ARM MacBook Pro I don’t want an Overpriced Netbook.

[leman]

Now, you look at ARM computers where you can't cuddle up to Microsoft anymore. Realize you're paying a premium for a Mac and can't run Microsoft when Apple abandons you after a few years.

You are conveniently forgetting that Microsoft was trying to get into ARM game for a while now. Windows on ARM exists and is running on customer devices. It's still kind of crappy, but Microsoft has already announced that it will develop it further. I am fairly sure that Bootcamp will make a return around 2021-2022 when ARM Windows gets more features.

I am also not quite sure what you mean by "cuddling up" or "abandoning". Popular Microsoft applications such as Office are already running as native applications on ARM Macs.

ARM Macs means Apple is in control and applying current policy of ARM devices, can stop you from installing unsigned OS or from doing what you want, when you want it. They can also disable your Mac remotely. A true Big Brother move.

They can already do these things with Intel Macs. Wake up.

 

[EdT]

Let’s keep it simple: Apple would never release a new ARM MacBook that was worse than the year before. Their entire MO is “the new iPhone 11 is 30% faster and 50% more efficient than the iPhone X”. They always compare the latest and greatest model with last years, and show how much better this new one is.

Plus, Apple has a lot to prove. The whole tech world is waiting to see what happens with this transition, and Apple knows if they couldn’t come out with anything other than a great product, journalists would have a field day with “Apple is doomed!”. There’s no chance in my mind that all AS macs are going to be AT LEAST just as good as the current offerings - and more likely better than the current intel macs.

Apple, and for that matter every hardware or software company in existence, is quite willing to cherry pick features and abilities that show an improvement and just not talk about ones that don’t. And that’s with the features and limitations that they know about. Once released any new product has bugs and limitations that product testing didn’t find. Customers do things that companies don’t think about doing with products and software.

The new computers from Apple are going to be both new hardware and new software. Something will come up, probably multiple somethings, that will not be expected. That’s on top of whatever limitations that they are expecting but figure that they can solve within a year or 2 with new hardware/software. Any product line that goes through a fundamental architecture change will have teething problems. Small problems won’t hurt Apple’s reputation much. Medium problems will leave a stain but if solved soon will be forgotten over time. Major problems can seriously hurt the bottom line.

And part of Apples ‘problem’ will be expectations. People don’t know what the consequences are with the new hardware. The computer/OS/software may do everything that Apple engineers tried to accomplish for a first generation device but not do what customers are expecting. Look at any hardware thread and you will see people complaining that the battery doesn’t last a week or they can’t connect to 3rd party product ’X’ or some other problem that is caused by unrealistic expectations by some customers. One or two groups of people disappointed probably is ok. Multiple different groups, disappointed because of separate problems that won’t be fixed for 4-5 years is a very bad situation. If there are enough people disappointed then the problem isn’t their assumptions but Apple’s.

Right now, reading anything you can find, you can’t say for certain what will work better, what will work the same, and what may not work at all. I still think Apple should have spent time shaping expectations where they know it’s not going to be a problem, reducing expectations where they know that there will be initial problems, and having answers for situations that may require a fundamental shift in user habits.

 

[Joelist]

What Apple did was show both full (not mobile) Microsoft Office Professional running natively on Apple Silicon and show Adobe Creative Suite likewise running natively on Apple Silicon. This occurred at WWDC.

 

[MisterMe]

....

I'm trying to think when I last came across an application that I needed that wasn't supported on the Mac without a good alternative....MS Visio maybe? But then web-based tools like LucidCharts or Draw.io are good these days... MS Project?

....

OmniGraffle has been around for about two decades from NeXTSTEP developer, The Omni Group.

 

[Joe The Dragon]

Again, Intel is 2 manufacturing processes behind both Apple and AMD. Apple and AMD have shrunken their manufacturing processes that far. Physics dictate that you can only shrink your die so much before you hit a brick wall.

