I've said it before here: Intel allowing ARM chip makers to use its 10nm process is not an "automatic win" for the company, as many seem to believe it is. If A

I've said it before here: Intel allowing ARM chip makers to use its 10nm process is not an "automatic win" for the company, as many seem to believe it is. If Apple is already able to match some of Intel's mainstream CPUs with an inferior process, what do you think is going to happen when Apple can use the same 10nm process Intel uses? a) Apple embarrasses Intel with a much cheaper chip (I'm talking ~5x here) that can surpass some of its most powerful notebook chips, while both using the same process. b) Apple replaces Intel in most of its Mac lineup with the exception of Macbook Pro (and even those chips could be replaced with cheaper AMD Zen chips soon). c) Intel is ultimately chased to the more profitable "up-market" (typical innovator's dilemma), and loses control of the consumer market. d) All of the above. I hope Apple does switch to its own ARM chips for the Mac line. It's what Steve Jobs would've done and would've wanted, but it remains to be seen if Tim Cook is willing to follow in his footsteps to that degree. For those still worrying that "Mac performance would suffer" - newsflash - Macbook Air has already been using the lower (than Core i3) performance "Core M5" for at least a generation. So if you have the latest Macbook Air, you're already benefiting from less performance than you did 2-3 years ago with Core i5. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if Apple announces an A11-powered Macbook Air next year that is 30%+ faster than the previous "Intel Core" Macbook Air. It would also be a great and very smart way to launch the ARM-powered Macbooks because people would have little to complain about (other than perhaps a few initial compatibility issues, but I think they will get over those quickly as developers update their apps).