On the current MacBook Pros, the hardware-level data encryption is thanks to the Intel chips, actually. The T2 is doing finger print recognition and other stuff though.
I'm not saying you're wrong because you seem to know more computery stuff than I do. But I don't think you're right in this case.
Something's just occurred to me.
An ARM-powered Mac should be able to run iOS apps without too much difficulty, or even iOS itself, should it not? That could be a bit of a killer feature (unless I've completely misunderstood MacOS, it's not exactly my primary field of knowledge).
That was part of the demo Cougar.
Superficial, you are correct (but so am I, sort of). Intel chip used for AES and FileVault without any help from the T2… but T2 also now doing encryption on the fly… I didn’t know that ‘till you made me look. All a bit belts’n’braces… not sure why I have FileVault turned on now…
An ARM-powered Mac should be able to run iOS apps without too much difficulty, or even iOS itself, should it not?
I guess that's part of the rationale, seamless transition between phons, iPads and laptops - something Microsoft have been trying to achieve for ages, not that anyone buys their phones (if they still exist).
Windows Phones don't exist anymore, no. Shame really, the UI really was quite interesting, it's just a shame they didn't have any users (when compared to Apple/Android).
An ARM-powered Mac should be able to run iOS apps without too much difficulty, or even iOS itself, should it not? That could be a bit of a killer feature
I think that's the whole point of it all. Apple makes most of its money off iPhones, a bit off iPads, but Macs are just an afterthought to keep the fanbois in the walled garden. An ARM based Mac will let them focus their attention on the iOS stuff where they make all their money.
the UI really was quite interesting
The UI was lovely. Super unstable though. Looking at the preview of the upcoming iOS, they’ve used some of the Windows Phone UI layout… but without copying its efficient use of space (or its super clean look).
H1ghland3r
Member
In a world where complex processors like x86 are becoming impossible to shrink into ever smaller packages (Intel has been stuck on 14nm for almost a decade now) ARM designs are far easier, more efficient in both operation and power usage to take advantage. As was said above, it’s easy to see an Apple or major manufacturer putting together a massively multithreaded ARM processor together (100+ cores per chip) and blowing x86 away completely.
Ice Lake CPUs are 10nm. The latest AMD CPUs I think are on 7nm.
And the new ARM Cortex-A78, X1 etc and Mali GPU stuff to go with them are 5nm (and I imagine at least the 2021 Apple releases and MS surface releases etc. will be that?)
Jeez I remember being at Uni talking about architectures more than 100x that.
That was part of the demo Cougar.
Huh. Neat. Bit of a game-changer, that.
As was said above, it’s easy to see an Apple or major manufacturer putting together a massively multithreaded ARM processor together (100+ cores per chip) and blowing x86 away completely.
That'll be more likely in the server/datacentre where massive parallelism works, rather than Apple desktop/laptop. Amazon already have 64 core ARM (as well as Intel and AMD solutions) in their datacentres. Someone else has 80 core ARM. 100+ is probably only a matter of time.
Most common use of high amounts of parallelism on Apple (or Windows etc.) is probably rendering Youtube videos, where GPU probably makes more sense.
Apple will probably be something like 4 powerful cores + 4 powersaving cores (or something of that kind of order).
I had a Windows phone, still do actually as a backup. It was really good, the actual real stumbling block was a lack of apps or developer interest, most things were occasionally janky 3rd party versions and no major browser.
The UI was streets ahead of my present android, the use of tiles worked on the phone in exactly the way it didn't on a PC. I think with actual effort it could have worked well but even Microsoft wasn't interested in the end.
I reckon a proper ARM based laptop at a sensible price and proper support would shake the market, this is what the Surface should be. But for the fact I don't like closed ecosystems and paying out my arse I'd be looking at the Apple.
seamless transition between phons, iPads and laptops – something Microsoft have been trying to achieve for ages
Well you can do it with tablets and PCs, because you can get Windows tablets and install the same software on it. Cloud account, bosh.
Geekbench scores - running non-natively via RosettaII on the dev kit with the iPad Pro CPU: https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/search?q=eperm-d995af6e2ef02771
Looks very much that, even assuming no advance between the launch of this old chip and whatever they put in the launch Arm Mac hardware, even using emulation, the laptop will be on a par with the current base MacBook Air. So, add in another 18 months of chip development/fab, and then add in software recompiled to run natively, and Arm will be easily be faster than Intel at launch for an Arm MacBook Air. No indication about what a desktop pro machine could be like yet, of course.
I'd have a guess Apple will have a long term convergence plan, as said they make most of their money from consumer stuff, so makes no real sense to have their 'pc' branch running different hardware. Plus you've also got to consider where we'll be in 5/10/20 years, the handheld stuff is only going to get more powerful and pervasive, so convergence does make sense long term, and will be easier if it's all running on the same hardware. I'd imagine the line between iOS and OSX will become increasingly blurred as time goes.
you’ve also got to consider where we’ll be in 5/10/20 years
After a long time where we were in an awful tech wilderness with underpowered machines gasping along even when they were new, hardware has generally been "good enough" for years now. Over in the Windows world, the recommended hardware minimum spec today hasn't changed since Vista, other than a bit more disk space (32GB in a world where that would be on the small side for a micro SD card). That's fourteen years.
