Arm Powered Mac Must Be Powerful, But Why/When Top Dogs Would Join The Party?

[jlc1978]

Apple market is still desirable enough for software development and publishing. If Apple's chip is on par with hypes shown in this forum, I believe many developers will continue to support Mac platform.

My hope is the smaller developers will be able to easily port their products to ARM Macs. I use a number of apps that make me more productive, such as Default Folder X, A Better Finder Rename, path Finder, Alfred, Capto, the list goes on. I'd hate to lose the features they add to my Mac.

Add to this: home and office users who value better battery and power efficiency (office etc will be available on Apple Silicon from day 1), web developers, certain class of academic users... the user set will be bigger than you think

Offcie avaiablity will be a huge plus. If MS makes Office available from day 1 I'd consider an ARM Air. Realistically, an Air would already meet 90% of my use cases and be a lot easier to lug around than my MBP. The only thing that prevents me from buying one for traveling is screen size. 13.3" is simply too small for me to use comfortably daily for extended periods. Luna Display / Sidecar help alleviate some of those issues so I may reconsider when the ARM Airs debut.

Because:

1. The Mac is a significant business in the PC world.
2. Many creative pros will only use a Mac and nothing but a Mac
3. Big software vendors have likely been told of the power and speed that’s coming down the line
4. It’ll be easier than ever for iPad first vendors to port their software to the Mac. Admittedly this will take a few years to play out.
5. And finally, no doubt they have been told that this move will result in cheaper Macs (thus an increase in sales).

I pretty much agree with 1 - 3; although I do not think it as definitive as you state.

#4 Oh god no. The last thing we need is Mac software to become more iPad like, with all the tradeoffs made for a touch interface and iPhone / iPad compatibility. I would not want to trade the Mac versions of Occide or say Omnigraffle for the iPad versions.

#5 Apple. Cheaper Macs. I doubt it. It may slow price increases but I would be pleasantly surprised if Apple decided to shave $100 or more off of the price of a Mac becasue they went to their own ARM processor.

 

[Danny82]

My hope is the smaller developers will be able to easily port their products to ARM Macs. I use a number of apps that make me more productive, such as Default Folder X, A Better Finder Rename, path Finder, Alfred, Capto, the list goes on. I'd hate to lose the features they add to my Mac.



Offcie avaiablity will be a huge plus. If MS makes Office available from day 1 I'd consider an ARM Air. Realistically, an Air would already meet 90% of my use cases and be a lot easier to lug around than my MBP. The only thing that prevents me from buying one for traveling is screen size. 13.3" is simply too small for me to use comfortably daily for extended periods. Luna Display / Sidecar help alleviate some of those issues so I may reconsider when the ARM Airs debut.



I pretty much agree with 1 - 3; although I do not think it as definitive as you state.

#4 Oh god no. The last thing we need is Mac software to become more iPad like, with all the tradeoffs made for a touch interface and iPhone / iPad compatibility. I would not want to trade the Mac versions of Occide or say Omnigraffle for the iPad versions.

#5 Apple. Cheaper Macs. I doubt it. It may slow price increases but I would be pleasantly surprised if Apple decided to shave $100 or more off of the price of a Mac becasue they went to their own ARM processor.

Agree Apple not known to go for lower end of the market.. but imagine if macbook air recycle the ipad pro chip and price lower by $100 because it is cheaper than intel chip plus reduce wastage cost.. and it is faster than 70% of laptop in the windows laptop space.. wishful thinking but I want that to happen..!!!

 

[DearthnVader]

I fear, Apple's move to their own SoC isn't a matter of better for Pro users. I'm not sure Arm is going to scale as well as Apple hopes it will on the high end.

I understand the move, Apple makes most of it's money off iOS devices, and that's where most of the R&D budget is, so moving the Mac to Apple SoC is a no brainer.

For my use case, it really isn't going to change much, most of the work I do just uses common Unix tools that port well to just about anything. I just prefer the macOS to other Linux/Unix systems.

While I sometimes prefer to toss as much raw CPU power at something if I can, I don't have, nor do I really need the highest end 28 core Mac Pro or iMac Pro. People that need all that raw CPU power maybe disappointed with Apple SoC, I think if Apple had high end, high core count, high clock speed SoC's ready, they wouldn't be saying it's going to take 2 years to complete the transition.

I hope I'm wrong, and Apple SoC Pro machines don't turn out to be vaporware. I know Apple has a lot of talent and money to throw at their own SoC's, hopefully more talent than money. Some problems can't be solved by just throwing money at them without talented people to put that money to use.

Arm has evolved to be a primarily low power draw chip, and Apple's people have been designing iOS CPUs, not world class workstation CPUs, and I just think it's not going to scale as well as they hope.

Hope is not a strategy.

