Is COVID a factor for Arizona? I'm rather amazed and confused why AZ is the worst right now.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
ARM based MacBook Pro discussion [merged]
- Thread starter Omega Mac
- Start date
-
- Tags
- arm intel macbook pro macos sierra
- Sort by reaction score
Is COVID a factor for Arizona? I'm rather amazed and confused why AZ is the worst right now.
I don’t see it significantly delaying development, since it was just announced and construction is at least a few months off. OT, but California, Arizona, and Texas all border Mexico, which has seen a big spike. Perhaps that has something to do with it, since social distancing statistics haven’t really changed much for Arizona over the past few weeks.
It also heavily depends on Microsoft too. Even if Apple provided Microsoft with the necessary info/tools tomorrow. It's then on Microsoft to change their Windows 10 for ARM licensing policy.
Apple’s new ARM-based Macs won’t support Windows through Boot Camp
Microsoft has the power to change ARM-based Macs running Windows 10 on ARM.
www.theverge.com
"Microsoft only licenses Windows 10 on ARM to PC makers to preinstall on new hardware, and the company hasn't made copies of the operating system available for anyone to license or freely install. “Microsoft only licenses Windows 10 on ARM to OEMs,” says a Microsoft spokesperson in a statement to The Verge."
Right now that makes sense because ARM PC ecosystem is not so big. Even if Microsoft were to license ARM Windows not many people are going to but it because the hardware isn't widely available nor the apps. So it's OEMs who may license it and build ARM PCs.
That policy can change once the hardware is available and customers demand is there.
That policy can change once the hardware is available and customers demand is there.
It also heavily depends on Microsoft too. Even if Apple provided Microsoft with the necessary info/tools tomorrow. It's then on Microsoft to change their Windows 10 for ARM licensing policy.
Apple’s new ARM-based Macs won’t support Windows through Boot Camp
Microsoft has the power to change ARM-based Macs running Windows 10 on ARM.
"Microsoft only licenses Windows 10 on ARM to PC makers to preinstall on new hardware, and the company hasn't made copies of the operating system available for anyone to license or freely install. “Microsoft only licenses Windows 10 on ARM to OEMs,” says a Microsoft spokesperson in a statement to The Verge."
They already do license it now, but only if it's a PC OEM and it's pre-installed. There's no real reason for them to hold out on changing that. Especially since they already knew Apple was doing this transition and thus the ARM ecosystem would expand. If Microsoft was interested in having Bootcamp/Windows be available on Apple Silicon Macs, they'd have already changed the policy or made an exception to it. So that's what i mean when i say ultimately the onus is actually on them and possibly more than it is Apple (who already is working with Microsoft to get Office running on ARM) to get the ball rolling on this. So whatever it is Apple needs to provide to Microsoft, i think they have already. Or if not, it seems like they're more than willing to. The rest is on Microsoft.
Last edited:
Real question, why do people want Windows for Arm in Bootcamp when it doesn't run many native apps on the Arm version? It's not running x86 Windows 10.
I heard a few complaints on gaming, it won't run old games on Windows anyway due to the incompatible architecture, so where is the concern?
I get there are Windows tools, but those wouldn't run anyway.
I heard a few complaints on gaming, it won't run old games on Windows anyway due to the incompatible architecture, so where is the concern?
I get there are Windows tools, but those wouldn't run anyway.
I found Craig Federighi at the WWDC keynote and an interview afterwards really avoided talking about virtualized Windows on Big Sur. At first I thought it was the typical Apple "this problem doesn't exist" approach, but the more I think about it, the more I wonder if he has knowledge about Microsoft planning to release a version of Windows on ARM that will also translate x86 Windows app like Rosetta 2 does for x86 Apple apps, and that this operating system would be supported on macOS as a virtualized OS.
Yeah I know, overly complicated, but it would allow Mac users to run x86 Windows apps on Apple ARM computers.
Yeah I know, overly complicated, but it would allow Mac users to run x86 Windows apps on Apple ARM computers.
People want what they want, some people need access to both Windows and MacOS but would prefer to be based on Mac hardware. I think just because ARM Windows has that limitation currently doesn't mean it will forever. Unless there's a technical reason that actually makes it truly impossible. It's not a dead end road, it's a road Microsoft hasn't gone down yet, but will if enough passengers in the car tell them to. The fact that they even bothered to make an ARM chip with Qualcomm and make a version, however handicapped, of Windows for it all means they're at least interested and curious. If they put in the work to make it doable, it also functions as them putting in the work to do their own fully functioning ARM PCs/Surface laptops. There's not really a reason for them not to do it at some point. I think just the timing didn't work out largely.
