What difference does switching from Intel to ARM make for normal users?

[Bustermd]

For the average person? No different as in all likelihood an ARM based device is their main computing device anyway (tablet or phone). “Can I check my email on it and watch Netflix? - I’m good”

For an person that needs to use a specific piece of software for some reason? May be different: some users won’t be able to use macs because they need windows or need a piece of x86 software that won’t be ported over. This is the unfortunate reality of the choice apple made and may cost them business. Other users will be able to change the software they use and accomplish the same task, or what they use will be ported over (I.e. Adobe or MS Office).

 

[Sydde]

There is a rather large library of iOS/iPadOS software that is all but ready to run on ARM Macs. Granted, something like 95% of that stuff is either primarily/only mobile-useful or just plain garbage, but the good stuff is really pretty good.

 

[honestone33]

Myself, there are 4 commercial programs I use which are mandatory: SuperDuper! (available for free also, but I paid for it), Tech Tool Pro, 1Password, and Quicken 2017. And although I have quite a lot of third party free programs, the critical ones are Thunderbird, Onyx, LibreOffice, VLC, Transmission, and EasyFind. Given that it will take a few years before support for Intel-based programs is gone within the Mac OS, there seems to be plenty of time for developers to do the necessary conversions.

 

[ruka.snow]

Myself, there are 4 commercial programs I use which are mandatory: SuperDuper! (available for free also, but I paid for it), Tech Tool Pro, 1Password, and Quicken 2017. And although I have quite a lot of third party free programs, the critical ones are Thunderbird, Onyx, LibreOffice, VLC, Transmission, and EasyFind. Given that it will take a few years before support for Intel-based programs is gone within the Mac OS, there seems to be plenty of time for developers to do the necessary conversions.

Quicken looks like the only one that'll be a pain point.

 

[LancesUK]

To anyone working with professional audio mixing and running a DAW it'd be wise to wait a bit before taking the plunge. Even if you use Logic (I do), third party plugins will take some time to be ported. Although many might work with Rosetta, some modern VIs use AVX which is not supported by Rosetta. On top of that, there will be a performance hit, something crucial for anyone who has ever done a large and complex mix, relying on hundreds of plugins to play in real time. Audio is very demanding despite the usual concept that video is the king of kings, and every percentage of CPU you loose due to Rosetta is a plugin less on your session. So keep that in mind. I'd wait at least a year after the first machines are introduced if you are serious about audio production. There are always people eager to do the dirty work first...

 

[honestone33]

Quicken looks like the only one that'll be a pain point.

Yeah, I am anticipating that. But hopefully the folks at Intuit will get it converted before Apple no longer supports Rosetta 2.

 

[Erehy Dobon]

Intuit hasn't been involved with Quicken (the desktop software) for a while.

They spun it off a couple of years ago to a private equity firm who licensed the name as part of the deal.

The Apple Silicon announcement bodes very poorly for Quicken/Mac users. Quicken on the Mac has trailed the Windows version for over 20+ years. Don't you remember that long spell when there was only Quicken for Windows and no Quicken for Mac?

My guess is that Quicken's operators will EOL Quicken for Mac and focus on their dwindling Quicken for Windows customer base.

Intuit foresaw all of this. They bought Mint.com to replace desktop Quicken because they were too lame to create their own online service. Mint.com has provided basically zero innovation in the past five years but hey, they are one of the big players.

Intuit will not go out of business by letting Mint.com function as a mediocre service.

 

[bousozoku]

I was thinking that, after making the jump from Motorola 68040 to PowerPC 604e to Intel i7, most people will have a rocky landing, followed by some easier times.

Thankfully, macOS doesn't have to be re-invented, although that is happening anyway. When Mac OS X was new, it wasn't really useful until 10.3.4 and was best at 10.4.11, as I recall. It was the smoothest for PowerPC and not so great for Intel. After that, it went the other way.

It took a long time for third parties to get their act together for Mac OS X, no matter which processor.

I always hope that third parties will do their work, but most are on a shoestring budget when it comes to macOS.

 

[HDFan]

Quicken looks like the only one that'll be a pain point.

That's my biggest concern. Run it under Parallels/Windows due to the superior PC version.