Like I say tho, for me, the move is a good one, if Apple can drive the price down a little, I'll likely be a buyer of the first gen Apple SoC Macs. I just don't know how long it will be before any Apple SoC Pro machines are truly faster that x86 offerings.

 

[jlc1978]

While I sometimes prefer to toss as much raw CPU power at something if I can, I don't have, nor do I really need the highest end 28 core Mac Pro or iMac Pro. People that need all that raw CPU power maybe disappointed with Apple SoC, I think if Apple had high end, high core count, high clock speed SoC's ready, they wouldn't be saying it's going to take 2 years to complete the transition.

My guess is part of the transition time comes from several considerations:

1. App developers need time to port to the ARM chip; two years give them time while still encouraging them to start to avoid not having an ARM chip when x86 are phased out.
2. That reassures current purchasers that the x86 Mac will be around for a while longer and not simply disappear overnight.
3. It will take time to scale up their ARM for high end machines. While some doubt Apple can do that, ARMs certainly can work in high end machines and perform; and Apple can certainly hire the required talent to make any type of ARM chip they want.

High end MBP are their bread and butter, and can work out bugs and software availability in a low end Mac where the demands for performance and the availability of certain programs is not as high. If Office and iWorks runs, iTunes works and there is a browser they probably cover 70% of the users off the bat for an Air.

 

[Falhófnir]

The way things are going I wouldn't be surprised if Intel & AMD are producing their own lines of Arm chips for consumer Windows computers by the end of the decade. Intel have just failed for the second time to produce a low power competitor on x86 (Lakefield) and derailed Microsoft's Windows 10X plans (surface Neo) - if Windows on Arm is still in its early days and not all that useful yet, it's still now the only one of Microsoft's attempts at a more modern consumer OS to drop the legacy bloat of full fat Windows that's actually gotten anywhere at all...

 

[bluecoast]

My hope is the smaller developers will be able to easily port their products to ARM Macs. I use a number of apps that make me more productive, such as Default Folder X, A Better Finder Rename, path Finder, Alfred, Capto, the list goes on. I'd hate to lose the features they add to my Mac.



Offcie avaiablity will be a huge plus. If MS makes Office available from day 1 I'd consider an ARM Air. Realistically, an Air would already meet 90% of my use cases and be a lot easier to lug around than my MBP. The only thing that prevents me from buying one for traveling is screen size. 13.3" is simply too small for me to use comfortably daily for extended periods. Luna Display / Sidecar help alleviate some of those issues so I may reconsider when the ARM Airs debut.



I pretty much agree with 1 - 3; although I do not think it as definitive as you state.

#4 Oh god no. The last thing we need is Mac software to become more iPad like, with all the tradeoffs made for a touch interface and iPhone / iPad compatibility. I would not want to trade the Mac versions of Occide or say Omnigraffle for the iPad versions.

#5 Apple. Cheaper Macs. I doubt it. It may slow price increases but I would be pleasantly surprised if Apple decided to shave $100 or more off of the price of a Mac becasue they went to their own ARM processor.

Thanks for the compliments So:

#4: I more mean things like the iPad gaining a sidebar UI to match better with the Mac. I personally don’t think that we’ll see touch integrated on the Mac UI. What I do think though is that we’ll see a Mac that morphs into an iPad like interface when it’s screen is undocked from its keyboard - basically the MS Surface done correctly - and Catalyst & Swift UI ate steps towards this.

#5 I’ve no evidence here but one way to sweeten the uncertainty of moving the Mac from intel to Apple Silicon will be to provide clear tangible benefits on day one in a price cut. Meaning ~$100 US or so from a (decently specced) base model.

If the efficiencies of using their own silicon in the Mac means that Apple is not having to pay the intel tax, passing this saving on immediately would be an incentive for both devs and consumers. A price cut is a universal language that everyone can understand.

 

[jlc1978]

The way things are going I wouldn't be surprised if Intel & AMD are producing their own lines of Arm chips for consumer Windows computers by the end of the decade. Intel have just failed for the second time to produce a low power competitor on x86 (Lakefield) and derailed Microsoft's Windows 10X plans (surface Neo) - if Windows on Arm is still in its early days and not all that useful yet, it's still now the only one of Microsoft's attempts at a more modern consumer OS to drop the legacy bloat of full fat Windows that's actually gotten anywhere at all...

While it's hard to say what will happen, I wonder if an Intel or ARM is a good idea, If they build on an architecture they don't control and do not have an OS they can match to a chip, they risk their chip being one more option in a commodity market. Yes, they can add their own tweaks but since their chips would not be a standard unless MS has Windows take advantage of the tweaks there will be no reason for PC makers to use their chips unless they are cheaper; and they'd have to license ARM adding to the costs. Their best bet, IMHO, is to work to make their chips superior to ARM chips across their markets.