So Intel has more room to grow here. Both Apple and AMD will eventually get to a point where they can't shrink the die so much anymore.

Apple may have amazing engineers but they can't break physics.



8 cores is not twice as fast as 4 cores. Heck, 4 cores is not twice as fast as 2 cores.

So performance scaling is definitely not linear, realistically.

And A12Z does NOT match any contemporary GPU with 50W. I'm not sure where you are pulling that from, but this is obvious if you compare the iPad Pro against the 16" MacBook. The AMD Radeon 5300M/5500M/5600M in the 16" MacBook are rated at 50W. I sincerely doubt A12Z is able to catch up. It can barely handle simplistic graphics at the native resolution of the iPad. CAD software on the iPad Pro is a sub par experience, if I have to be polite. At best, Apple is slightly exceeding Intel's integrated graphics but that doesn't say much.

I honestly think you and many others are too excited about what Apple can achieve with their chips. I'll err on the cautious side, because it's obvious that the move to ARM will mostly benefit only Apple: they'll have more control over the platforms.

If Apple was confident about performance, they would not need 2 years to transition, nor would they need to introduce more Intel-based Macs. The fact is: Apple still has to introduce Intel-based Macs. For how long, we have no idea. But the fact is: Apple knows they cannot completely usurp Intel performance at the higher end of the spectrum. The iMac, the 16" MacBook and the Mac Pro will likely have to wait until TSMC can produce 5nm chips reliably.

introduce Intel-based Macs or just make small bumps?

 

[throAU]

Rosetta especially is one thing I will have to test for myself over believing any comments on here, like ‘it runs very smoothly’ when in fact it is a P.O.S. One persons judgement of speed / fan noise / heat etc can vary a lot to another

I'm pretty confident in it to be honest.

I started with the Mac towards the end of Rosetta's life and ended up missing it a lot. I didn't even know some software (e.g., Diablo 1) was running via Rosetta until it went away by default and had to be installed as an optional package in Snow Leopard, it was that good IMHO.

And that was doing run-time translation. Rosetta 2 is INSTALL TIME translation, so the performance should be better still.
[automerge]1600216159[/automerge]

I am disappointed with speed. In single-threaded performance, there have been barely any advances in the last couple of years.

That's not a Mac only problem though. You're not going to get better single thread performance improvement anywhere else, either.

 

[throAU]

Maybe you should tell all those guys who have bought a Mac Pro they wasted their money, as your MSI laptop is more than enough

Yeah, in terms of "desktop replacement" a 1660ti, 16GB of RAM, and only 2 drives is poverty pack desktop spec as far as I'm concerned.

I'm regularly burning through 48-50 GB of RAM for my typical virtualisation workload on the desktop in my sig and that's only because I'm constraining my workload to its limits because I don't want to cough up enough money for thread ripper.

Laptops are suited for some things, gaming, high end workloads, etc. are not those things. It will always be a compromise because performance is tied to power consumption and thermal output, both of which are inherently limited in a portable.

 

[dogslobber]

"Apple announced Microsoft 365 and Adobe Creative Cloud support for its first Arm chip and first Arm-based Macs, which it calls Apple silicon."

A little research goes a long way to cutting through the BS.

We'll see. It took three years for Adobe to actually release a version of PS that was native to Intel. Microsoft was still plugging bugs in the Rosetta version in 2010. You might drink the kool-aid but I look for shipping products. A commitment to deliver is vaporware until it actually is in the hands of consumers. That usually never hits a proper schedule so it might be 3-4 years before there utility of ARM Macs is a value proposition to consumers. Mind you, some will sip from the fountain or jump head first in regardless, just because, well, Apple.

