5 ms·

Apple have smoothly changed processor architecture twice before, they could do it again. Maybe they'll go ARM everywhere at some point.

philippnagel 10y ago
Is ARM objectively better than x86?
- redial 10y ago
  It is objectively cheaper.
- old-gregg 10y ago
  ARM is better for <5W applications when performance is secondary to power consumption, but Intel is beating them at performance/watt ratio everywhere else.
  - esturk 10y ago
    So why not use both? Just like iPhones use a M9 processor for some dedicated computations, why can't MacBooks offload some less intensive computations to an energy efficient ARM processor. This in no way eats the x86 market but in fact grows the ARM market.
    - redial 10y ago
      If they bring TouchID to the Mac maybe that is what they'll do as it uses the secure enclave inside the A series processors.
  - NEDM64 10y ago
    You can't say that, because there aren't 45W and more ARM chips to compare with Intels...
- tremon 10y ago
  The ARM ecosystem is objectively healthier than x86, due to competition from multiple vendors.
stan_rogers 10y ago
I was there for both. It wasn't particularly smooth. Backwards compatibility was... what's the word I'm looking for? Laughable. That's it.
- georgemcbay 10y ago
  These days "good enough" CPUs are cheap enough that they could probably field a generation of switchover machines which had both x86 and ARM processors and just build a virtual machine style environment into the OS to more or less seamlessly run the "legacy" apps on "legacy" hardware without the need for all of that software backward compatibility. Running old apps on a cheap i3 would be far better than trying to do x86-64 software emulation on ARM. Of course, the business relationship side is not quite as clear as the technology side if you want to ensure consistent delivery of a lot of parts -- "sell us a bunch of CPUs for this machine designed as a stopgap until we don't need your CPUs anymore", though maybe that is solvable by dealing with AMD. All that said... I'm perfectly happy with x86 on the desktop and have yet to see any indication that ARM can compete on the types of jobs I still do with "desktop"-class (whether they be actual desktops or laptops) machines, like code compiling, RAW photo editing, video editing, etc.
  - smitherfield 10y ago
    I believe Apple tried to do just that in the early days of the 68K to PowerPC switchover (I may be confusing them with another company), but it ended up not working very well.

philippnagel 10y ago

Is ARM objectively better than x86?

redial 10y ago
It is objectively cheaper.
old-gregg 10y ago
ARM is better for <5W applications when performance is secondary to power consumption, but Intel is beating them at performance/watt ratio everywhere else.
- esturk 10y ago
  So why not use both? Just like iPhones use a M9 processor for some dedicated computations, why can't MacBooks offload some less intensive computations to an energy efficient ARM processor. This in no way eats the x86 market but in fact grows the ARM market.
  - redial 10y ago
    If they bring TouchID to the Mac maybe that is what they'll do as it uses the secure enclave inside the A series processors.
- NEDM64 10y ago
  You can't say that, because there aren't 45W and more ARM chips to compare with Intels...
tremon 10y ago
The ARM ecosystem is objectively healthier than x86, due to competition from multiple vendors.

stan_rogers 10y ago

I was there for both. It wasn't particularly smooth. Backwards compatibility was... what's the word I'm looking for? Laughable. That's it.

georgemcbay 10y ago
These days "good enough" CPUs are cheap enough that they could probably field a generation of switchover machines which had both x86 and ARM processors and just build a virtual machine style environment into the OS to more or less seamlessly run the "legacy" apps on "legacy" hardware without the need for all of that software backward compatibility. Running old apps on a cheap i3 would be far better than trying to do x86-64 software emulation on ARM. Of course, the business relationship side is not quite as clear as the technology side if you want to ensure consistent delivery of a lot of parts -- "sell us a bunch of CPUs for this machine designed as a stopgap until we don't need your CPUs anymore", though maybe that is solvable by dealing with AMD. All that said... I'm perfectly happy with x86 on the desktop and have yet to see any indication that ARM can compete on the types of jobs I still do with "desktop"-class (whether they be actual desktops or laptops) machines, like code compiling, RAW photo editing, video editing, etc.
- smitherfield 10y ago
  I believe Apple tried to do just that in the early days of the 68K to PowerPC switchover (I may be confusing them with another company), but it ended up not working very well.