This is Apple's Roadmap for Moving the First Macs Away from Intel (arstechnica.com) 383
After 15 years, Apple will again transition the Mac to a new architecture. The company announced at its developer conference today that it will introduce Macs featuring Apple-designed, ARM-based processors similar to those already used in the iPhone and iPad. From a report: Tim Cook pegged this switch as one of the four biggest transitions the mac has ever had. Alongside the more to PowerPC, the move to Intel, and the transition to Mac OS X, ARM will be one of the biggest mac changes ever. Apple is promising "a whole new level of performance" with a "Family of Mac SoCs." The transition to ARM from x86 means that some apps will be native and some won't. For mac OS 10.16, Apple says that all of the Apple 10.16 apps are native ARM apps. Xcode developers can "just open their apps and recompile" to get an ARM binary. "Universal 2" is a new type of binary that will run on Intel and ARM macs. Microsoft Office and Adobe's creative suite (Photoshop) were demoed as native ARM apps. Final Cut Pro has an ARM version too, along with a features that run on the "Neural Engine" in the Apple SoC.
Apple says it wants to make sure users can run all their apps on their ARM mac, even if they aren't native. So, just like with the PowerPC-to-Intel transition, Apple is dusting off the Rosetta brand with Rosetta 2, which is now an x86-to-ARM emulator. This move has been predicted for years, as the upsides for Apple are clear. Cupertino has always valued tight integration of hardware, software, and services, but Macs have been outliers among Apple's products in their reliance on an outside party for the CPU. (iPhones and other Apple products do contain display panels, modems, and camera components made by other companies, though.) So far, Apple's chip division has excelled in every market it has entered. In the world of smartphones, the company's SoCs are easily a generation ahead of the best Qualcomm, Samsung, and Mediatek have to offer. Apple's most dominant smartphone showing is probably the iPhone SE, a $400 iPhone that will out-perform $1200 Android phones thanks to the A13 Bionic SoC.
Apple says it wants to make sure users can run all their apps on their ARM mac, even if they aren't native. So, just like with the PowerPC-to-Intel transition, Apple is dusting off the Rosetta brand with Rosetta 2, which is now an x86-to-ARM emulator. This move has been predicted for years, as the upsides for Apple are clear. Cupertino has always valued tight integration of hardware, software, and services, but Macs have been outliers among Apple's products in their reliance on an outside party for the CPU. (iPhones and other Apple products do contain display panels, modems, and camera components made by other companies, though.) So far, Apple's chip division has excelled in every market it has entered. In the world of smartphones, the company's SoCs are easily a generation ahead of the best Qualcomm, Samsung, and Mediatek have to offer. Apple's most dominant smartphone showing is probably the iPhone SE, a $400 iPhone that will out-perform $1200 Android phones thanks to the A13 Bionic SoC.
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, except for applications that do JIT. I guess that Java JRE will never get ported to ARM.
Re: Rosetta is not an emulator. (Score:2)
What the hell do you think Android is? :D
Re: Rosetta is not an emulator. (Score:2)
Re:Rosetta is not an emulator. (Score:4, Informative)
Rosetta recompiles code for the target architecture. There is no emulation.
-jcr
No, it does not recompile anything, and yes it is an emulator. Rosetta does not access source code, it translates binaries. The code translation is considered emulation.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: Rosetta is not an emulator. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
This not what a compiler is, it never was what a compiler is, and no matter how many times you ignorantly pronounce it, it will never be what a compiler is.
There is not such thing as "compiling" an executable binary to another executable binary. There is another term for that which you would know if you weren't some douche pretending to be an expert on /,
Re: Rosetta is not an emulator. (Score:3)
Translation from one code into another is what a compiler does. One of them being a human-optimized one and one being a computer-optimized one is a rather new narrowing of the definition, that is not used by e.g. the dragon books, and that we should not support, as it limits our thinking and possibilities.
