# Hearsay: Macs with ARM processors next year?



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 24, 2020)

Mac With Apple-Designed Arm Processor Coming in First Half of 2021


Apple's first Mac with a processor designed in house is set to be released during the first half of 2021, Apple analyst Ming Chi Kuo said in a...




www.macrumors.com





This has been the rumor for years, so who knows whether it's true. But it could be.


----------



## Thundercat (Feb 24, 2020)

Coming from Ming Chi Kuo, I'd say it's true...


----------



## Geoff Grace (Feb 24, 2020)

I normally take rumors with more than a grain of salt, but this one makes a lot of sense given the convergence of iOS and macOS technologies and Apple's involvement with ARM technology. I originally was expecting ARM-based Macs to appear later this year, but delays happen.

Given the likelihood of this transition, it's a tough time to buy Macs. Would you rather invest in a platform that will be outmoded next year or wait and be an early ARM adopter? Neither option sounds particularly appealing.

I suppose if I had to choose, I'd buy this year and wait a few years for the transition to complete before I jumped on the ARM train.

Best,

Geoff


----------



## Thundercat (Feb 24, 2020)

What will be the ramifications for hackintosh?


----------



## Geoff Grace (Feb 24, 2020)

I imagine the hackintosh will be a viable option for a few years yet, but I don't see how it could be compatible with an ARM-based future.

Best,

Geoff


----------



## MarcelM (Feb 24, 2020)

well, new macos versions will for sure also support the new mac pro or imacpro etc, so hackintosh will still be an option. id say intel cpus will be supported for another few years. well, actually for a long time.


----------



## Geoff Grace (Feb 24, 2020)

This might give an indication of the timeline:

Apple's transition to Intel processors

Of course this is all speculation; but if ARM-based Macs were to first appear next January and Apple were to follow the same timeline, then the first ARM-only macOS would appear in late 2024.

Best,

Geoff


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 24, 2020)

Even though computer years are now maybe four human years (down from 20), in my opinoin the conventional wisdom about when to buy tech products hasn't changed: when your current one doesn't do what you need it to do anymore. There's no way to time this or the stock market perfectly.

What I want to know is whether the ARM processors will be a major step forward.


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 24, 2020)

What does all this mean for software and sample devs? They will all have to develope versions compatable with Arm?


----------



## Virtuoso (Feb 24, 2020)

Imagine how long it's going to take developers to recode their apps and plugins for ARM! Some have only recently moved to 64bit and many _still_ haven't caught up with 8 year old retina displays.

I wonder if it's going to be like Windows RT, the ARM-only version of Windows 8, which was aimed at low end laptops. That OS totally bombed and was killed off after 3 years.

I think it's more likely that we will see ARM chips introduced in the low end of the product line at first, for people who just want a light ultraportable with good battery life that syncs with their iPhone.

As for 'ARM-only', it will take many years before they dump Intel at the higher end, if at all. More likely that they will add the multicore AMD chips to their high-end range, since they already have a good relationship with AMD for their GPUs.

Their 'Marzipan' migration strategy for ARM is aimed at easing the transition for developers who currently produce iPad/iPhone apps, rather than at developers of major apps like Cubase, Pro Tools, Cinema 4D, DaVinci Resolve etc. Recoding those (and the thousands of plugins in their ecosystems) will mean YEARS of pain!


----------



## wayne_rowley (Feb 25, 2020)

Virtuoso said:


> Imagine how long it's going to take developers to recode their apps and plugins for ARM! Some have only recently moved to 64bit and many _still_ haven't caught up with 8 year old retina displays.



Not long once Apple release the updated development tools. Then it's just a recompile. Different chip support is not as problematic as supporting retina which impacted the UIs.



Virtuoso said:


> I wonder if it's going to be like Windows RT, the ARM-only version of Windows 8, which was aimed at low end laptops. That OS totally bombed and was killed off after 3 years.
> 
> I think it's more likely that we will see ARM chips introduced in the low end of the product line at first, for people who just want a light ultraportable with good battery life that syncs with their iPhone.



Maybe, maybe not. But the CPU benchmarks of the iPad Pro gave the MacBook Pro a run for the money! These Apple ARM chips are powerful and fast!


Wayne]


----------



## Jack Weaver (Feb 25, 2020)

Interesting topic - to me, mainly because I'm considering a new Mac Pro this week. 

However, I'm not particularly worried about the advent of ARM. Apple's plans are always shrouded in mystery. It might be that ARM is best-suited to iPhones, iPads and possibly laptops. We just don't know right now and Apple can and does changes their plans midstream. 

Will I buy this Mac Pro and then see ARM chips taking over the whole product line? Probably unlikely. 

I do hope as time goes on I'm able to upgrade the processor. But that may be a socket issue. Meanwhile, I need a computer for music and audio work and this overpriced beast seems like a secure way to go - despite the lauded potential of a Hackintosh using AMD processors. 

So, my hair is not on fire over this announcement. 

But I would like a new, cool iPad to use for a future purchase of StaffPad. So bring on the ARMs!

.