 

[alxhxxa]

I hope I'm wrong, and Apple SoC Pro machines don't turn out to be vaporware. I know Apple has a lot of talent and money to throw at their own SoC's, hopefully more talent than money. Some problems can't be solved by just throwing money at them without talented people to put that money to use.

Let's be fair, industry giant like Qualcomm is no ordinary company, they hired only the very best, and Apple's A-Chip beat them flat & square ! Apple must have hired some people who are better than many very best, talent doesn't sound like a problem to me ?

ARM is for mobile, many people say, then how do we explain "FUGAKU" ? Which is the world's most powerful super computer as of today, and it is an ARM based machine, isn't it ?

What I really worry is Apple's intention. With same amount of money, PC always more powerful than a Mac, hardware wise, Apple has never really build a super-desktop. If they are sincere about bringing hi-power desktop to the Mac, they should have introduce a powerful 27" ARM-Mac, which is most professional will buy, instead of the rumored 24"(21" replacement) from the very beginning. That consumer oriented 24" machine just further enhanced their mobile eco-system. Even if precise-controls are just not possible with those iApp's touch screen interface, and I don't expect that would be any better for their desktop-ported version. Apple might never worry about if top software developers join the party or not, Microsoft/Adobe, just a show, might be ??

ARM and talents are not the problem, Apple's marketing strategy is what desktop Mac users should worry about.

 

[iindigo]

My hope is the smaller developers will be able to easily port their products to ARM Macs. I use a number of apps that make me more productive, such as Default Folder X, A Better Finder Rename, path Finder, Alfred, Capto, the list goes on. I'd hate to lose the features they add to my Mac.

The vast majority of small devs making "good citizen" Mac apps are using Obj-C/Swift/Cocoa, which means that porting for most if not all of them will be ticking a checkbox and recompiling. The apps that are more of a question are those that are clearly built on custom/cross-platform tech, but even most of those should come along too, if a little later than all of the true native apps.

 

[DearthnVader]

ARM is for mobile, many people say, then how do we explain "FUGAKU" ? Which is the world's most powerful super computer as of today, and it is an ARM based machine, isn't it ?

Likely a cost thing, performance per dollar maybe better with Arm.

Toss 150k cores at anything and you are going to have a powerful machine, I'm just not sure that is going to scale well in a desktop workstation.

ARM and talents are not the problem, Apple's marketing strategy is what desktop Mac users should worry about.

I agree, the move to Apple SoC will only be as successful as unit sales. If Apple doesn't gain market share, it's just a sideways move, only selling to people that buy Macs anyway won't really help anything.

A lot of that comes down to price and product line, Apple should be able to save some money on unit costs with their own SoC's, but will they pass that cost savings on to consumers to try and gain market share, will will they just bank the profits for the Mac faithful.

I get it, Apple's brand is premium products at a premium price, more of a status symbol than anything else, and they don't want to compete for people that only buy based on price. However, often, they lose sales to people that buy based on value.

 

[jlc1978]

I get it, Apple's brand is premium products at a premium price, more of a status symbol than anything else, and they don't want to compete for people that only buy based on price. However, often, they lose sales to people that buy based on value.

While I agree Apple is a premium brand, value is very subjective. I've used Apple products for many years, and for me, the durability and (generally) ease of use has been worth the premium. If I want a machine that is sturdy and well built, with a high res screen, the price is not that far off of a MacBook or MBP.

While OS X has become more complicated as it aged, it's still pretty easy to troubleshoot. I've been able to walk through family members to fix problems when I am not at home, something I've found much more difficult with a PC. being able to solve a printer connection problem over the phone so an important document can be printed is also worth extra for me.

That said, I'd love to see Apple hold the line on prices or even (gasp) reduce them. A top of the line in store MBP is pushing the value / cost curve for me; even if it is a business purchase. I replace my MBP when AppleCare runs out, so it'll be interesting to see what happens with ARM in the next few years.

 

[JMacHack]

I love my iPhone and iPad Air, but I just don't believe that they can rock the x86 world, it's just too big......

Strictly speaking, they don't have to. Apple is pretty much the only player with enough clout to make the shift to ARM processors now.

However, there are other players in the ARM game, and if they smell blood in the water, you bet they're gonna start going for desktop-class processors as well. And I don't believe x86 is gonna be able to be the pinnacle of performance forever. Linux already has ARM versions, Windows 10 has an arm version (which sucks right now, but that's more due to the processor performance not being there at the moment). Should Samsung, Qualcomm, et al. start going toe to toe with x86 then it'll rock the x86 world.

 

[Ursadorable]

Autodesk contemplated bringing 3ds Max to MacOS when it was x86 but decided the timeline was too long.

Imagine having that much platform specific spaghetti code.