Mac Goes Arm

[WildWestDesigns]

I'm not actually surprised by this. It was pretty well trending that way for quite a while and with the T2 chip, that just kinda cemented it in my mind.

It looks like the roadmap is 2 yrs with the first ones coming out at the end of the year. Adobe has already started going the way of Arm with Mac already. I don't know about Corel, and given how their initial Corel on Mac happened, I have to wonder if that will go over well in 2 yrs time.

To me, ARM has one big advantage at this time, power consumption versus resource consumption, up to a certain point. Rigs like I use or some others on here use, that advantage quickly goes away. In 2 yrs time though, it may be a different story. Maybe there will be another Rosetta to help lessen the pain of transition.

 

[Johnny Best]

Apple is dropping the Intel chips and going with their own chips.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

Apple is dropping the Intel chips and going with their own chips.

Yes, that's what that article was about. Apple Silicon or something like that, but based on the ARM arch.

Combine this though with OpenGL deprecation (and removal I'm thinking as well, deprecation was either with this latest version or the one before), for somethings it's not all that good. It just depends on how things go from here. I think they totally bypassed even considering Vulcan and just went straight to their own Metal.

 

[unclebun]

Sounds like Apple is trying to do a Windows 10. Make it to where computers are just a big phone.

 

[greysquirrel]

I don't game on my mac nor do I run windows(anymore) as long as the processor is fast and reliable I really don't care what one is inside. They have figured out through their mobile solutions different scenarios for each application. My MacBook pro with i7 runs super hot....I would not ind that being able to be addressed. The proof would be seeing the ship their pro series desktop with them...maybe then it could be affordable...

 

[Bobby H]

It's fairly easy to understand why Apple will transition to their own ARM-based CPUs. Multiple factors are involved.

I think the chief factor is Intel has been moving way too slow and stubbornly conservative with its own CPU development. The company acts almost like a cartel of sorts, strong-arming vendors into using its arguably obsolescent designs as opposed to taking a chance on newer designs from rivals, like AMD and its acclaimed Ryzen CPU. I don't know what's going on in back room "negotiations" between Intel and companies like Dell, HP and others. The Ryzen CPU has gotten a lot of raves, but it's still not appearing in a lot of desktop and notebook PC product lines.

The glacier-pace of development has turned certain Intel products into a complete waste of money. The notebook version of their Core i9 CPU is a primary case in point. The Core i9 consumes too much power and runs hotter than lava, especially in a thin notebook chassis like a Mac Book Pro or a Dell XPS. The very high priced CPU throttles way down to very sub-par performance levels to save it from cooking itself to death. The 2020 versions of Dell's 15" and 17" XPS notebooks don't even have an i9 option available currently. Even the latest 8-core i7 CPUs generate a lot of heat and can have throttling issues.

Obviously Apple doesn't need any of that garbage. Apple already has a lot of experience developing ARM-based devices and software (for iPhone and iPad). This move simplifies things for them. The move will probably improve their profit margins and/or allow them to sell Macs at more competitive prices.

Still, I have very mixed feelings about the move. Apple still plans on selling Intel-based Macs for a couple more years, but I predict the sales levels of those kinds of devices to go right into the toilet. Who in their right mind would want to buy a pricey Mac notebook with an Intel-based CPU if Apple is going to stop supporting it in the future?

Ditching x86-based CPU architecture means no more ability to run a Windows partition and Windows-based apps natively on Apple hardware. That's going to force people who've been using Mac hardware to run PC apps into a tough choice. When they buy a new computer they'll either have to switch to an ARM-based Mac ecosystem or they'll have to ditch the Apple-branded hardware for something else that runs Windows natively. It's too bad Apple couldn't have tried making a Ryzen-based Mac.

The software used in the sign industry is extremely Windows-specific. Very little (if any at all) runs native under OSX. And now there's going to be Intel and ARM-based variants of OSX for a couple of years. I certainly do not expect developers such as SAi to create two different versions of Flexi to run on OSX when they're not even making an Intel-based version for OSX now.