----------



## robgb (Feb 25, 2020)

MarcelM said:


> well, new macos versions will for sure also support the new mac pro or imacpro etc, so hackintosh will still be an option. id say intel cpus will be supported for another few years. well, actually for a long time.


People are building Hackintosh's with AMD chips now, so I imagine anything is possible.


----------



## Technostica (Feb 25, 2020)

The only winner I see here is Apple; 
More control, higher margins, no competition due to a closed system so less need to compete.

At least with x86 there is strong competition between Intel and AMD as there is with Nvidia and AMD with GPUs. 
Plus there are fewer competing fabrication facilities as things get more challenging to manufacture on smaller nodes.
So in going it alone they will likely rule out one of those.



robgb said:


> People are building Hackintosh's with AMD chips now, so I imagine anything is possible.


AMD use the same instruction set as Intel so user software compatibility isn't an issue. Chipset etc driver support might be an issue though!

It would be ironic if Microsoft's latest attempt at Windows on ARM leads to more competitive ARM chips for laptops and desktops making an ARM Hackintosh more likely. 
Although I think MacOS on ARM would be too locked down for that to happen.

Quite a few companies have been attempting to challenge Intel in the data centre server space with ARM designs with not much joy.
With AMD now having much better designs than Intel that can only hamper moves to ARM server chips I suspect.


----------



## VinRice (Feb 25, 2020)

jamwerks said:


> What does all this mean for software and sample devs? They will all have to develope versions compatable with Arm?



Most likely will just be a re-compile in X-Code plus a few inevitable little snafus. Apple are pretty good at this sort of thing.


----------



## VinRice (Feb 25, 2020)

Virtuoso said:


> Recoding those (and the thousands of plugins in their ecosystems) will mean YEARS of pain!



Don't be silly. Of course it won't


----------



## Technostica (Feb 25, 2020)

VinRice said:


> Most likely will just be a re-compile in X-Code plus a few inevitable little snafus. Apple are pretty good at this sort of thing.


The issue is the massive amount of 3rd party stuff and not everyone uses X-Code.


----------



## VinRice (Feb 25, 2020)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Mac With Apple-Designed Arm Processor Coming in First Half of 2021
> 
> 
> Apple's first Mac with a processor designed in house is set to be released during the first half of 2021, Apple analyst Ming Chi Kuo said in a...
> ...



It'll happen, just a matter of when.


----------



## VinRice (Feb 25, 2020)

Technostica said:


> The issue is the massive amount of 3rd party stuff and not everyone uses X-Code.



I could see Steinberg having a problem with Cubase/Nuendo since their cross-platform libraries seem particularly crusty. OSX performance is always worse than the Windows equivalent. Dorico however works equally on both so it may well be time for a change.


----------



## wayne_rowley (Feb 25, 2020)

Jack Weaver said:


> However, I'm not particularly worried about the advent of ARM. Apple's plans are always shrouded in mystery. It might be that ARM is best-suited to iPhones, iPads and possibly laptops. We just don't know right now and Apple can and does changes their plans midstream.



ARM is not new - it has been around for years. It was not invented by Apple either. ARM (Acorn, then Advanced RISC Machines) powered the Archimedes series of computers in the late 80s, early 90s - and they blew the socks off the equivalent MS DOS PCs of the day.

RISC architectures scale better than CISC (Intel & AMD). As I said some of the benchmarks for the IPad Pro come close to those of the MacBook Pro - with significantly less power and heat involved.

I suspect in the short term they will keep ARM chips to the laptops and portables where power and heat are critical. The desktops will likely continue to use Intel (or AMD) for a while yet, but make no mistake, the processor architecture is more than capable!

Wayne


----------



## robgb (Feb 25, 2020)

wayne_rowley said:


> I suspect in the short term they will keep ARM chips to the laptops and portables where power and heat are critical. The desktops will likely continue to use Intel (or AMD) for a while yet, but make no mistake, the processor architecture is more than capable!


Whatever the case, Apple will find a way to reach into our wallets and withdraw cash.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 25, 2020)

Technostica said:


> The only winner I see here is Apple;
> More control, higher margins, no competition due to a closed system so less need to compete.



Well, they do still have to build competitive machines.

I've become a major curmudgeon about having to keep buying perfectly good things over and over, and especially about computer upgrade fever. But sometimes new products really are an improvement! Hopefully that'll be the case here.

By the way, I'm all for cool consumer features that have nothing to do with music studio applications. A lot of the things Apple has done are very useful, for example letting you answer and make iPhone calls on your Mac. If this facilitates that kind of thing, great.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 25, 2020)

robgb said:


> Whatever the case, Apple will find a way to reach into our wallets and withdraw cash.



True, but we open our wallets willingly - they're not pickpockets. And with only a couple of exceptions, I've been very happy with the literally dozens of Apple products I've bought over the years (including something like 25 Macs last time I figured it out).

That's why I think they may turn out to be a profitable company.


----------



## VinRice (Feb 25, 2020)

robgb said:


> Whatever the case, Apple will find a way to reach into our wallets and withdraw cash.



Bastards making desirable products. How dare they!