E.g. you compjle macro assembly to assembly and assembly to CISC machine language and the CPU compiles it to a RISC machine language. WebAssembly gets compiled too. And SVG can be compiled to PDF, despite
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Rosetta recompiles code for the target architecture. There is no emulation.
-jcr
No, it does not recompile anything, and yes it is an emulator. Rosetta does not access source code, it translates binaries.
No, the Intel binary is the source code in this case. Just as assembly language generated from C code is also source code. Its just fed into a different tool, an assembler, rather than a C/C++ compiler.
JIT -- Just in time compilation works on a binary and it is compilation not emulation. What Rosetta is doing is a smarter version of JIT.
The code translation is considered emulation.
No. Emulation is more of a "simulation" of an OS API, hardware like ports, a CPU instruction set, etc. To emulate Windows on an Intel Mac you only need to emulate the fir
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Rosetta is not an emulator. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It does not "recompile" as it does not have access to source code.
Also, it does runtime translation when required, as an emulator does.
If you're going to whine about the definition of a word, at least has some of the facts on your side.
Re: Rosetta is not an emulator. (Score:2, Insightful)
Oh kid. In our times, *everything* was source code. Machine language was originally designed to be entered by humans with paper media or even switches too. (And watch the blinkenlights.)
I recommend Computerphile on YouTube. They've got really great information on those times, from the first computers and personally meeting von Neumann, to today.
Re: (Score:3)
Seconded. This guy has no idea what he's talking about...
Re: Rosetta is not an emulator. (Score:5, Informative)
Are you fucking retarded?! Machine code is raw binary. When you toggle in a program using octal/hex/binary opcodes and data using front panel switches or even in software (debugger, hex editor, ML monitor, etc), that is certainly not "assembly language". Assembly is a layer of abstraction above that.
Assembler is not a high level language but it certainly is not machine code.
Everyone over 35 here is laughing hysterically at you. Such righteous indignation only to be so naive and wrong. Especially those of us who have ever patched binaries by hand or cracked games in the old days.
Re: Rosetta is not an emulator. (Score:4, Informative)
LOL no such thing as "machine language", poser. There is "assembly language" which you no doubt have never worked with but for which I was employed for many years of my career to work with.
If I were ignorant, maybe I'd take your advice and watch a YouTube channel that taught me the same bogus information you're offering.
Find a single source that refers to x86 object as "source code", fool.
A9 C1 20 ED FD
That is Machine Code. If you inspect the bytes in memory, that is what you will find. It is also what the processor (in this case, a 6502) can execute WITHOUT FURTHER TRANSLATION.
If you type those bytes into the Monitor program of an Apple 1 or Apple ][ (yes they use the same call), and type [address]G, you will be treated to an "A" on the screen.
That is "Machine Code", or "Machine Language". It is the directly executable instructions and operands that the CPU, er, Executes.
However...
LDA #$C1
JSR $FDED
Is the Assembly Code representation of the Above. If you inspect the bytes in memory, you will find that text NOWHERE. It requires an Assembler (a type of simple Compiler) to TRANSLATE (Compile) the Assembly Language Mnemonics into the Machine Language Opcodes and Operands that the processor DIRECTLY Executes.
Got it?
Moron.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It does not "recompile" as it does not have access to source code.
Source code need not be the human readable code we know and love. It need not be the original author's work. Assembly language generated by a C/C++ compiler is also source code. So is binary. It all depends on the tool it is being fed into, C/C++/Swift compiler, assembler, JIT compiler, etc.
Also, it does runtime translation when required, as an emulator does. If you're going to whine about the definition of a word, at least has some of the facts on your side.
And you know what the "runtime translation" is called? Just In Time Compilation.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't recompile the app. It doesn't have the source code, it can't.
It translates the x86 instructions into ARM instructions. There will be some optimization for common sequences that popular compilers generate, but overall it won't be nearly as efficient as starting from the source code. No where near native performance.