 

[Maximara]

We'll see. It took three years for Adobe to actually release a version of PS that was native to Intel. Microsoft was still plugging bugs in the Rosetta version in 2010. You might drink the kool-aid but I look for shipping products. A commitment to deliver is vaporware until it actually is in the hands of consumers. That usually never hits a proper schedule so it might be 3-4 years before there utility of ARM Macs is a value proposition to consumers. Mind you, some will sip from the fountain or jump head first in regardless, just because, well, Apple.

But as you note that was 10 years ago...and Apple, supposedly, has made the conversion process a lot saner this time around with simple recompile via Xcode being all that is needed with most code being native in days of development.

If Apple follows the PowerPC to Intel transition there will be a two year 6 month window from production to ending old CPU production (January 2007-August 2009 last time) more then enough time for a developer to get off their lazy butt and recompile (assuming their code isn't a spaghettified mess) and that is ignoring that the fact the Rosetta translator didn't end until the next OS (Lion) in July 2011. That is four years seven months.

Also knowledgable Mac users know there are cheaper alternatives.

GraphicConverter (called the poor man's photoshop) has been around since 1992, has 1.5 million users, and has had prompt updates. "ARM version for the upcoming ARM architecture are available as BETA." Unless there is some really esoteric feature why in the name of sanity would you go for the software as a model where you keep paying a monthly fee to Adobe? Besides even if there is some features PS had that GC doesn't and till actually use Adobe per the above video have already converted much of their software.

The same of true of Microsoft Office vs LibreOffice and LibreOffice has a Raspberry Pi ARM version which, if they did their coding right, should not be that much of a pain to recode for ARM mac.

There is a reason some Mac users make fun of Windows users. This is why.

 

[Joelist]

This stuff is starting to become FUD.

Apple demonstrated full Microsoft Office running natively on Apple Silicon at WWDC. They likewise demonstrated Adobe Creative Suite doing the same thing. So these are not "promises" they are accomplished things. They ran Autodesk Maya in Rosetta 2 and it was fast and smooth as was Tomb Raider. And Autodesk already has a leg up on native operation because it already has an iOS version.

 

[Maximara]

This stuff is starting to become FUD.

Apple demonstrated full Microsoft Office running natively on Apple Silicon at WWDC. They likewise demonstrated Adobe Creative Suite doing the same thing. So these are not "promises" they are accomplished things. They ran Autodesk Maya in Rosetta 2 and it was fast and smooth as was Tomb Raider. And Autodesk already has a leg up on native operation because it already has an iOS version.

Starting to become FUD? It passed FUD a long time ago...unless you repurpose FUD to mean Fictional Unsupported Delusions rather than Fear Uncertainty and Doubt.

Personally unless there are some really esoteric feature you would actually use (note I said use not think you need) I don't understand why anyone would go with the "Live service" Microsoft Office has become over the free LibreOrrice.

GraphicConverter insanely powerful for the price (US$40) and it is shareware and if GC can't do it there is Gimp...which is free.

 

[dmccloud]

One of the funniest posts I have read in years.

Thats a broad generalisation there regarding your opinion that your MSI laptop is more than fast enough for what I would use a desktop for.

Maybe you should tell all those guys who have bought a Mac Pro they wasted their money, as your MSI laptop is more than enough.

If you honestly need that much more of a machine, then no preconfigured consumer desktop could handle your needs either. My use case is probably significantly more representative of the PC market as a whole than your allegedly "highly specialized" workload. Edge cases do not constitute the norm.

 

[dmccloud]

We'll see. It took three years for Adobe to actually release a version of PS that was native to Intel. Microsoft was still plugging bugs in the Rosetta version in 2010. You might drink the kool-aid but I look for shipping products. A commitment to deliver is vaporware until it actually is in the hands of consumers. That usually never hits a proper schedule so it might be 3-4 years before there utility of ARM Macs is a value proposition to consumers. Mind you, some will sip from the fountain or jump head first in regardless, just because, well, Apple.