----------



## Technostica (Feb 25, 2020)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Well, they do still have to build competitive machines.


Based on how much leeway macOS users give Apple their hardware doesn't have to be that competitive.
Look at the new Mac Pro tower whose base platform was outdated before it was released for one recent example.


----------



## Geoff Grace (Feb 25, 2020)

I would love to be able to use iOS soft synths like the Moog Model D natively on the Mac—especially at iOS prices. It seems like things are moving in that direction.

Best,

Geoff


----------



## robgb (Feb 25, 2020)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> That's why I think they may turn out to be a profitable company.


Whoa, now. Don't get ahead of yourself. Only time will tell.


----------



## SupremeFist (Feb 25, 2020)

When it happens, it will very likely be only the Macbook Airs at first. Desktops a few more years down the line I would think.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 25, 2020)

Technostica said:


> Based on how much leeway macOS users give Apple their hardware doesn't have to be that competitive.
> Look at the new Mac Pro tower whose base platform was outdated before it was released for one recent example



Depends on what you're after: benchmark wanking, or you just prefer working on Macs.

The me the new Mac Pro is outdated because of the price. It's not necessary to spend $10,000 on a computer anymore. I don't care how powerful it is or isn't.

(Not that it was ever necessary to spend that much on a single machine, but $3500 + several slaves added up.)


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 25, 2020)

Based on the fact that they built the new macPro on Intel, I do not think that we will see all macs move to ARM any time soon. I agree, first it will be the MBP air, then maybe all Laptops. Mobile computers. That could easily take 5 years to roll out. Minis and iMacs after that, if ever. Any kind of tower computers, maybe never. I do not at all think this will be like the PPC->Intel changeover that happened in the past. Especially since they just released a super expensive Intel based platform.

in Ten years from now, we will see where it all is, but for the foreseeable future, there are much bigger problems to worry about then ARM OSX.


----------



## Technostica (Feb 25, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> In Ten years from now, we will see where it all is, but for the foreseeable future, there are much bigger problems to worry about then AMD OSX.


This thread is about ARM not AMD.
Intel and AMD use the same ISA so it's a straightforward swap.


----------



## wayne_rowley (Feb 25, 2020)

Long, but interesting.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 25, 2020)

sorry ARM is what I meant. Same response as before. Will edit it.


----------



## gst98 (Feb 25, 2020)

Technostica said:


> The only winner I see here is Apple;
> More control, higher margins, no competition due to a closed system so less need to compete.



Apple got fed up with intel that it was worth their while to make their chips with the intention of putting them in laptops - yes you’re right about competition and lowering costs, but it is not the primary reason for the chips. If apple want more money they will make more AirPods, not make their own chips. Intel have cost Apple hundreds of millions in lost sales and limited their laptops performance, to the point where they had no choice but to design their own chips. 

I think you haven’t seen the benefits of the ARM chips. For instance: they most likely won’t need fans - this is invaluable to musicians. 

Apples own chip design in the iphones are the reason they’re battery is so good. Laptop battery life will potential increase by 30-50%. 

Not to mention that intel is a train wreck and the ARM chips will be way faster. With apples optimisation it’s going to be amazing for the consumer.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 25, 2020)

won't need fans? Please. This is not factual. Just because iPads don't have fans does absolutely not mean that desktop computers based ARM will somehow magically run cool enough to avoid fans. That is a nice fantasy.


----------



## wayne_rowley (Feb 25, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> won't need fans? Please. This is not factual. Just because iPads don't have fans does absolutely not mean that desktop computers based ARM will somehow magically run cool enough to avoid fans. That is a nice fantasy.



But these desktop PCs are running bloated CISC x86 processors that require a lot of power and therefore generate a lot at heat.

RISC processors require less power with fewer transistors and simpler instruction sets. They generate a lot less heat. It really is a different architecture.

They may or may not require fans - we shall see. But if they do the cooling is likely to be a lot less and much quieter.

Wayne


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 25, 2020)

If ARM's run cooler, then they will make them faster and be hot again. hehe I think that is totally wishful thinking that there will be no fans, maybe in a somewhat cpu crippled macbook air. This smells like Apple Koolaid to me.


----------



## gst98 (Feb 25, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> won't need fans? Please. This is not factual. Just because iPads don't have fans does absolutely not mean that desktop computers based ARM will somehow magically run cool enough to avoid fans. That is a nice fantasy.



This has been discussed by engineers over the last few years. The most likely scenario we will see is that they will have fans, but almost never be turned on. 

Pure fantasy? it isn't fantasy - the ipad pro has signifacntly more processing power than the 13 inch MBP (it even has more per core!). So if it doesn't have fans, why would a MBP need fans?

The 12 inch macbook already does not have fans on it (it came out way back in 2017). I'm afraid it is already reailty. Also, I only said it "likely" no fans. Apple definately wants there to be no fans ideally, but will they get it out of the gate? Well on the lower end laptops I think yes, it's very likely. The 15-inch? no, not for a while. 