For the immediately foreseeable future, your normal end user doesn't really need more power any more. Gamers, powers users (video editing perhaps), bitcoin miners sure, but your average consumer not so much. There's a "what computer?" thread on here every week and 99% of the time it's for "email, web and occasional Office use."
Rather we need smaller, lighter, lower power (ie longer battery life), that's where the next leaps are to be had I'd guess.
I’d imagine the line between iOS and OSX will become increasingly blurred as time goes.
There has been some conjecture that it might become possible to link a future iPhone to a keyboard and monitor and run MacOS apps as a desktop machine, and iOS as a portable handset. Once a phone gets above 1Tb of storage and appropriate RAM, combined with fast cloud storage, it doesn’t seem too much of a stretch.
Been there done that got the iMac. Never again. They went to intel two months after I bought it. Instant obsolescence. I won’t be going back.
I've not read all of the thread, but isn't this where Google is headed?
Android phone running Chrome and Gmail = PC running Chrome and Gmail?
The hardware is less and less important.
Been there done that got the iMac. Never again. They went to intel two months after I bought it. Instant obsolescence. I won’t be going back.
You had 5 months notice officially (the change was announced by Jobs at WWDC June 2005) plus however long the rumour sites were talking about it.
It wasn’t instant obsolescence either, I used a G5 tower and intel MacBook side by side for years.
There has been some conjecture that it might become possible to link a future iPhone to a keyboard and monitor and run MacOS apps as a desktop machine, and iOS as a portable handset. Once a phone gets above 1Tb of storage and appropriate RAM, combined with fast cloud storage, it doesn’t seem too much of a stretch.
That really would be great. I effectively do that with my current MacBook - I take it between the office and home. Both places I’m using USB-c to plug it into a keyboard/mouse/monitor/usb hub. The keyboard and monitor on my laptop are pretty redundant and if the phone has the power to run a full desktop suite, it would be work brilliantly.
That paradigm doesn’t address watching Netflix in bed or browsing the web on the sofa, though.
Also, are Apple really going to sell me just one product instead of two (phone+computer)?
There has been some conjecture that it might become possible to link a future iPhone to a keyboard and monitor and run MacOS apps as a desktop machine, and iOS as a portable handset. Once a phone gets above 1Tb of storage and appropriate RAM, combined with fast cloud storage, it doesn’t seem too much of a stretch.
You can already have most of that with a Samsung using Dex or the Huawei equivalent.
You can already have most of that with a Samsung using Dex or the Huawei equivalent.
Not really - those are still Android apps, just on a monitor instead of a phone screen. Sure, some apps are adaptive enough to look like desktop apps in desktop mode, but probably not many. I think the idea being discussed is that you will have both MacOS and iOS versions of the app on the same device, rather than the same app presenting itself differently. I guess this is different because if a vendor only produces the desktop app and does no work on iOS you'll still be able to use it when hooked up to a monitor.
Instant obsolescence
I worked solely on PowerPC equipped Macs for 5 years after the transition started. Buying an Intel one now will easily give you minimum 5 years use.
Not really – those are still Android apps, just on a monitor instead of a phone screen. Sure, some apps are adaptive enough to look like desktop apps in desktop mode, but probably not many. I think the idea being discussed is that you will have both MacOS and iOS versions of the app on the same device, rather than the same app presenting itself differently. I guess this is different because if a vendor only produces the desktop app and does no work on iOS you’ll still be able to use it when hooked up to a monitor.
Hence saying "most of that". 🙂
Good read...
ex-Microsoft, Steven Sinofsky, is a huge fan of the transition...
He completely mishandled Microsoft’s first attempt to make use of Arm, so I wouldn’t necessarily trust his opinions about how Apple should make the shift, or the effect it will have on Windows users in the medium term.
Been there done that got the iMac. Never again. They went to intel two months after I bought it. Instant obsolescence. I won’t be going back.
You had 5 months notice officially (the change was announced by Jobs at WWDC June 2005) plus however long the rumour sites were talking about it.
It wasn’t instant obsolescence either, I used a G5 tower and intel MacBook side by side for years.
In 2000 I was using a G4 Mac tower, a Graphite and grey one, dual 450 MHz G4 processors, for photoshop work. It was faster than the Intel Pentium III. Mine had 500Mb of RAM, later doubled to 1Gb, cost £1000 for that, and I think a 30Gb HDD. that was about £2500 for the machine, and another £2500 for my 21” monitor. The director of the company managed to grab a couple of the Macs including mine when the company was forced into receivership, and one of them is still being used at a different company, although it’s mainly used as a server, crucially it runs legacy software and drivers for certain obsolete photosetting equipment.