Maybe I'm reading something here that's not there, but I find the lack of news of a Windows ARM version (or some other way to run it) somewhat suspicious. Apple knows that the ability to run Windows apps is important. I'm wondering if something is in the works, but they just aren't ready to announce anything yet.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

I think for the average user, the availability of the entire iOS App Store will be the most noticeable difference. Everyone currently using a dedicated bank app on their iPhone will have that same, dedicated bank app on Mac. This will translate to less browser usage (No more, "Does that site work better in Chrome, Firefox, or Safari?" No more sites warning you to unblock popups or enable cookies.). More logins with Touch ID (or, gasp, Face ID, since Apple's ARM chips can include Secure Enclave). There's even the possibility that this will encourage those banks, etc. to actually deliver full-featured apps instead of reserving some features for the browser (as long as you use the right browser).

Maybe Apple Arcade becomes more attractive, as those games will be available on Mac, too (let's face it, dedicated game apps beat browser-based games hands down).

Big difference between the PowerPC/Intel switch and the Intel/Apple ARM switch... For most Intel Mac users the ability to run Windows apps is more of a theoretical possibility than one they actually use. For Apple ARM users they'll be taking advantage of the new capability the first time they open the App Store and start hitting the little cloud/download icons in Purchased. Can you say, "Happy as kids in a candy store?"

Back in the '80s and '90s people bought PCs for home use because that's what they were accustomed to at work. Today, it's far more likely that the computer they love most is the iPhone in their pocket. That's already sold a very substantial number of Macs for the home. This is going to sell even more of them.

Then consider that something like 90% of corporate mobile devices are Apples (very similar to Microsoft's domination of the corporate desktop). As mobile devices penetrate more and more of the workforce, the favorite "work computer" is less likely to be a Windows desktop. The desktop computer that can install a profile and download the corporate iOS apps will be the one preferred for work-from-home.

 

[ruka.snow]

That's my biggest concern. Run it under Parallels/Windows due to the superior PC version.

Maybe I'm reading something here that's not there, but I find the lack of news of a Windows ARM version (or some other way to run it) somewhat suspicious. Apple knows that the ability to run Windows apps is important. I'm wondering if something is in the works, but they just aren't ready to announce anything yet.

Their telemetry might tell them a very different story. Windows apps may a drop in a bucket and I have no doubt web developers using Docker aren't all that important yet(Though we did get a mention as well as Linux VM's for development). If it comes to it for one application you might consider renting a Remote Desktop session.

 

[gnasher729]

It was confirmed today during a WWDC session that Rosetta cannot work to virtualize Intel.

I would be _very_ careful with that statement. Rosetta doesn't support Intel virtualisation instructions, so you cannot have Intel VMs. That doesn't mean you cannot have ARM VMs, and it doesn't mean ARM VMs cannot use Rosetta to run Intel code. After all, 15 years ago there was Intel virtualisation running on PowerPC on a Mac.

 

[thekev]

It was confirmed today during a WWDC session that Rosetta cannot work to virtualize Intel.

Virtualizing refers to an OS layer, not so much an instruction set architecture. If standard Windows adds support for ARM builds, you could have Windows vms for that. I wouldn't call the ARM instruction set as simple as some people make it out to be though. With the inclusion of Neon, it has a lot going on. It mainly avoids putting like issuing arithmetic instructions with 1 memory operand.

 

[chrfr]

Virtualizing refers to an OS layer, not so much an instruction set architecture. If standard Windows adds support for ARM builds, you could have Windows vms for that. I wouldn't call the ARM instruction set as simple as some people make it out to be though. With the inclusion of Neon, it has a lot going on. It mainly avoids putting like issuing arithmetic instructions with 1 memory operand.

I didn’t mention anything about Windows. There are ARM-based versions of Windows which exist now. What I said still stands as correct: Rosetta cannot be used to virtualize Intel.
[automerge]1593176556[/automerge]

I would be _very_ careful with that statement. Rosetta doesn't support Intel virtualisation instructions, so you cannot have Intel VMs. That doesn't mean you cannot have ARM VMs, and it doesn't mean ARM VMs cannot use Rosetta to run Intel code. After all, 15 years ago there was Intel virtualisation running on PowerPC on a Mac.

What existed 15 years ago as Connectix/Microsoft Virtual PC was emulation, not virtualization, and performance was terrible.
You’re not going to be able to run an Intel version of Linux, Windows, or any other operating system on these Apple Silicon Macs unless it’s emulated.

