If Apple goes thru with this, I will stop buying macbook pros for myself and stop my employer from buying them. That would be roughly 4000 purchases every 3 years.
If Apple goes thru with this, I will stop buying macbook pros for myself and stop my employer from buying them. That would be roughly 4000 purchases every 3 years.
Perhaps you could explain your reasoning? Abandoning the OS would be far more difficult for most people than abandoning the underlying CPU architecture.
Why? The applications people are familiar with are available on Windows. MS Office is the main one. My own parents have been using Macs for many years but recently in a volunteer capacity had to use the supplied Windows 10 computers. They found the transition quite easy. In fact my mother remarked that Windows 10 was much more Mac-like than older versions of Windows. The jump from Finder to Explorer was pretty simple (despite the lack of a paned interface in Windows). MS Office seemed about the same to t
It seems Adobe CC and Office 2019 already ported themselves to the Mac ARM and most apps are a compile away.
The x86 emulation demo was impressive and they could always throw more hardware at the problem, the ARM chip is 1/3 the cost for Apple to produce and consumes a lot less power. Having an x86 code interpreter on chip is what Intel and AMD both do already, why not on ARM?
The x86 emulation demo was impressive and they could always throw more hardware at the problem, the ARM chip is 1/3 the cost for Apple to produce and consumes a lot less power.
Apple didn't produce x86 chips, so it's just "the ARM chip is 1/3 the cost for Apple". Only with their piss-poor volumes they could have gone AMD instead, probably saved just as much money (since they wouldn't have to spend money making their own desktop processors) and they'd have retained binary compatibility.
Apple is sitting on some of the world's largest corporate cash reserves, they aren't taking this step to save money. They're doing it specifically to be incompatible with everyone else, in order to push people further into their walled garden. They just want to benefit from vendor lock-in.
I'm out... (Score:3, Interesting)
If Apple goes thru with this, I will stop buying macbook pros for myself and stop my employer from buying them. That would be roughly 4000 purchases every 3 years.
Re: (Score:2)
If Apple goes thru with this, I will stop buying macbook pros for myself and stop my employer from buying them. That would be roughly 4000 purchases every 3 years.
Perhaps you could explain your reasoning? Abandoning the OS would be far more difficult for most people than abandoning the underlying CPU architecture.
Re: (Score:2)
Why? The applications people are familiar with are available on Windows. MS Office is the main one. My own parents have been using Macs for many years but recently in a volunteer capacity had to use the supplied Windows 10 computers. They found the transition quite easy. In fact my mother remarked that Windows 10 was much more Mac-like than older versions of Windows. The jump from Finder to Explorer was pretty simple (despite the lack of a paned interface in Windows). MS Office seemed about the same to t
Re: I'm out... (Score:2)
It seems Adobe CC and Office 2019 already ported themselves to the Mac ARM and most apps are a compile away.
The x86 emulation demo was impressive and they could always throw more hardware at the problem, the ARM chip is 1/3 the cost for Apple to produce and consumes a lot less power. Having an x86 code interpreter on chip is what Intel and AMD both do already, why not on ARM?
Re: I'm out... (Score:4, Informative)
The x86 emulation demo was impressive and they could always throw more hardware at the problem, the ARM chip is 1/3 the cost for Apple to produce and consumes a lot less power.
Apple didn't produce x86 chips, so it's just "the ARM chip is 1/3 the cost for Apple". Only with their piss-poor volumes they could have gone AMD instead, probably saved just as much money (since they wouldn't have to spend money making their own desktop processors) and they'd have retained binary compatibility.
Apple is sitting on some of the world's largest corporate cash reserves, they aren't taking this step to save money. They're doing it specifically to be incompatible with everyone else, in order to push people further into their walled garden. They just want to benefit from vendor lock-in.
Re: (Score:2)
Having an x86 code interpreter on chip is what Intel and AMD both do already, why not on ARM?
In a word: Licensing. That is it.
But functionally, you are correct (I believe).