Re: Rosetta is not an emulator. (Score:2)
No where near native performance.
Tell that to the Maya demo they showed.
If it wasn't within 5% of native speed, Iâ(TM)d be really surprised.
Re: (Score:2)
Maya does a lot of the work on the GPU.
Shadow of the Tomb Raider was selected for the same reason - performance is mostly limited by the GPU.
Re: (Score:2)
Maya demo was in the rosetta demo portion
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
There is a reason why you can't do that. The intermediate form includes all the constraints, x86 doesn't. A lot of optimization relies on knowing those constraints.
Cheap Used Intel Macs ! (Score:2)
Yay for Cheap Used Intel Macs ! :)
The soon-to be useless and cheap Intel MacPros can run Linux juuust perfectly
Re: Cheap Used Intel Macs ! (Score:2)
Yay for Cheap Used Intel Macs ! :)
The soon-to be useless and cheap Intel MacPros can run Linux juuust perfectly
So can the new ones. They showed it doing just that, as part of their Virtualization demo.
Re: (Score:2)
Bad News for Intel (Score:2)
AMD is quickly chipping away at the high end chip market. AMD also has the console market locked up. Now Apple is working on the laptop and, eventually, desktop market with ARM. Not important in and of itself, but if they can squeeze comparable performance out of the ARM architecture, it will be enticing for Microsoft to push ARM based Windows further than it already is.
If Intel's bottom line starts taking a hit, expect them to be flexing their huge patent portfolio sooner rather than later.
Re: (Score:2)
...it will be enticing for Microsoft to push ARM based Windows further than it already is.
By "enticing", do you mean steal that many more CPU cycles to drive that many more channels of Telemetry?
Sorry, but in the era of fast-enough i7s, cheap RAM and SSDs, I'm struggling to understand why Microsoft needs to make Windows faster, since abusive user data mining is exactly what made it slower.
If Intel's bottom line starts taking a hit, expect them to be flexing their huge patent portfolio sooner rather than later.
Everyone's bottom line is taking a hit right now, but if companies think they're going to flex their legal anything anytime soon, think again. Take a number and get in the back of the COVID-19 line. Our lega
Re: (Score:3)
I'm struggling to understand why Microsoft needs to make Windows faster,
Seriously? You don't think improving efficiency, saving power and reducing waste is worth it?
Today, data centers use about 2% [energy.gov] of the total energy consumption in the United States. Given those kind of loads, and the fact that cloud use is only going up, I'd think reducing power consumption by even a few percent is absolutely worth it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's bad news for everyone except Apple.
Up next is an Apple CPU with HW encrypted executables that you can't disable, encoding only available from Cupertino.
Want to make an Apple app? Pay the fee.
SEP (Score:2)
They could have done that already with the SEP built into Macs since 2017. Why haven't they?
Re: (Score:2)
Want to make an Apple app? Pay the fee.
Isn't this already the case?
Re: (Score:2)
There will be some bad news for them as well; some people won't stay with Apple. I know I certainly won't.
and how slow will windows VM's be? and app store?? (Score:2)
and how slow will windows VM's be? and app store lock in???
Re: (Score:2)
In comparison to X86-64 desktop chips, ARM emulation is going to be a bit slower, Windows will probably run fine and basic apps, but games? I don't think it will be a good experience.
Native apps for ARM should be nice though, Apple is doing it's Apple thing.
I feel like the transition is going to be rough for Apple people, but in a few years when everything is ported and running natively they probably will enjoy fast, quiet and efficient PC's.
Should make syncing to an iPhone easy? (I only own one Apple produ
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In comparison to X86-64 desktop chips, ARM emulation is going to be a bit slower, Windows will probably run fine and basic apps, but games? I don't think it will be a good experience.
Native apps for ARM should be nice though, Apple is doing it's Apple thing.