That’s twenty years it’s been in use - at the same company, which I worked at as well, I would regularly see lines of PC’s which had been gutted of anything useful before going for recycling. None were more than two or three years old...
Sorry but I don’t do IT and I don’t rely on a Mac for work. I don’t watch the Conferences ans I don’t follow the trends.
I bought an original macintosh to write my PhD in 1992. I wanted a first family PC so would not have noticed any imminent change. Then they updated the OS and I couldn’t. Then the power adaptor failed. Common in that model. It sits unloved at the bottom of the bed in the spare room. The family HP I5 PC has been running fine ever since. Windows 10 did it as far as I’m concerned.
Son1 has an i7 running OSX on a BIG MacBook i7 to be compatible with his college supervisor’s matlab environment for his coding. It’s fine but I don’t feel the love.
I won’t be going back.
That’s twenty years it’s been in use
Banks are still running COBOL. When things work, best not to change them. I don’t have an issue with that.
There are not running COBOL on machines from the last century though.
There are not running COBOL on machines from the last century though.
NASA still uses Intel 386 and 486 CPUs, plus old Power PC chips.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/why-todays-spacecraft-still-run-on-1990s-processors/
In the meantime, processor technology advances by light years.
How can anyone even read an article with that in the headline, let alone believe anything in it?
Ha! Short of time travel, how does the equipment in those examples of “Today’s Spacecraft” have anything but older CPUs in them? And the COBOL thing… mostly run on what IBM developed PowerPCs into … pointing out why IBM’s and Apple’s chip priorities were diverging so much on the run up to Apple jumping to Intel.
That’s twenty years it’s been in use – at the same company, which I worked at as well, I would regularly see lines of PC’s which had been gutted of anything useful before going for recycling. None were more than two or three years old…
That's not for the reasons you think, and it doesn't show what you think it shows.
That's not even comparing like with like. You certainly can't compare the 1 off machine kept running for 2 decades with the general replacement cycle of office hardware.
Every major enterprise will replace all general PCs every few years, for several reasons, one of which is reliability. And that is regardless of brand, and I include Apple as PCs, because that is exactly what they are.
Every company will also have a few legacy machines that they keep running forever, well past their typical life, also for several reasons. We kept a DOS6 486 machine running until about 2012, for hardware reasons, and our supplier did similar, in order to keep a deliverable software item running for 20 years (based on Excel). Others will use some app that maybe was not feasible to migrate from a previous architecture to a new one, where there's no feasible replacement app.
My first Mac was obsolete within 4 years, and was already on battery #3. I span up one of my old 1-core Athlon PC's the other day, and the only failure was the CR2032 battery. It was the only thing I could find with firewire. There's probably someone else out there running a 68000 based Mac LCii or something, although that might have needed recapping by now, and dry solder joints reflowed in the monitor.
Either way, looks like Apple/Arm might be looking for a bigger bite of the Linux/BSD/VM/container etc. pie where one can replace hardware every 2 years with nearly no negative sideeffects in terms of keeping old software running. And they didn't put too much emphasis on allowing people to keep legacy MS x86 stuff running.
That’s twenty years it’s been in use – at the same company, which I worked at as well, I would regularly see lines of PC’s which had been gutted of anything useful before going for recycling. None were more than two or three years old…
Are we still trotting out this tired old non-argument? How many of those three year old PCs cost five grand? It's like saying that your Snap-On screwdrivers last longer than the ones you got from Poundland. Of course they do, and they only cost you one of your lesser-used internal organs. It's just not a fair comparison.
You pay £5,000 for a machine which lasts for 20 years vs replacing a £500 PC every three years coming in at £3,000 in total, net result in the former case you're left with a 20 year old computer and in the latter one that's just two years old.
My laptop is 12 years old. It's running the current version of Windows 10 and it's absolutely fine. I kept my old work laptop when they forcibly "upgraded" us a couple of years ago, that's nine years old. It's running the next version of Windows 10 and it's absolutely fine. And I'd go as far as to say that these are not anomalies, any PC of that vintage that was a half-decent spec to start with should be able to be brought up to current without breaking a sweat (well, if you throw an SSD at it). Are there many decade-old Macs running Catalina?
What you've got there is not an example of "PC vs Mac," it's an example of "corporate recycling."
Oh, and my tower PC is probably almost 20 years old as well (I'd estimate circa 2003-vintage but I can't be 100% certain as I'm not its original owner), though the only original components are probably the chassis and the floppy drive [edit, scratch that, I've just checked and that drive bay is empty bar the FDD faceplate]. That's one of the joys of ATX having been the standard unchanged desktop PC form factor for the last quarter of a century, I can keep swapping stuff out as technology marches on and it all just fits and works. It'll probably outlive me.
Cougars just cross because he can't sell his stash of old xeon processors