Also the educated guesses are that it will take around 4-5 years beofre the powerful macs get the ARM chips.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 25, 2020)

in a MBR air I agree, but not in the power desktops we need and use here in this forum. Fantasy to think otherwise. 

What do think Apple is going to say to all the people that just spent $10,000 on an underpowered and overly hot MacPro, according to your reasoning?


----------



## Cinebient (Feb 25, 2020)

There are already a lot ports to find on iOS and many using JUICE which is crossplatform anyway. Its mainly a GUI conversation which is the hardest part. There are already some great professional tools on ARM devices running sometimes better as on my macbook pro.
Now that things like StaffPad with major libraries support, SWAM instruments and a lot other things happen (and even things i cannot get on my desktop or laptop) i could already think about leaving the mac platform.
But i would love to just run all my favorite iOS apps also on a mac.
The downside of iPad and ARM for now is that all real-time audio runs always on one core. There is no multi-core even not in DAWs yet. But still i can run sometimes 50 instances of a good sounding synth (but yeah, not the Moog ones)
Not sure what magic this is. So if Apple could put more ARM power into a macbook i would ditch X-86 in a heartbeat. 80% of the tools i need are already ported. More to follow for a fraction of the price.
Maybe anyway the old dektop, laptop x-86 workflow are dinosaurs. If developers not follow the future, they are out of the game some day.
I could live with an X86-ARM hybrid. Running macOS and iOS on one machine. But of course Apple won´t make this. I´m in for a new macbook but i guess i will wait another 1-2 years before wasting 4k on a dying platform since mac is just a sideproject anymore. Maybe by then iPads are already more powerful and has the more interesting tools for me (well, it is still not there yet).


----------



## gst98 (Feb 25, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> in a MBR air I agree, but not in the power desktops we need and use here in this forum. Fantasy to think otherwise.
> 
> What do think Apple is going to say to all the people that just spent $10,000 on an underpowered and overly hot MacPro, according to your reasoning?



yeah but no one thinks that is coming any time soon. Your will not be using an ARM desktop for at least 5 years most likely. They are just testing waters with the slower latops. And by that time who knows whether they will need fans. Fans are not the only way to cool a chip, so the future MBP will proably have heat sinks. 

Also concerning the Mac Pro is a little differnt. The new one is almost silent already (the fans almost never come on anyway so you could argue it barely needs them), so no one is asking for a quieter Pro desktop from Apple. The macbook pros on the other hand really are in need of getting rid of fans. 

But again, the 2018 ipad already has better single performance than even the brand new MacPro. So, I imagine by time Apple refresh the Mac Pro in 5 years time there will be no fans. What will people say? tbh I don't think people give a crap if it's got fans or not - as long as it gives the performance they want. When the time comes, a hypothetical Mac Pro with ARM will be faster and cooler, and they won't sell one until that is the case.

The nature of the ARM chips is that they don't run at anywhere near the rate of Intels Chips. So they never get as hot. Therfore sticking a fan on something that isn't hot doesn't gain anything, other than waste energy. So if apple get better performance than Intel, you're getting a cooler chip, and a faster chip, and fans are really part of the equation anymore. (this just relies on apple continuing to get power out of their chips without having to run at faster rates, which doesn't seem to a problem as of yet)


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 25, 2020)

if its not as hot its also not going to perform well enough for most of us here. Simple as that. ARM is a long ways off, nobody has a crystal ball but we are going to be using Intel for what we do here for quite a long time yet..


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 25, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> What do think Apple is going to say to all the people that just spent $10,000 on an underpowered and overly hot MacPro, according to your reasoning?



All seven of them are going to be absolutely livid.


----------



## gst98 (Feb 25, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> if its not as hot its also not going to perform well enough for most of us here. Simple as that. ARM is a long ways off, nobody has a crystal ball but we are going to be using Intel for what we do here for quite a long time yet..



I think you didn't read my last paragraph. Yes, not as hot = not running as hard. But that is only with intel chips.

ARM chips are fundamentally different. ARM chips do get warmer, but they will never get anywhere near as hot as an intel chip. Because they don't run at any where near the same rate. ARM is NOT Apples own-brand Intel chip, it has a completly new architecure.

I don't know how else to demonstrate this other than, the iPhone XR (apples budget phone from 2018) has a faster single core performance than a $50,000 Mac Pro. This is proof that the concept is a reality and it just has to be scaled.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 25, 2020)

if they don't run at the same rate, then future desktops will not ever be using them.


----------



## gst98 (Feb 25, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> if they don't run at the same rate, then future desktops will not ever be using them.




🤦‍♂️ Rate is not a synonym for CPU performance. This is like saying the only way to make a car faster is to give it more horspower. No!!!!! make the car lighter, make it more aerodynamic. it is about good engineering, not brute force.

This is the difference between Intel and ARM chips. Intel just shove more power at it year after year, but they hit a brick wall. That is why they are dying. There chips aren't getting an faster and thats why apple is furious. 

In the world of ARM, a chip can run at half the rate of an Intel chip and be twice as fast. if intel don't realise this soon, they will continue to die out.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 25, 2020)

alright man. I hope that fantasy works out for you. My crystal ball says our power desktops are not going to leave the intel platform for 10 more years. Peace out.