ARM-based versions of Office 365 and the Adobe Creative Suite are already available for Windows on ARM. So yes, there are shipping products for ARM already. Since Office uses the same code base across MacOS and Windows, the bulk of the work has already been done. But we all know that facts and reality have no place in your world...

 

[throAU]

Now that you've established your status as a troll, if you honestly need that much more of a machine, then no consumer desktop could handle your needs either. My use case is probably significantly more representative of the PC market as a whole than your allegedly "highly specialized" workload. Edge cases do not constitute the norm.

Dude, I can get 256-512+ GB of RAM, 64 cores and a 3090 in a desktop. Or a pair of them?

I can get much higher spec than your laptop by a LARGE amount probably for less money (without going to the extreme).

You claimed your laptop can handle anything you can throw at it.

Well.... its mid-tier at best vs. a desktop you can build for half the price. If it's all you need, good for you, but don't go claiming its a general desktop replacement because it just isn't.

And yeah, mobile-compromise (as per the guy you quoted) is exactly why I bought a MacBook Air. No laptop is good enough for what I want to do at the high end, so I just use it for basic stuff and remote to my desktop for when I need to do something more serious.

 

[dmccloud]

Dude, I can get 256-512+ GB of RAM, 64 cores and a 3090 in a desktop. Or a pair of them?

I can get much higher spec than your laptop by a LARGE amount probably for less money (without going to the extreme).

Higher spces than 99% of the market would ever need or take full advantage of. I'm not sure why you feel the need to brag about your custom-built desktop that definitely cost significantly more than my laptop.

 

[Maximara]

Dude, I can get 256-512+ GB of RAM, 64 cores and a 3090 in a desktop. Or a pair of them?
I can get much higher spec than your laptop by a LARGE amount probably for less money (without going to the extreme).

Higher spces than 99% of the market would ever need or take full advantage of. I'm not sure why you feel the need to brag about your custom-built desktop that definitely cost significantly more than my laptop.

I'm surprised you didn't point out the fallacy of comparing a desktop to a laptop. Or of comparing what is Frankenputer to a Mac laptop. Heck, how many people outside of hobbyists, high end gamers, and programmers built their PC anyhow?

The fun thing is when ARM Macs computers come out there is be another stat to compare: Wattage performance ie processing power vs wattage. Comparing a 10w to a 25+w confutation in not a apple to orange comparison its more apple to bowling ball one

 

[johngwheeler]

I'm surprised you didn't point out the fallacy of comparing a desktop to a laptop. Or of comparing what is Frankenputer to a Mac laptop. Heck, how many people outside of hobbyists, high end gamers, and programs built their PC anyhow?

The fun thing is when ARM Macs computers come out there is be another stat to compare: Wattage performance ie processing power vs wattage. Comparing a 10w to a 25+w confutation in not a apple to orange comparison its more apple to bowling ball one

This is a good point. Even if performance improvements with ASi are modest, I am expecting significant battery life improvements in laptops. In the server / data-center world, ARM scores highly in performance/watt metrics, which is a hugely important figure when you are running servers 24x7x365. Yes, current ARM cores have 50-80% the performance of typical Intel Xeon CPUs in many workloads, but they use a lot less power per core, and typically have twice the performance / watt (and subsequently cost about half the price when paying for power or cloud services). Check out the Amazon Graviton 2 pricing on AWS compared to similar performance instances using Intel Xeon or AMD Epyc.

Admittedly, this is less of a concern for typical consumers, but long battery life is a big issue for many people. At least it was before lots of us started working from home

I had a Dell 4-core i5 for work last year that had awful battery life - 1.5-2 hours for my usual jobs. I could barely get through a single meeting. My MBP16 was much better, but with realistic loads could get about 5-8 hours - not quite enough for a day's work. If I could get a "real" 12 hours with all my key apps running (and 50+) browser tabs, then this is a big deal if you can't plug-in.