I feel like the transition is going to be rough for Apple people, but in a few years when everything is ported and running natively they probably will enjoy fast, quiet and efficient PC's.
Should make syncing to an iPhone easy? (I only own one Apple product an Apple TV 4K box thing)
They did actually demo "Shadow of the Tomb raider" running under Rosetta2 - it looked surprisingly good and smooth. I've never played that game, so I don't know how it compares to running on e.g. a current iMac.
Re: (Score:2)
Hmmm maybe if they got some GPU action in there somehow.... That's pretty amazing to be honest.
I am trying to wrap my brain around that, but I just can't imagine how... I have some theories but they are uneducated guesses at best lol
Re: (Score:2)
It was the Mac version, leveraging Metal, Apple's low-level graphics API (which is used on both iOS and macOS). The way that these OS-level emulation things usually work is that only the application code is emulated, and any system call ends up in native code.
Re: and how slow will windows VM's be? and app sto (Score:2)
Jut stuff a shitload of cores, GHz, pipelones, caches, bus bandwidths and buffers in there.
The efficiency of ARM will be gone (or maybe it never was there), but at least the architecture has less legacy cruft... I guess.
Re: (Score:2)
They selected that game because it's mostly bound by the GPU. Having a slower CPU won't kill the frame rate.
Re: (Score:2)
> They did actually demo "Shadow of the Tomb raider" running under Rosetta2 - it looked surprisingly good and smooth. I've never played that game, so I don't know how it compares to running on e.g. a current iMac.
Smooth is 120+ FPS.
30 FPS is not.
It _might_ have been 60 FPS but it hard to tell without further analysis.
Its too bad Apple decided to omit the average framerate and frame time on a current gen Mac and how it performed on Apple Silicon.
Re: (Score:2)
If they knew it was running at a crazy framerate, they would mention it. That they didn't tells you what you need to know: it's running around 30fps, which is good enough for a video demonstration. Still, that's not too shabby.
I'm actually pretty excited about this move. It would be nice if this translated into cheaper products, or at least products at the same price with better default specs for RAM and disk, but I'm not a fool. Apple will most likely pocket the difference.
Re: and how slow will windows VM's be? and app sto (Score:2, Flamebait)
From what I saw, Windows will be plenty snappy, as if anyone cares.
And there will be no App Store lock-in. Or else they wouldnâ(TM)t need a new version (Universal 2) if their dual-platform Packaging format, nor their absolutely kickass Rosetta 2 translator. The App Storeâ(TM)s âoeBitcodeâ Distribution system would just handle all that at Download time.
You Haters just need to all STFU on thus one. Apple is about to put every other platform in the dust.
Seriously.
Re: and how slow will windows VM's be? and app st (Score:2)
I was with you until the last two "paragraphs".
No, they won't. It will hardly be a personal computer. You need to wipe the jizz off your brain.
Re: (Score:2)
They showed Linux running in VMs. It was probably an ARM version, but there's an ARM version of Windows 10 too. They also demonstrated Maya and the latest Tomb Raider game running under x86 emulation, and performance seemed good.
Re: (Score:2)
ARM windows is crap and running an mac app with calls routed to non x86 code speeds stuff up.
Re: (Score:2)
Who buys a Mac to run Windows in a VM?
Many. Not exclusively, of course, but to run those applications that don't support Mac natively.
Re: (Score:3)
Who buys a Mac to run Windows in a VM?
Started doing that back in 2008, and today they make and sell competing hypervisor products for OSX.
Perhaps we can stop asking this question that is akin to "Who buys an SUV and never goes off road?"
Re: and how slow will windows VM's be? and app sto (Score:2)
Everyone??
Hell, most SUVs can't even go off-road. They are pathetic and are NOT jeeps.
As I said: They are bad in ALL disciplines. Just the worst car possible from all the properties of all the other types.
They only get bought for *one* reason: Pussies thinking they are safer in them.