That is a good response and thoughtful. I would not be surprised if a lot of success happens on Apple's side that MS would try harder to make a working Arm Windows. My confusion is why people were so upset they didn't see it working on the Arm mac considering Arm Windows does very little to begin with.
It reminds me of the old Windows PPC version.
It reminds me of the old Windows PPC version.
So close to getting the 10th gen 13 inch. I wish I knew if the 13 inch ARM was coming this fall. I feel like if I wait I am going to get burned.
And if you don't you can get burned too. Tough times trying to buy a Macbook right now.
No bootcamp means no gaming on the Mac so I’m not happy with arm
Why not just wait until they release ARM? If you're so convinced you'll get an Intel MBP then you may get some good deals once the ARM MBPs land. If you are not 100% convinced they may convince you, so nothing to lose for waiting I guess?
I already said it in another post, but I can see many people buying their Intel Mac just before ARM just because of fear and then regretting it because "my Mac won't last 6 years" and/or "ARM Macs aren't a problem at all as many thought"
It's not fear, it's experience
. I've gone through a Windows -> SGI (work computer) -> Linux -> Intel Mac transition over the past 25 years. Even the Linux -> Mac transition had the occasional serious hiccup getting software in my field (biochemistry/biophysics/bioinformatics) to work. I just bought a 16-inch MBP to replace my Early 2013 15-inch MBP. I will probably transition to Mac ARM in 2-3 years, likely first on a lower end laptop to test the software I need and to see other people's experiences.I'm lucky that I can (and do) use a Linux box for some things, but it's so nice to have a single, capable Mac computer that let's me run short (<1 hour) jobs.
Do you guys think Apple will introduce a new design language for the ARM MacBook Pros? It seems like a good time when they're changing basically everything else (software design + processor + graphics). There's also reports that the new chips + graphics could lead to thinner, lighter, cooler (temperature) designs.
But also, Apple just updated the MBP 15 to 16 design with new thermals, and I don't really know what they'd do to change their design. Apple might also consider it safer to keep the same design and say "it's the same Mac, but performs this much better." Thoughts?
But also, Apple just updated the MBP 15 to 16 design with new thermals, and I don't really know what they'd do to change their design. Apple might also consider it safer to keep the same design and say "it's the same Mac, but performs this much better." Thoughts?
Maybe they will revisit the smaller 15.4" design they ditched for thermal reasons? That seems to be the machine they wanted to build, and there might be more room to keep the magic keyboard if the battery and cooling solution can be smaller with Apple Silicon. If they stretch the screen out into the corners like the iPad Pro you could probably keep the 16.0" display, but you'd have to round off the corners, not sure how well that would work with macOS?
I'm very curious how radical the new designs may or may not be as well. I could see them going either way. I hope they figure out a good middle ground. They don't need to completely reinvent the laptop and do something crazy that will be highly divisive or niche like a second screen on the keyboard like the like the Asus Zenbook Pro Duo or something. However, it'd be safe but fairly dull if they literally just drop their Apple Silicon into the existing designs and call it a day. This concept render floating around for the alleged iMac redesign rumored to borrow heavily from the iPad Pro's design language is really nice looking to me.
It has the same skeleton of what the iMac is and has been but the aesthetic is modernized. That's the idea i want them to do for ARM MBPs. Still look like a MBP but slim the bezels even further than the current 16", sleek up the design a little bit, rethink the MBPs hinge, cleverly iterate upon (or just drop entirely) the touch bar, try to bring back the tapered edge of the Macbook Air but to the Macbook Pro since ARMs efficiency will allow for cooler and thinner devices. Something interesting but not over the top i guess.
Big Sur is tailor made for rounded corners. They even added the “safe areas” to the sdks so that apps can adjust themselves automatically to avoid them.
Or maybe apple intends to stick a big beautiful notch right in the middle of the menu bar. I would love that. But then, I just like to watch the forums burn, so...
(I've said this in a few threads, but it probably makes sense to start a separate discussion about it.)
The A12Z in the current iPad Pro and the ARM Mac mini DTK is powerful enough to match the current 2020 MacBook Air WITH ROSETTA 2. Certainly, it has the power to best the current 2020 13" MacBook Pro. Plus, it clearly fits in a thermal envelope as thin as the current iPad Pro without needing a fan.
If you put an Apple SoC that requires even the cooling of the current 2020 MacBook Air, it would run circles around the current Intel 2020 13" MacBook Pro.
My prediction: I think Apple is going to merge the MacBook Air and the 13" MacBook Pro moving into the ARM transition.
