3 ms·

Given the Mac's history in the last few years, and the fact that it only accounts for 12% of Apple's revenue and 8% of shipped units, I see two scenarios: 1) A

by andr 10y ago

Given the Mac's history in the last few years, and the fact that it only accounts for 12% of Apple's revenue and 8% of shipped units, I see two scenarios: 1) Apple gets out of the Mac business in a few years - Apple is not the kind of company to wait patiently for its product lines to run into the ground. The only reason they really need the Mac is Xcode for all those iOS apps that need to be developed. I wouldn't be surprised to see an Xcode for iCloud, or maybe even some kind of partnership with Microsoft (Visual Studio already lets you build iOS apps, just not in Swift). 2) Apple is working on the Mac's second act (third?), which could only be a switch to ARM. It makes business sense because a lot of the R&D will be united between iOS and Mac - making those A9s and A10s sure isn't cheap. And it explains the lackluster progress from customers' perspective. My bet is on #1, so all the criticism about the MacBook's ports or RAM is just barking up the wrong tree.

mojuba 10y ago
> The only reason they really need the Mac is Xcode for all those iOS apps that need to be developed. This is simply not true. MacOS is at the very least a companion OS that gets more and more tightly integrated with the iOS devices. App handover, now also copy/paste, etc etc. An iPhone without a Mac loses many of its advantages over Android. Let alone that there are no signs Apple is going to abandon the Mac business as you say, the recent MBP announcements being the best proof of it. On (2) switching to ARM: I personally don't believe in this, because this will break a lot of software and will seriously piss off a lot of people. The switch to Intel was relatively easier back in the day because the Mac user base at the time was laughable and there was a big promise that the Macs will become a lot more powerful. I know about the bitcode and stuff, but the more I think about it, the less I believe Apple is prepared to make the switch for its laptops and desktops. Maybe, just maybe one separate product line like MacBook Air switches to ARM, but then what's the point?
- sjwright 10y ago
  There's simply no point for Apple to switch desktop CPU architectures unless there's a unavoidably compelling reason to do so. The move to Intel met this high threshold easily. A modest cost saving doesn't qualify and would be partially swallowed up by R&D costs. Energy/thermal savings might be a reason in theory, but how much of a laptop's energy use goes to the CPU anyway? Apple seems to be doing just fine with Intel's low-TDP parts anyway.
- boulos 10y ago
  The switch to x86 from PPC turned out to be such a ridiculous win in terms of overall performance and compatibility that the community's initial reaction (omg! Nooooo!) was defused. Apple also did a good job with Rosetta, which they kept around for quite some time. You'll note that Intel has folks that have done binary translation of ARM in an attempt to grab some mobile market share. The same could be done on the x86 => ARM side. But it only works if the result is fast enough. We're probably still not that close today, but what odds would you take on 5 years? If most of the software folks are writing on macs is for other Apple ARM-based products, it doesn't sound so crazy to emulate x86 for people doing "server" work.
cpr 10y ago
Apple will never abandon the development platform they themselves want. So we get to piggyback on their self-interest...
jeffbax 10y ago
Companies don't just "abandon" $20B/year businesses, and it will sure take a lot more than a "few years" for that to decline to make a comparison to iPhone's inevitable cannibalization of the iPod. Additionally, they see iOS devices and Macs as completely distinct, thus not merging them into one like the Surface attempts. Your theories… are pretty much ludicrous.

by andr 10y ago

mojuba 10y ago

> The only reason they really need the Mac is Xcode for all those iOS apps that need to be developed. This is simply not true. MacOS is at the very least a companion OS that gets more and more tightly integrated with the iOS devices. App handover, now also copy/paste, etc etc. An iPhone without a Mac loses many of its advantages over Android. Let alone that there are no signs Apple is going to abandon the Mac business as you say, the recent MBP announcements being the best proof of it. On (2) switching to ARM: I personally don't believe in this, because this will break a lot of software and will seriously piss off a lot of people. The switch to Intel was relatively easier back in the day because the Mac user base at the time was laughable and there was a big promise that the Macs will become a lot more powerful. I know about the bitcode and stuff, but the more I think about it, the less I believe Apple is prepared to make the switch for its laptops and desktops. Maybe, just maybe one separate product line like MacBook Air switches to ARM, but then what's the point?

sjwright 10y ago
There's simply no point for Apple to switch desktop CPU architectures unless there's a unavoidably compelling reason to do so. The move to Intel met this high threshold easily. A modest cost saving doesn't qualify and would be partially swallowed up by R&D costs. Energy/thermal savings might be a reason in theory, but how much of a laptop's energy use goes to the CPU anyway? Apple seems to be doing just fine with Intel's low-TDP parts anyway.
boulos 10y ago
The switch to x86 from PPC turned out to be such a ridiculous win in terms of overall performance and compatibility that the community's initial reaction (omg! Nooooo!) was defused. Apple also did a good job with Rosetta, which they kept around for quite some time. You'll note that Intel has folks that have done binary translation of ARM in an attempt to grab some mobile market share. The same could be done on the x86 => ARM side. But it only works if the result is fast enough. We're probably still not that close today, but what odds would you take on 5 years? If most of the software folks are writing on macs is for other Apple ARM-based products, it doesn't sound so crazy to emulate x86 for people doing "server" work.

cpr 10y ago

Apple will never abandon the development platform they themselves want. So we get to piggyback on their self-interest...

jeffbax 10y ago

Companies don't just "abandon" $20B/year businesses, and it will sure take a lot more than a "few years" for that to decline to make a comparison to iPhone's inevitable cannibalization of the iPod. Additionally, they see iOS devices and Macs as completely distinct, thus not merging them into one like the Surface attempts. Your theories… are pretty much ludicrous.