Which is patently wrong. More mass means worse crashes. Means more protection needed to achive the same safety. They are worse than small hatchbacks. Plus more dangerous to others aswell. And guzzle more gas, are worse at corner
Re: (Score:3)
Which is patently wrong. More mass means worse crashes.
More mass means the crash is worse for "the other one", not for the one in the SUV - unless both involved are in a SUV.
will pro workstions not have pci-e based Apple GPU (Score:2)
will pro workstions not have pci-e based Apple GPUs?? and no pci-e slots?
Re: (Score:2)
Apple did not announce any hardware based on this new OS. Just a developer kit rental.
and Imac pro / mac pro level systems? (Score:2)
and Imac pro / mac pro level systems?
Re: and Imac pro / mac pro level systems? (Score:2)
Tim Cook claimed they will also be offering, and even designing nee, Intel-based systems for a long time to come.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn’t invest in a new Intel Mac unless/until we hear something more concrete regarding just how long OS support will be guaranteed.
Tim Cook gave an estimated transition window of two years. As I recall, Steve Jobs made similar vague assurances about future PowerPC support “for years to come” when he announced the transition to Intel. In practice they dropped PPC support as quickly as they could get away with without technically lying. Two years still qualifies as “years to come
Haven't we seen all of this before? (Score:2)
Answer: yes.
Re: (Score:2)
I want to learn more about the new virt tech (Score:4, Interesting)
Apple announced new virtualization technology that'll be part of "Big Sur". They specifically talked (briefly) about having a Linux VM; but I'll be curious to see what other OSes are supported. Will you be able to run an older version of macOS, for instance?
I can't imagine Parallels or VMware is happy about this announcement, although a lot will depend on how well Apple's system works, and how adaptable it is. Google Maps didn't go away just because Apple started offering its own Maps. Heck, for all we know right now, this might just be a rebranded and somewhat tweaked version of VirtualBox.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple announced new virtualization technology that'll be part of "Big Sur". They specifically talked (briefly) about having a Linux VM; but I'll be curious to see what other OSes are supported. Will you be able to run an older version of macOS, for instance?
I can't imagine Parallels or VMware is happy about this announcement, although a lot will depend on how well Apple's system works, and how adaptable it is. Google Maps didn't go away just because Apple started offering its own Maps. Heck, for all we know right now, this might just be a rebranded and somewhat tweaked version of VirtualBox.
They did actually demo a Linux VM running in Parallels. Not sure if that was running on emulation or native.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Their Linux demo was running under Parallels.
I missed that - haven’t used Parallels in a long time. I thought they were claiming it was Apple’s own in-house virtualization tech, but perhaps it’s just an underlying layer that lets products like Parallels and Docker get close to the “bare metal”.
I agree that the brief demos of both that and Rosetta 2 looked impressive.
Oh, My! (Score:5, Insightful)
When you watch the WWDC Keynote, keep in mind that they are running their demos on their Development Platform, consisting of a Mac mini with a motherboard with an A12Z SoC.
Thatâ(TM)s the same SoC used in the new $300 iPad.
Apple is going to walk away from everyone else, performance-wise on Macs, just like they already have with phones and tablets.
And yes, they have both x86 (and x64?) and Virtualization covered quite well, thank you!
AAPL stock price is up another almost $8.00 on this news, BTW.
Suck it, Haters!!!
Re: (Score:2)
I've got one of those new $300 ipads. It uses an A10 Fusion, which is two generations behind. And yes, I knew this when I bought it.
The ipad mini and ipad air use A12 chips. The Pro uses an A12Z. But the Pro is an $800 tablet.
Re: Oh, My! (Score:2)
The ipad mini and ipad air use A12 chips. The Pro uses an A12Z. But the Pro is an $800 tablet.
I stand corrected, sorry.
But it is still running in an iPad, with all the power and thermal constraints that implies.
