5 ms·

I would love an ARM based MacBook Air. I dunno why it’s widely assumed if Apple introduces one ARM based Mac that all Mac’s will eventually go ARM - Operating

by EricE 7y ago

I would love an ARM based MacBook Air. I dunno why it’s widely assumed if Apple introduces one ARM based Mac that all Mac’s will eventually go ARM - Operating systems supporting multiple CPU architectures isn’t a new thing, and Apple has had more commercial success than anyone else. I have no doubt for me as an end user that once apps are updated I wouldn’t experience any difference - other than better performance, battery performance, and a cooler running computer. Thankfully I’m not clinging to any older unsupported apps so I realize it’s easy for me to be pro ARM Mac - which is why I don’t expect Apple to go ARM only any time soon but offer a choice for quite a while while the market settles out. And who knows, Intel could turn it around. They haven’t managed for the last 7 years or so, but I suppose it could still eventually happen.

dragonshed 7y ago
> I dunno why it’s widely assumed if Apple introduces one ARM based Mac that all Mac’s will eventually go ARM Two points to think about on this issue: 1) When Apple moved away from PowerPC, they did so entirely. 2) Apple historically* wanted to keep its hardware offerings simple and easy to understand, and supporting multiple architectures could muddy their offerings. * When Jobs returned to Apple, he killed the confusing lineups in favor of one option each of desktop or mobile, for pros and home users. This has changed a bit lately, but I can imagine ARM and Intel options of Macbook vs Macbook Air vs Macbook Pro being a nonstarter. Anyway, I agree, an ARM Macbook Air would be awesome, assuming the software followed suit.
soneil 7y ago
I suspect that only going ARM on a few models could be detrimental. The risk is creating a niche within a niche. If they move everything, as with previous arch moves, it's "do or die" for third-parties. But if, eg, MacBook Air turns into MacBook ARM but MacBook Pro remains Intel - this would be a very difficult schism. Many publishers might look at it as being pro customers staying on Intel and cost-sensitive customers on ARM, which could damage adoption. The risk is having no carrot and no stick - not entirely dissimilar to Itanium's problem.
- wtallis 7y ago
  Apple's primary carrot and stick here will be the Mac App Store. Whether they split the product line between ARM and Intel, or go for a full transition to ARM, they'll mandate that apps on the App Store be universal binaries. The challenge as usual will be ISVs that don't distribute through the App Store and want to drag their heels (eg. Adobe, who always prefers ignoring Apple's roadmap in the hopes that they won't have to update their own code).
  - scarface74 7y ago
    Adobe has ported it’s software from 68K to PPC to OS X (Carbon) to x86 (Carbon) to x86 (Cocoa) over the years. Not to mention that they are shipping an iPad version already.
    - wtallis 7y ago
      As I recall, Adobe was unwilling to abandon Carbon until Apple promised that Carbon wouldn't make the 64-bit transition. And even then, Adobe was pretty slow: Creative Suite on Windows started including 64-bit versions in 2008 and required a 64-bit CPU starting in 2010, but the last CS version for Mac in 2012 was still all 32-bit. When Apple dropped 32-bit support in 2019 after a two-year warning period, parts of Adobe Creative Cloud on macOS were still not ready. Even Adobe's transition from PPC to Intel took 15 months after Intel Macs started shipping and 22 months after the x86 Mac dev kits were publicly announced (though I wouldn't be surprised if Adobe had a heads-up if not actual dev kits even before Apple publicly announced their Intel transition). And let's not forget all the fuss Adobe made when the rest of the world was ready for Flash to die. This company has a history of being very defensive about their technical debt.
  - saagarjha 7y ago
    > Apple's primary carrot and stick here will be the Mac App Store. …which has historically been fairly terrible at being either.
Joeri 7y ago
That doesn’t sound like a thing apple would do. The big reason to switch from intel to arm is not performance, it is two reasons: cost and control. Apple is no doubt getting a nice discount from intel, but they can make something with similar performance for a fraction of the cost. The new iphone se is faster than the macbook air, but it costs less than half. The cpu is a big part of that equation. In addition, apple is currently tied to intel’s roadmap, a situation which they surely want to end. Cost and control will drive them to switch the whole line-up. I expect the transition to be done before the end of 2022, with intel support being dropped from the latest OS two years later, and no more macOS updates for intel-based macs two years after that.
- scarface74 7y ago
  There have been benchmarks showing that the A13 chip in the $400 iPhone SE is faster in single core performance than their 16 inch MacBook Pro. This is even with the thermal limits of a phone.
  - oblio 7y ago
    Yeah, run those benchmarks at full throttle for 4 hours and let's check the scores then :-)
    - wtallis 7y ago
      Full throttle for 4 hours isn't the use case for the 16-inch MacBook Pro, either.
      - FpUser 7y ago
        Worked just fine on my HP Omen 15 laptop and not for 4 hours but more like for a week and half non stop as I had to encode whole pile of 4K videos from pro format to consumer (h264). All the while I was also coding and debugging the application. I set TDP limiter so that the temp does not go above 80C that still has all 6 cores running at around 3GHz if I remember correctly. The fans were running non stop but not full throttle. Not a thing what I would normally do but my rendering desktop was out of commission for a few days while waiting for parts to arrive.
google234123 7y ago
Why would you love an ARM based MacBook Air versus, for example, a faster MacBook Air or one with more battery life? What makes ARM intrinsically better?

