inconvenience for 99% of developers.
Marketshare is not a metric you use to decide if you’re going to take time and develop software for a particular platform - what’s more important is user base and which versions of the OS is being used the most.
Yeah, if you didn't understand it then it's probably best not to comment.