Re: (Score:3)
But the Mac mini in the development system doesn't have "all the power and thermal constraints" implied by the iPad Pro.
You're trying to suggest that a $300 iPad is as powerful as modern Intel desktops and there's multiple reasons why that is not the case, from getting the iPad wrong to failing to consider thermal differences. Not to mention, of course, that there was no performance evidence presented at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Unlikely. The reason x86 is so fast it's that the complex instructions lend themselves to on the fly optimization in CPUs with lots of resources.
ARM is more suited to efficiency, with simpler instructions that require less decoding and less hardware to execute.
Beware benchmarks showing competitive performance, they are designed to mislead.
Re: (Score:2)
"And yes, they have both x86 (and x64?) and Virtualization covered quite well, thank you!"
They demo'ed it and announced their intentions. "Quite well" will need to be seen, you sound like SuperKendall here. Very bad look.
The most interesting thing is that they've chosen to promote the transition based solely on performance. Also, "ARM" did not appear anywhere.
Finally, they announced iPhone and iPad apps will run natively and have App Store access, but it is not clear through what mechanism. It appeared
Re: (Score:3)
Where do you get your benchmarks, Apple marketing material? Qualcomms Snapdragon 865 outperforms a13 on most benchmarks. They come close enough, but on Macs they have to compete with the likes of Ryzen + Vega. Apple is of course a hugely capable company, but we'll see if they can deliver on that.
Re: Oh, My! (Score:2)
Indeed. Apple fanboys will get a fraction of the x86 performance at even higher price. The rest of us sure are the ones that are suckers.
Watch the demo and say that, Hater!
What I saw was indistinguishable from Intel-native performance, even running translated x86 code.
Re: (Score:2)
Their existing tablet SoCs have comparable performance to Intel's laptop processors. They said they're going to produce larger SoCs for their macs. I don't see why the performance won't be competitive with Intel.
Should work well for Apple (Score:2)
They'll likely continue to make a lot of money, more money than even whole groups of PC companies, selling their ARM-based machines. And for many many users they won't notice any difference in the jump. However I suspect that corporate users will likely move away from Macs, after embracing them for the last decade or so. I know a lot of people that bought Mac laptops because they were tired of dealing directly with Windows problems, but they still wanted and needed to run certain Windows-only software pac
Re: Should work well for Apple (Score:2)
I know a lot of people that bought Mac laptops because they were tired of dealing directly with Windows problems, but they still wanted and needed to run certain Windows-only software packages. The Intel macs were a boon for these people. With that advantage going away, I think a lot of them will just go back to Windows, which although still a horrible experience, is much better than it used to be.
They showed Linux running under Parallels. Why do you think that Windows won't run?
Re: (Score:2)
Are you implying that x86 Windows running in Parallels via Rosetta 2 is going to be a full-performance, robust solution? I'm very skeptical. Even the best dynamic translators incur a performance penalty. It used to be 1/3 the speed of native, but the technology has improved greatly in the last 20 years. I still expect a 50% slowdown. You have knowledge that performance is greater than 75% of native?
Re: (Score:2)
Other than Apple making macOS clearly worse with each release, pretty much. I like how "analysts" are now claiming that Apple suffered from being tied to Intel release cycles, as if that were a problem for anyone, when Apple would let Macs languish for years without updates.
Inevitable (Score:2)
Re: Inevitable (Score:2)
You mean small keyboard.
They are far from full-sized (like a desktop keyboard). In every of the three dimensions.
Besides: Where are the split keyboards, Apple? Our hands do not grow out of our bellies, you know?