by EricE 7y ago

dragonshed 7y ago

> I dunno why it’s widely assumed if Apple introduces one ARM based Mac that all Mac’s will eventually go ARM Two points to think about on this issue: 1) When Apple moved away from PowerPC, they did so entirely. 2) Apple historically* wanted to keep its hardware offerings simple and easy to understand, and supporting multiple architectures could muddy their offerings. * When Jobs returned to Apple, he killed the confusing lineups in favor of one option each of desktop or mobile, for pros and home users. This has changed a bit lately, but I can imagine ARM and Intel options of Macbook vs Macbook Air vs Macbook Pro being a nonstarter. Anyway, I agree, an ARM Macbook Air would be awesome, assuming the software followed suit.

soneil 7y ago

I suspect that only going ARM on a few models could be detrimental. The risk is creating a niche within a niche. If they move everything, as with previous arch moves, it's "do or die" for third-parties. But if, eg, MacBook Air turns into MacBook ARM but MacBook Pro remains Intel - this would be a very difficult schism. Many publishers might look at it as being pro customers staying on Intel and cost-sensitive customers on ARM, which could damage adoption. The risk is having no carrot and no stick - not entirely dissimilar to Itanium's problem.

wtallis 7y ago
Apple's primary carrot and stick here will be the Mac App Store. Whether they split the product line between ARM and Intel, or go for a full transition to ARM, they'll mandate that apps on the App Store be universal binaries. The challenge as usual will be ISVs that don't distribute through the App Store and want to drag their heels (eg. Adobe, who always prefers ignoring Apple's roadmap in the hopes that they won't have to update their own code).
- scarface74 7y ago
  Adobe has ported it’s software from 68K to PPC to OS X (Carbon) to x86 (Carbon) to x86 (Cocoa) over the years. Not to mention that they are shipping an iPad version already.
  - wtallis 7y ago
    As I recall, Adobe was unwilling to abandon Carbon until Apple promised that Carbon wouldn't make the 64-bit transition. And even then, Adobe was pretty slow: Creative Suite on Windows started including 64-bit versions in 2008 and required a 64-bit CPU starting in 2010, but the last CS version for Mac in 2012 was still all 32-bit. When Apple dropped 32-bit support in 2019 after a two-year warning period, parts of Adobe Creative Cloud on macOS were still not ready. Even Adobe's transition from PPC to Intel took 15 months after Intel Macs started shipping and 22 months after the x86 Mac dev kits were publicly announced (though I wouldn't be surprised if Adobe had a heads-up if not actual dev kits even before Apple publicly announced their Intel transition). And let's not forget all the fuss Adobe made when the rest of the world was ready for Flash to die. This company has a history of being very defensive about their technical debt.
- saagarjha 7y ago
  > Apple's primary carrot and stick here will be the Mac App Store. …which has historically been fairly terrible at being either.

Joeri 7y ago

That doesn’t sound like a thing apple would do. The big reason to switch from intel to arm is not performance, it is two reasons: cost and control. Apple is no doubt getting a nice discount from intel, but they can make something with similar performance for a fraction of the cost. The new iphone se is faster than the macbook air, but it costs less than half. The cpu is a big part of that equation. In addition, apple is currently tied to intel’s roadmap, a situation which they surely want to end. Cost and control will drive them to switch the whole line-up. I expect the transition to be done before the end of 2022, with intel support being dropped from the latest OS two years later, and no more macOS updates for intel-based macs two years after that.

scarface74 7y ago
There have been benchmarks showing that the A13 chip in the $400 iPhone SE is faster in single core performance than their 16 inch MacBook Pro. This is even with the thermal limits of a phone.
- oblio 7y ago
  Yeah, run those benchmarks at full throttle for 4 hours and let's check the scores then :-)
  - wtallis 7y ago
    Full throttle for 4 hours isn't the use case for the 16-inch MacBook Pro, either.
    - FpUser 7y ago
      Worked just fine on my HP Omen 15 laptop and not for 4 hours but more like for a week and half non stop as I had to encode whole pile of 4K videos from pro format to consumer (h264). All the while I was also coding and debugging the application. I set TDP limiter so that the temp does not go above 80C that still has all 6 cores running at around 3GHz if I remember correctly. The fans were running non stop but not full throttle. Not a thing what I would normally do but my rendering desktop was out of commission for a few days while waiting for parts to arrive.

google234123 7y ago

Why would you love an ARM based MacBook Air versus, for example, a faster MacBook Air or one with more battery life? What makes ARM intrinsically better?