----------



## gst98 (Feb 25, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> alright man. I hope that fantasy works out for you. My crystal ball says our power desktops are not going to leave the intel platform for 10 more years. Peace out.



Well I said I reckon 5 years. Which is in line with how often Apple refresh the Mac Pro. 

Again, not a fantasy, it is already real and has been for years. No need to get rude about it. I was just taking time to explain something to you and you seem to have taken it badly for some reason.


----------



## Virtuoso (Feb 25, 2020)

The CPU might not need a fan but NVMe SSDs also run pretty hot, as does fast memory. Not an issue in an iPad, given what people typically use them for, but try running Cinema 4D or Final Cut on a laptop with no fans and you'll find it throttling back pretty quickly.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 25, 2020)

sorry, but not it has not. and no I am not meaning to be rude to you but still I have a difference of opinion...that idea that ARM can now keep up with or exceed Intel is simply not correct.

ARM has been used in mobile devices, rasberry PI's and things like that. ARM does not even come close to keeping up with Intel based solutions for powerful desktop solutions as needed for video and audio work, etc.. You can hope that in the future it will meet or exceed the performance of current Intel solutions, but that is pure speculation at this point....fantasy really. Sorry if this word is offending you, but that is how I see it...and again...I say...my crystal ball says Apple will be putting out Intel desktops for 10 years, not five, at least ten. AMD would be a more likely possibility then ARM for that purpose. As I have said already several times, we may see ARM placed in smaller laptops. There is no reason at all to suspect that any time even remotely soon the entire OSX will be shifting to ARM instead of Intel..that is just speculation on the the woefully fake news internet sphere.


----------



## VinRice (Feb 25, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> sorry, but not it has not. and no I am not meaning to be rude to you but still I have a difference of opinion...that idea that ARM can now keep up with or exceed Intel is simply not correct.



Hey, tell us how you hate the new MacPro again! We love hearing that _ad nauseam_.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 25, 2020)

I never ever said I hate the mac pro. I do hate the price


----------



## VinRice (Feb 25, 2020)

But, but, you said it was under-powered and overly hot, no?


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 25, 2020)

I never said that seriously, If you are talking about this discussion, I was being sarcastic about what gst98 when he or she said that.


----------



## wayne_rowley (Feb 25, 2020)

My first ARM based desktop computer was the Acorn Archimedes A3000 which my Dad bought back in 1990 (ish). A 32bit computer than ran a beautiful GUI based multitasking OS called RISC OS. It smoked PCs in terms of performance and usability. In fact I could run games such as Elite and EGA Trek on it using the PC Emulator. The Archimedes was well known and well respected in the music industry because if you wanted to run Sibelius you had to have one - the software was born on RISC OS.

to think these chips are only small simple processors designed only to run on phones and tablets is to fundamentally misunderstand what they are and what they can do. There is more than one way to design computer microprocessors and ARM is different to Intel and it’s derivatives. If we are still using Intel on high end desktops in 10 years time, then you can bet any significant performance increase from now to then will come from parallelisation or redesign - because they have pretty much hit the wall with single core speed!


----------



## wayne_rowley (Feb 25, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> I never said that seriously, If you are talking about this discussion, I was being sarcastic about what gst98 when he or she said that.



I‘m sorry but to suggest that someone who disagrees with your opinion has been brainwashed by Apple is rude. I.e. your reference to koolade. I get the reference and it’s not nice!

Opinion is just opinion. Everyone has it, but opinions are not the same as fact. I know what ARM systems could do in the past, I know what they can do now and I’m excited about what future ones will be capable of if scaled up. 

My point has been that you can’t use the same measuring stick that we‘re using for CISC systems because they are very different. The design of RISC means that they can scale much further before they hit the wall. As others have said, if their single core performance can exceed that of Intel‘s mobile chips, without the fans that the Intel chips need, then they are not going to need the fans/water cooling that the Intel desktop and server chips need to the same degree.

Faster, quieter, more power efficient. 

My opinion is that a move to ARM is a good thing as we may all be disappointed in the performance of our Intel based systems in 10 years time otherwise..


----------



## gst98 (Feb 26, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> sorry, but not it has not. and no I am not meaning to be rude to you but still I have a difference of opinion...that idea that ARM can now keep up with or exceed Intel is simply not correct.
> 
> ARM has been used in mobile devices, rasberry PI's and things like that. ARM does not even come close to keeping up with Intel based solutions for powerful desktop solutions as needed for video and audio work, etc.. You can hope that in the future it will meet or exceed the performance of current Intel solutions, but that is pure speculation at this point....fantasy really. Sorry if this word is offending you, but that is how I see it...and again...I say...my crystal ball says Apple will be putting out Intel desktops for 10 years, not five, at least ten. AMD would be a more likely possibility then ARM for that purpose. As I have said already several times, we may see ARM placed in smaller laptops. There is no reason at all to suspect that any time even remotely soon the entire OSX will be shifting to ARM instead of Intel..that is just speculation on the the woefully fake news internet sphere.



okay, that's fine, I think there is far less to have an opinon about though. 

