winston2010

Like I said before, if Apple makes an ARM core running x86 instructions, it minimize the transition problems for existing apps.

I'm not saying this is what Apple will do, but If I were Apple, this is what I would do, hear me out on this:

1, x86 instructions are the processor codes, not the OS.  Both Windows and OS X are compiled into x86 instructions.
2, There used to be a RISC vs CISC architecture war to see which is faster. But Intel (and AMD) started to use x86 instructions on top of RISC-like cores and lines were blurred.
3, Intel just entered 10 nm process but Apple  A14 is already going to use 5 nm, there may be room for x86 compatibility
4, Make the compatibility at the lowest level (closer to the hardware) helps existing software run faster.
5, Apple may need to license x86 instructions, AMD has a cross license deal with Intel on x86 for AMD's x86-64.
6, Intel may decide it is better to get a licensing deal with Apple since it is profit without the cost of manufacturing.

Great for school kids. I'll take 2.

This is what I was waiting for. For me 16" MacBook Pro was too big. 12" MacBook was light, but the keyboard really sucks. 13" MacBook Air is under powered. 13"/14" MacBook Pro with 16 GB of memory and at least 512 GB SSD is my preferred configuration.

If I were Apple, I would make a x86 instructions compatible processor with ARM core.  Modern Intel processors used the same technique with RISC-like core and x86 microcode.  This way, no transition issues, if not 100% compatible with existing software.

It took China 30 years to get to where it is at today. India has a large population, it will get there eventually.