> 12/ Or do you allow cross-compilation? Then the access to underlying system undermines "iOS" walled approach. Only "certified apps" isn't so interesting to mo

> 12/ Or do you allow cross-compilation? Then the access to underlying system undermines "iOS" walled approach. Only "certified apps" isn't so interesting to most people. I don't get this point. How does ARM translate to "walled garden"? I see no reason to tie ARM and the walled garden-approach together, just because that's the way it is on mobile. Non-certified apps would work just fine on OSX if the developers build for ARM. Assumption 1: Most interesting OSX apps are active ones, where the authors have the source code, and are thus able to cross-compile and publish ARM binaries. Assumption 2: Due to volume (and using an indenpendent foundry) the A11 chip is at least 10x cheaper than an Intel CPU. I'd love to see a Macbook with 10xA11s, for a total of 20 high-performance cores, even if it can only run non-legacy apps ("legacy" meaning apps that depend on x86 code somehow). Does anyone know how much space the four inefficient cores on the A11 take up? Perhaps the A11 volume is just so large that Apple can spit them out at a cost so low that it doesn't matter if four of the cores remain unused? I don't think they'd be of much use in a Macbook -- at least not the 40 of them that would be available in a 10xA11 setup.