First let me say, to think of ARM chips as only being for Raspberry Pi's and mobile devices is the fundamental problem. Did you ever see the apple advert like a year ago where the child asks he mom 'hey wha,ts a computer?'. As stupid as the AD was it shows what Apple's vison is. Other than Pro devices, they want a world where tablets and laptops are the same thing.

and when you say "You can hope that in the future it will meet or exceed the performance of current Intel solutions". No I don't have to. They have existed for years already. 

You think 10 years? I disagree with you there then. the iphones have barely been out for more than a decade, so there is no way Apple will let another 10 years lapse. Also they way that Intel is going, no one will be using them in 10 years. 

I'm not sure why you think it is fake news. Also, apple would never change to anything other than ARM, what would be the point of chaning to AMD.

All you need to do is google the numbers. ARM is already way faster than Intel, all Apple have to do is implement it. @wayne_rowley hit the nail on the head really. It is not an opinion that the per-core performance is better in their phones than their desktops - its a fact.


----------



## jcrosby (Feb 26, 2020)

MarcelM said:


> well, new macos versions will for sure also support the new mac pro or imacpro etc, so hackintosh will still be an option. id say intel cpus will be supported for another few years. well, actually for a long time.


By Apple's own policy they have to support any previous machine for 5 years. Hakinotsh will most likely live on for at least 4-5 more years. (I also think hackintosh is low on Apple's priority list. The amount of mac users actually running hacks wouldn't even amount to a drop in a bathtub of mac users. I'd imagine they're probably far more concerned about solving bigger problems like ARM and how to deal with Intel's unreliability.)





__





Obtaining service for your Apple product after an expired warranty


Learn about your options for getting service and parts for Apple devices that are past their warranty period.



support.apple.com





Plus the hack scene adapts quickly, commercial ARM chips will probably be common by then, and nobody really knows what the future or ARM truly looks like outside of the companies doing actual chip development.

Also the common sense consensus is that x86 isn't going away too soon simply because ARM ins't capable of the types of brute force computation required to do something like run several hundred instruments in real time, handle the complex math involved in real-world film/video use cases, etc...

Anyway I think it's pretty safe to assume ARM will hit consumer models like the AIR soon-ish, but won't end up in models like the MBP, MP, iMP, for at least a few years. At least based on what I've turned over so far while looking into this. ARM just currently doesn't deliver the kinds of high horsepower, complex computation needed to run something like Logic, Final Cut, etc.


----------



## ptram (Feb 26, 2020)

If it can help in making the Macs thinner, it's good!

Paolo


----------



## khollister (Feb 26, 2020)

Back to the future - I've been at this long enough to remember vividly the Motorola 68K CISC to IBM PowerPC G5 RISC transition and then back to CISC with Intel. Apple has been agile enough to transition platforms when their current technology hits a dead end twice before and they obviously have experience in doing it. The move to Intel wasn't because of a fundamental limitation of the PowerPC RISC architecture, but because IBM had no interest in advancing the product line. At this point, I imagine Apple, faced with the stall of the Intel CPU progress, isn't too interested in jumping ship to another 3rd party (AMD) only to be in the same predicament several years down the line.

The only potential issue I can forsee in an ARM move is the loss of being able to run Windows apps natively. Apple may decide this isn't a large enough market share problem to worry about.


----------



## wayne_rowley (Feb 26, 2020)

khollister said:


> The only potential issue I can forsee in an ARM move is the loss of being able to run Windows apps natively. Apple may decide this isn't a large enough market share problem to worry about.



Yes, that may be an issue in the short term. I think for most users though emulation or virutalisation will run many apps well enough. 

Plus it wouldn't surprise me if Microsoft end-up porting Windows to run natively on ARM - if they haven't already.


----------



## Technostica (Feb 26, 2020)

wayne_rowley said:


> Plus it wouldn't surprise me if Microsoft end-up porting Windows to run natively on ARM - if they haven't already.


They are currently on their second attempt but early days:








Microsoft Surface Pro X And Pro 7 Review: Snapdragon And x86 Experience


Microsoft has two new decidedly different Surface Pro models to choose from, so which is best suited for you? Find out here...




hothardware.com


----------



## lastmessiah (Feb 26, 2020)

wayne_rowley said:


> Plus it wouldn't surprise me if Microsoft end-up porting Windows to run natively on ARM - if they haven't already.



They have and it works quite well.


----------



## gst98 (Feb 26, 2020)

khollister said:


> Back to the future - I've been at this long enough to remember vividly the Motorola 68K CISC to IBM PowerPC G5 RISC transition and then back to CISC with Intel. Apple has been agile enough to transition platforms when their current technology hits a dead end twice before and they obviously have experience in doing it. The move to Intel wasn't because of a fundamental limitation of the PowerPC RISC architecture, but because IBM had no interest in advancing the product line. At this point, I imagine Apple, faced with the stall of the Intel CPU progress, isn't too interested in jumping ship to another 3rd party (AMD) only to be in the same predicament several years down the line.
> 
> The only potential issue I can forsee in an ARM move is the loss of being able to run Windows apps natively. Apple may decide this isn't a large enough market share problem to worry about.