CorelDRAW is a more "mainstream" graphics application. The company has been struggling to get their current OSX variant up to snuff. Do they have the resources to develop ARM-based and Intel-based versions of CorelDRAW for OSX? Adobe is already at work porting their applications, but they're a big company with a lot of resources. Serif kind of has a head start since they have iPad versions of Affinity Designer and Photo.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

The Core i9 consumes too much power and runs hotter than lava, especially in a thin notebook chassis like a Mac Book Pro or a Dell XPS. The very high priced CPU throttles way down to very sub-par performance levels to save it from cooking itself to death. The 2020 versions of Dell's 15" and 17" XPS notebooks don't even have an i9 option available currently. Even the latest 8-core i7 CPUs generate a lot of heat and can have throttling issues.

This on one hand is the pro for ARM that I was thinking about, but it also has a con attached to it. The con is, when someone starts getting into the more power user situation, needing insane amount of resources, that power consumption versus resource used advantage that ARM has starts diving. Now, this may improve in the 2 yrs time to where it's a none issue, but right now it's still an issue to think about.

This move simplifies things for them. The move will probably improve their profit margins and/or allow them to sell Macs at more competitive prices.

It does simplify things and it should make them more profitable. I don't know about the other things though.

Who in their right mind would want to buy a pricey Mac notebook with an Intel-based CPU if Apple is going to stop supporting it in the future?

Only if their software needs trump their hardware needs at this specific point, but the writing is on the wall.

Ditching x86-based CPU architecture means no more ability to run a Windows partition and Windows-based apps natively on Apple hardware. That's going to force people who've been using Mac hardware to run PC apps into a tough choice. When they buy a new computer they'll either have to switch to an ARM-based Mac ecosystem or they'll have to ditch the Apple-branded hardware for something else that runs Windows natively.

Not quite, there is emulation (a lot of people think that emulation and virtualization are the same things, but there is one key difference, emulation can actually handle hardware needs via software, virtualization cannot, it uses what's available physically on the host). Now this does present the problem of resources. Emulation does a hhhhhuuuuuuuggggggeeeee hit to usage and resources compared to virtualization. It's huge. Depending on the specs of the host, it may make what would have been marginal good enough with virtualization to unusable via emulation. But it is an option, but the hardware needs would be significantly (which is where you get to the con of using ARM (at this time) as well mentioned above).

CorelDRAW is a more "mainstream" graphics application. The company has been struggling to get their current OSX variant up to snuff. Do they have the resources to develop ARM-based and Intel-based versions of CorelDRAW for OSX? Adobe is already at work porting their applications, but they're a big company with a lot of resources. Serif kind of has a head start since they have iPad versions of Affinity Designer and Photo.

Ironically, this is where having programs written in more portable scripting languages actually would help out. And even JS (most people don't think of compiling JS (although the browser has been doing this behind the scenes for a very long time), but it can be compiled and used in a binary form as well) can be compiled if the need of source protection is necessary. That way it wouldn't matter so much what arch is going on. There is a sacrifice on not using low level languages (speed, resource management etc), but this is a major plus as well as it doesn't tend to matter what arch it's on. This is also why the trend to more browser based software (for better or worse, it has it's pros and cons) is happening (that and the obvious higher profit for subscription based software as well).

 

[Gene@mpls]

I have been concerned with Apple's profitability.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

I have been concerned with Apple's profitability.

I am sure they are doing well with their phone and iPad sales. The Macs are probably a stagnant (and maybe now niche and maybe declining at that) market.

The one thing though, this will make it easier for an even more closed ecosystem. Not something I am a fan of, but to each their own.

 

[Gene@mpls]

Being facetious here.

 

[WildWestDesigns]

Being facetious here.

Some are actually concerned about the "traditional" product sales though and some of this push to ARM could be to give the user base of the other products a similar experience that they are used to on the iPhones and iPads (at least as far as the UI goes). Also a push to a more closed system. It's possible to still install 3rd party software that isn't through the store, that's going to be less and less as time goes on. That does have it's pros and cons, but even the OS that has had repos far longer then Apple or Windows have had their respective stores is actually opening up to other forms of "installing" (this is in quotes due to actually no installation happening, it's ready to run portable binaries). This centralized way of doing things is not really good for the end user in the long run, good for a sys admin, but not an end user, but I digress.