Why? The things separating the 2020 MacBook Air and the 13" MacBook Pro is processing power, a 32GB RAM option, a TouchBar, and maybe two extra USB-C connectors. If you upgrade the MacBook Air with an Apple SoC that completely runs circles around the current 10th-gen based 13" MacBook Pro, fits the Air's current thermal envelope, give it two more USB-C ports, the option for 32GB of RAM, and give or take a TouchBar, what need is there for a 13" MacBook Pro? If the idea is to make a thinner 13" MacBook Pro (while keeping the scissor-switch, of course) because Apple now can, at what point does the MacBook Air become repetitive?
Right now, you effectively have three 13" Macs. You have the MacBook Air, the 8th-Gen Intel 13" MacBook Pro with two ports and the 10th-Gen Intel 13" MacBook Pro. The 8th-Gen based MacBook Air is basically the spiritual successor of the 2010-17 MacBook Air, which only existed to offer a lighter machine that could fit into a smaller thermal envelope at the expense of speed. These three different machines exist as a result of the speed and chipset disparities thereof and how that affects the enclosures that they're in. If there's no speed expense or thermal constraints for making a machine that fits in a MacBook Air-sized body, but otherwise has speeds that run circles around the 10th Gen Intel 13" MacBook Pro of current and the few features that said 13" Pro has over the Air, why do we need a 13" MacBook Pro at all? I guess whether the new machine be called a 13" MacBook Pro or a MacBook Air doesn't really matter. If the best of both worlds scenario can be achieved at the cost of the Air, then we don't need two computers, no?
Thoughts?
The A12Z in the current iPad Pro and the ARM Mac mini DTK is powerful enough to match the current 2020 MacBook Air WITH ROSETTA 2. Certainly, it has the power to best the current 2020 13" MacBook Pro. Plus, it clearly fits in a thermal envelope as thin as the current iPad Pro without needing a fan.
If you put an Apple SoC that requires even the cooling of the current 2020 MacBook Air, it would run circles around the current Intel 2020 13" MacBook Pro.
My prediction: I think Apple is going to merge the MacBook Air and the 13" MacBook Pro moving into the ARM transition.
Why? The things separating the 2020 MacBook Air and the 13" MacBook Pro is processing power, a 32GB RAM option, a TouchBar, and maybe two extra USB-C connectors. If you upgrade the MacBook Air with an Apple SoC that completely runs circles around the current 10th-gen based 13" MacBook Pro, fits the Air's current thermal envelope, give it two more USB-C ports, the option for 32GB of RAM, and give or take a TouchBar, what need is there for a 13" MacBook Pro? If the idea is to make a thinner 13" MacBook Pro (while keeping the scissor-switch, of course) because Apple now can, at what point does the MacBook Air become repetitive?
Right now, you effectively have three 13" Macs. You have the MacBook Air, the 8th-Gen Intel 13" MacBook Pro with two ports and the 10th-Gen Intel 13" MacBook Pro. The 8th-Gen based MacBook Air is basically the spiritual successor of the 2010-17 MacBook Air, which only existed to offer a lighter machine that could fit into a smaller thermal envelope at the expense of speed. These three different machines exist as a result of the speed and chipset disparities thereof and how that affects the enclosures that they're in. If there's no speed expense or thermal constraints for making a machine that fits in a MacBook Air-sized body, but otherwise has speeds that run circles around the 10th Gen Intel 13" MacBook Pro of current and the few features that said 13" Pro has over the Air, why do we need a 13" MacBook Pro at all? I guess whether the new machine be called a 13" MacBook Pro or a MacBook Air doesn't really matter. If the best of both worlds scenario can be achieved at the cost of the Air, then we don't need two computers, no?
Thoughts?
Last edited:
People read too much into Geekbench scores.
They are not indicative of real world performance at all.
Microsoft's Surface Pro X also benchmarked with the exact same scores by the way. Look it up.
So you're telling me an already released ARM device matches Apple's A12Z performance just like that?
And yeah, I know some of you ARM supporters will be quick to point out the A12Z used in the DTK isn't optimized, etc... But that's beside the point.
The fact is: Apple never released a single benchmark of their own. So either they want to give us all a surprise, or their chips did not break physics and they are not that amazing in the end.
Apple and TSMC are on 7nm process already and Intel is barely on 10nm, if even. You can only shrink the chip so much.
They are not indicative of real world performance at all.
Microsoft's Surface Pro X also benchmarked with the exact same scores by the way. Look it up.
So you're telling me an already released ARM device matches Apple's A12Z performance just like that?
And yeah, I know some of you ARM supporters will be quick to point out the A12Z used in the DTK isn't optimized, etc... But that's beside the point.
The fact is: Apple never released a single benchmark of their own. So either they want to give us all a surprise, or their chips did not break physics and they are not that amazing in the end.
Apple and TSMC are on 7nm process already and Intel is barely on 10nm, if even. You can only shrink the chip so much.