 

[Maximara]

Laptops are suited for some things, gaming, high end workloads, etc. are not those things. It will always be a compromise because performance is tied to power consumption and thermal output, both of which are inherently limited in a portable.

But that is why AS is such a game changer. It provides a desktop's performance with a laptop's power consumption and therefore has less thermal output. Thats mean putting an AS chip in a tower desktop (Mac Pro) is going ti kick Intel's rear to the point they might as well wear it as a hat.

Heck, there are already rumors of an AS Macbook ~$800 using the old $1,299 12in MacBook design. That is ~$500 savings. The pro version is admittedly rumored to be $1,099 but I suspect that is because of the Intel Macbook Pros Apple still has...which now I think about it will likely drop in price.

 

[MrGunnyPT]

Hopefully Microsoft Teams will run much better than the current iteration based on Electron, which runs like garbage as soon as you start a video call.

 

[dogslobber]

ARM-based versions of Office 365 and the Adobe Creative Suite are already available for Windows on ARM. So yes, there are shipping products for ARM already. Since Office uses the same code base across MacOS and Windows, the bulk of the work has already been done. But we all know that facts and reality have no place in your world...

They’re not the same code base so your argument is silly. The only fact here is that we saw a pre-canned demo of these builds. Nothing more. That is a fact.

 

[leman]

They’re not the same code base so your argument is silly. The only fact here is that we saw a pre-canned demo of these builds. Nothing more. That is a fact.

Of course they are the same codebase. Why would they maintain two distinct codebases for the same software? That would be insane!

 

[dogslobber]

Of course they are the same codebase. Why would they maintain two distinct codebases for the same software? That would be insane!

I guess Microsoft is insane then. The Mac BU is a separate entity from the Windows Office variant and do not share code at the level you think they do.

 

[leman]

I guess Microsoft is insane then. The Mac BU is a separate entity from the Windows Office variant and do not share code at the level you think they do.

You are right, I didn't pay attention to the post. I read something completely different. I though that this is about the Intel Mac vs. ARM Mac codebase. Sorry.

 

[Jorbanead]

Right now, reading anything you can find, you can’t say for certain what will work better, what will work the same, and what may not work at all.

You’re right, but I think we’re talking about slightly different things. I am referring specifically to the silicon. Not the software or it’s implementation necessarily, but how the silicon compares to intel.

Sure we can guess how the software and real-world implementation will fair, but that’s not the point of my post. My point is that when apple compares the newest model to the older model, especially when it comes to their silicon chips, they love to say Things like “20% faster than before”. Does that always translate to real-world performance? No. But it does show that overall the chip is still better than the year before and that’s apples entire MO with their custom silicon.

Other than the Mac mini (which was ruled by intels chips and their thermals) Apple always sells the newest models as being better than the previous years.

On a related note - a lot of people are skeptical about how powerful these chips are because they just announced the transition. People forget that Apple easily could have been working on this transition for over half a decade or more in their R&D labs. Just because it’s new to us does not mean Apple hasn’t tested hundreds of prototypes over years and years. Steve even said every version of OSX had an intel version too even during the PPC days - so just because Big Sur is the first official OS to work on ASi it doesn’t mean they haven’t had an ARM version of Mojave or high Sierra even.

Apple has done a lot of transitions. They are pretty good at them. And now that they have 100% control over the entire transition from top to bottom, a lot of the concerns mentioned may have already been ironed out during the Mojave or Catalina days.

But to get back to my point, I think Apple silicon chips are going to be at least as good as intel. BUT I don’t think Apple would have made such bold claims at WWDC if they were expecting to surpass intel chips (they already have in single core performance in the iPhone chip).

 

[Joelist]

Something being available for Windows on ARM is irrelevant. For one thing, Apple Silicon is significantly more performant than ARM Cortex SOCs. For another, Apple demonstrated full Office running natively on Apple Silicon at WWDC - and they did it on multiple programs and did it more than once.

This whole discussion has entered FUD territory.