It's amazing how the current state of intel really does reflect the concerns they had when switching from PowerPC. The issue I see is that over the last decade Apple has hired every leading chip design engineer they can. The ones they didn't get went to go and work for Elon Musk. It will be interesting to see if AMD can continue the success that they've been having as of late. Also I'm confindent that when apple start really making chips for the main line of Macs that they will have to be superior to AMD. it would be a raelly bad look if they were worse.


----------



## Dewdman42 (Feb 26, 2020)

jcrosby said:


> By Apple's own policy they have to support any previous machine for 5 years. Hakinotsh will most likely live on for at least 4-5 more years.



First, a hackintosh is not a vintage or old mac device and there is absolutely no garauntee it will keep working 4-5 more years worth of OSX updates. Apple will support the new MacPro for that long of course, but any hackintosh that is running today is based on whatever is in OSX already...drivers that happen by accident to support its motherboard and GPU, etc. You could build a hackintosh today, for example, that is using resident vanilla drivers that are only in Mojave by virtue of the fact that they were there to support the cheese grater, which is no longer officially supported by Apple and any day now those drivers could be removed from OSX. So a new hackintosh today, just on that alone, is not garaunteed at all to keep working for even one more OSX release, much less five. It might, it might not.

Secondly, the change in how Apple is moving KEXT stuff into a read-only system partition is the big problem for hackintoshers because a high percentage of people building hackintoshes have one or two kext hacks. Its not clear right now what will be possible to do that way in the future. Once the vanilla drivers are gone and you can't hack around it through a kext, you will be SOL to get apple-approved drivers for everything. That is probably 2 years away.

So just to be clear, there is absolutely no garauntee that a hackintosh built today will keep upgrading past Catalina. We shall see how it goes, but anyone building a hackintosh today needs to be aware that this is probably the biggest change to OSX in maybe 20 years that will have a direct impact on hackintosh computing. It will be interesting to see what happens over the next 2 years, but buyer beware.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 26, 2020)

At this point I think in terms of complementary tech, not replacement tech.

If I need an ARM Mac to run software I need to run, I'll buy one. The one I have now is frozen on Mojave as it is.


----------



## Geoff Grace (Feb 26, 2020)

Macworld's op-ed:

ARM Macs are coming, three years after Apple’s attitude change

Best,

Geoff


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 26, 2020)

Geoff Grace said:


> Macworld's op-ed:
> 
> ARM Macs are coming, three years after Apple’s attitude change



Macworld has a guy writing for them named Glenn Fleishman who's consistently excellent, but pretty much everything else they put on their site is vapid fanboy wank. The guy who wrote that editorial is the Kardashian of tech writers.


----------



## jcrosby (Feb 26, 2020)

Dewdman42 said:


> First, a hackintosh is not a vintage or old mac device and there is absolutely no garauntee it will keep working 4-5 more years worth of OSX updates. Apple will support the new MacPro for that long of course, but any hackintosh that is running today is based on whatever is in OSX already...drivers that happen by accident to support its motherboard and GPU, etc. You could build a hackintosh today, for example, that is using resident vanilla drivers that are only in Mojave by virtue of the fact that they were there to support the cheese grater, which is no longer officially supported by Apple and any day now those drivers could be removed from OSX. So a new hackintosh today, just on that alone, is not garaunteed at all to keep working for even one more OSX release, much less five. It might, it might not.
> 
> Secondly, the change in how Apple is moving KEXT stuff into a read-only system partition is the big problem for hackintoshers because a high percentage of people building hackintoshes have one or two kext hacks. Its not clear right now what will be possible to do that way in the future. Once the vanilla drivers are gone and you can't hack around it through a kext, you will be SOL to get apple-approved drivers for everything. That is probably 2 years away.
> 
> So just to be clear, there is absolutely no garauntee that a hackintosh built today will keep upgrading past Catalina. We shall see how it goes, but anyone building a hackintosh today needs to be aware that this is probably the biggest change to OSX in maybe 20 years that will have a direct impact on hackintosh computing. It will be interesting to see what happens over the next 2 years, but buyer beware.



My main point is that people regularly make this assumption due to ARM when x86 support will exist for at least another 4-5 years. (If not longer due to more models inevitably being available for at least a few years.)

True that it all depends on the OS, however not only does the hackintosh scene adapt quickly, (almost in real time.) People had Catalina fully running during the beta, and the 10.15 public release was running on hacks that same afternoon. I watched it happen in real time as I was solving some Mojave kinks that afternoon and spent a lot of hours on the forum... I remember clearly that the OP of the thread I was posting questions to posted a comment to the thread using sidecar, announcing it in bold text...

The hack developers are clearly anticipating these types changes by moving away from the old Clover method you refer to, and toward OpenCore. For sure no one knows until each successive OS is available, however it's pretty clear the intention behind OpenCore is to keep hackintoshing as alive as possible, for as far into the future as it can survive.