MacOS is going to 11. (Score:2)
What's the roadmap for OS X no to suck? (Score:2)
Seriously, I haven't seen OS this buggy since maybe Windows 98. Every time the entire OS crashes unexpectedly (which is a lot) I'm wondering if it's actually going to boot again. Every update seems to make it run slower and introduce new, even more creative bugs (for example I have to now unplug all external monitors or the boot process will get stuck on some invisible alert window). It also looks like use cases common on all the other OSes since at least 20 years are still a big mystery to Apple. When on m
Makes me sad (Score:4, Interesting)
Been a Mac user for a very long time now. Dont relish the thought of seeing the OS turning into a Freemium superhighway where you get nothing but crappy apps with ads from devs hoping youâ(TM)ll move on to their Pro version for $9 a month. X86 was the only thing keeping some of that garbage out of there which is an odd thing to say. Plus does completely unrestricted homebrew really have a future? Maybe Iâ(TM)m just being a big baby who doesnâ(TM)t like change. I guess weâ(TM)ll see.
Re:Makes me sad (Score:4, Funny)
So Macs will finally stop being PCs... (Score:3)
Personal Computers.
And join the assortment of jewelry with accidentially included electronics. ;)
Raspberry Pi Hackintosh (Score:2)
I'm sure there are enough differences that you wouldn't be able to do so, but it would be awesome if we could use a Raspberry Pi as a Hackintosh.
Intel's choice. (Score:2)
Intel has a choice: Innovate, or litigate? Which is easier, and which would you do?
Though they probably know Apple has a lawyer army.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Dual Booting Windows? (Score:2)
Yes, technically. In reality, it is a successor to Windows CE / Phone, and normal Windows applications don't run on it. It is more like a separate OS.
Re: Dual Booting Windows? (Score:2)
Sometimes, what isn't said is more interesting than what is, and I'm guessing from that statement that Windows on Mac is dead.
I wouldn't assume that at all. What I saw made me confident that there is absolutely no reason that won't happen.
Re: (Score:2)
I think a more accurate statement would’ve been “Boot Camp is probably dead”. I’m sure Windows will work in a hypervisor (don’t recall if it was specifically mentioned with regards to Apple’s announced new virtualization app).
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes, what isn't said is more interesting than what is, and I'm guessing from that statement that Windows on Mac is dead.
They said Intel based Macs will be available for years to come.
Re: (Score:3)
enjoy your IOS crap walled-garden-pretending-to-be-a-laptop.
Whatever. I like my walled garden. When I see many news stories about malware on Android and Windows, I am just glad I am in my garden.
I used to have an Android phone and it was crap compared to my iOS. It locked up, constantly had memory issues, and having to deal with amateur developers that would not allow me to move their apps to the SD card. WTF?!
And retard developers who wanted ALL access to everything on my phone when they did NOT need it. Pure sign of an amateur when you just require your app t
Re: (Score:2)
If they tune this processor well, I see no reason why they would be unable to compete with x86.
By the way,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
During the keynote Apple promised desktop-class performance on a notebook's power budget.
Guess we'll see.
Re: (Score:2)
They will use the ARM instruction set instead of x86. There is not limit to the performance of a chip using either instruction set. If anything, being to full of legacy crap, the x86 instruction set make CPU slower than their full potential.
Apple do not use a standard ARM core (such as Cortex A72) or anything, they design their own.
If they can make a good 10W ARM tablet chip, I wouldn't see why they couldn't make at first a 25W laptop chip, and then eventually a 70W desktop chip. The obvious thing to do is
Re: Won't it be ridiculously slow? (Score:2)
They're most likely banking on the fact that most people use laptops for nothing but light usage like web browsing, email and office applications.
Itâ(TM)s funny to see you idiots assuming so much incorrectly.
They already have all their Applications running natively, and even did a fairly impressive demo of Final Cut Pro, and Maya and some Tomb Raider X86 Mac game (plus an iOS game thrown in for good measure).
Watch the last 20 minutes of the Keynote. Youâ(TM)ll see...
Re: Won't it be ridiculously slow? (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't forget thar i7s in macs are horrendously throttled due to overheating problems due to the damn things having barely any air cooling, "because design". ... Because it is meant to be jewelry. Not to be actually used.