----------



## Technostica (Feb 26, 2020)

Trying to extrapolate from how an Apple phone/tablet SoC in 2020 when upscaled to laptop/desktop/server levels will perform versus the x86 competition in 3 to 5 years is a fool’s errand. Nobody knows as there are too many variables.
We are looking at nonlinear systems whereas some seemingly think this is a simple extrapolation.
Look at just the recent history of say the last 10 years to see what I mean.
No matter how good Apple are, they are totally unproven in this area and completely dependent on 3rd parties.
Mainly TSMC who 5 years ago bombed as badly as Intel’s fabrication team are doing now.
I’m looking forward to seeing how Apple do if they take this route across the whole product stack.
Should be an interesting ride, from the outside.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 26, 2020)

Technostica said:


> No matter how good Apple are, they are totally unproven in this area and completely dependent on 3rd parties



They can and as far as I know already have simply buy third parties.


----------



## Technostica (Feb 26, 2020)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> They can and as far as I know already have simply buy third parties.


There are only 3 companies with the fabs with the potential to produce these sort of chips. 
Intel and Samsung are off limits I suggest which leaves TSMC. 
Probably only cost 15 billon or so provided they had regulatory approval but buying them doesn't guarantee anything. 
I can see Apple giving them more money to get things done but this is cutting edge stuff. 
You can't just buy you way out of a hole at this level. 
They are getting ever closer to the point where quantum tunnelling will stop any further process shrinks. 
Designing the chips is the easy bit, building them is getting very hard. 
For example, look at all the interconnect technology that has been developed to help mitigate some of the issues.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 26, 2020)

Is it a hole? Are there only three companies that can produce these chips? I thought Siemans could, for example.

Also, does the size = power?

These are all actual questions, not rhetorical ones.


----------



## Technostica (Feb 26, 2020)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Are there only three companies that can produce these chips? I thought Siemans could, for example.


Right now only one company is making high power/high performance chips in volume on a 7nm equivalent node and that's TSMC for AMD. 
That's roughly equivalent to Intel's broken and missing in action 10nm. 
Siemens! I don't think so. 
IBM. Sold their fabs. 
GF. Stopped all development on nodes below 12nm.
Samsung. Playing catch up and investing heavily.


----------



## mauriziodececco (Feb 27, 2020)

Just a consideration on code portability; as of today, the development of an iPad or iPhone application is completely done compiling and testing on an Intel architecture. XCode do not integrate a machine level ARM emulator, it integrate an iOS runtime environment compiled for the Intel/AMD architecture. 
When you deploy to actual hardware, the code is finally compiled for the ARM architecture; this means that a large number of problems related to low end code portability are solved already by the architectures, like endianess and data type size; and this kind of problem touch C/C++/ObjectiveC code and not Swift (i think).
There may be a very small number of performance sensible hotspot in the code that needs to be re-optimized by hand, but honestly, last time i needed to optimize C code by hand was in the late 90s, it is very rare (but still possible) that modern compilers are not up to the task.
For third party stuff and open source libraries, same story; technically speaking the magic is not in XCode, but in clang and LLVM, the compiler. As told in the discussion, the API cleanup in Catalina also helps, only 64 bit code.

Maurizio


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Feb 27, 2020)

Technostica said:


> Right now only one company is making high power/high performance chips in volume on a 7nm equivalent node and that's TSMC for AMD.
> That's roughly equivalent to Intel's broken and missing in action 10nm.



Again, does size matter for performance?


----------



## Technostica (Feb 27, 2020)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Again, does size matter for performance?


Node size matters for:

1. Cost per transistor.
2. Performance.
3. Power efficiency.
4. Transistor density. There is a limit on the maximum practical size of a die so density impacts the maximum number of transistors per die. 

Node shrinking is essential which is why even as it gets much more difficult and expensive they still continue to develop smaller nodes.
It's clearly important for Apple as they have often been the first to use a new node for which they will be paying a premium and also taking a risk. 
Firstly, there will likely be a premium for being the first as it gives you a competitive advantage.
Secondly, yields tend to be at their lowest when a new node first goes into production.
Thirdly, if there are problems with a new node there will be delays before you can release your product. Those first in line will be hit by the longest delay.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 9, 2020)

ARM Mac Pro coming sooner rather than later, says Jean-Louis Gassee | AppleInsider


Jean-Louis Gassee has changed his mind about the ARM Mac shift, and now believes that an ARM Mac Pro is the inevitable endpoint — and is not that far away.




appleinsider.com





Qui est correcte - Technostica ou Jean- Louis Gassée?


----------



## Loïc D (Mar 10, 2020)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> ARM Mac Pro coming sooner rather than later, says Jean-Louis Gassee | AppleInsider
> 
> 
> Jean-Louis Gassee has changed his mind about the ARM Mac shift, and now believes that an ARM Mac Pro is the inevitable endpoint — and is not that far away.
> ...


For the sake of nitpicking we say Qui est correct ? or rather Qui a raison ? 
Nice article btw


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 10, 2020)

Tu à raison, d'accord. Je m'excuse.


----------