 

[Sydde]

What existed 15 years ago as Connectix/Microsoft Virtual PC was emulation, not virtualization, and performance was terrible.
You’re not going to be able to run an Intel version of Linux, Windows, or any other operating system on these Apple Silicon Macs unless it’s emulated.

And why would you need to? There is already a full or full-ish Windows 10 that runs on ARMv8, as well as several flavors of Linux. Not really much need for OS emulation.

 

[chrfr]

And why would you need to? There is already a full or full-ish Windows 10 that runs on ARMv8, as well as several flavors of Linux. Not really much need for OS emulation.

You can’t buy ARM Windows, and there aren’t many apps which run under ARM Windows. It has only limited 32-bit Intel emulation available. There are several other threads in this forum about this discussion, no need to repeat it here.

 

[BeefCake 15]

Given that I just got my late 2018 Mac Mini back in February, unless I can sell it for a decent price (by the time an ARM Mini arrives), I will be relying on Intel-based software, which should be OK for a few years. But for my MacBook Air, that machine is older, and when an ARM MacBook Air arrives, I will try and sell my current one. It's at that time that I will need the ARM versions of my third party software, on the MacBook Air only.

I wouldn't sell the mini, you can use it for years to come but instead sell the Air and replace it with the ARM version.

 

[thekev]

I didn’t mention anything about Windows. There are ARM-based versions of Windows which exist now. What I said still stands as correct: Rosetta cannot be used to virtualize Intel.

I get you now. Yeah you won't be able to run virtual machines that expect x86_64. Even with emulation, running an OS that way would be terrible.

 

[honestone33]

I wouldn't sell the mini, you can use it for years to come but instead sell the Air and replace it with the ARM version.

Thanks. I was thinking of doing that. I suspect, though, that an ARM-based Mini could be one of the first new ARM Macs to be released, as such a machine (16 gig of Ram, 512 gig SSD) will soon be available for developers to test it.

But yeah, replacing the Air first would be the way to go. But not sure when an ARM-based Air will be introduced. As always, timing is everything!
[automerge]1593191057[/automerge]

Intuit hasn't been involved with Quicken (the desktop software) for a while.

They spun it off a couple of years ago to a private equity firm who licensed the name as part of the deal.

The Apple Silicon announcement bodes very poorly for Quicken/Mac users. Quicken on the Mac has trailed the Windows version for over 20+ years. Don't you remember that long spell when there was only Quicken for Windows and no Quicken for Mac?

My guess is that Quicken's operators will EOL Quicken for Mac and focus on their dwindling Quicken for Windows customer base.

Intuit foresaw all of this. They bought Mint.com to replace desktop Quicken because they were too lame to create their own online service. Mint.com has provided basically zero innovation in the past five years but hey, they are one of the big players.

Intuit will not go out of business by letting Mint.com function as a mediocre service.

Yeah, I forgot that Intuit "spun" Quicken off. And yes, most likely the Mac versions will go by the wayside.

So, I guess I should start looking for a replacement. Anyone have any suggestions?

 

[thekev]

Thanks. I was thinking of doing that. I suspect, though, that an ARM-based Mini could be one of the first new ARM Macs to be released, as such a machine (16 gig of Ram, 512 gig SSD) will soon be available for developers to test it.

They barely touch the mini. I would assume notebooks first. The mini uses notebook chips, but they typically come out later. I would expect a mini to hit soon after imacs. Apple tends to favor imacs for higher price points and probably won't want the mini to come out first on that basis alone.

 

[eRondeau]

I don't have stats to back this up, but I'm guessing 90% of Mac owners rarely if ever do anything even remotely taxing on their systems. We don't run Linux or Bootcamp or Parallels or Final Cut Pro. We run Safari and Mail and Messages and iTunes and maybe iWork/MSOffice occasionally. So, sadly, we are the "normal" Mac users. And yes I include myself in that category. So to answer the OP's actual question, it is not likely that "normal" users (like me) will notice any changes when we switch to ARM.

 

[Sydde]

Well, that was true ten years ago, but these days, 90% of those people use a tablet or one of those 8" phones. For the average American, a suitcase-size computer used to be necessary, but for most of them, everything they used to use that great big noisy box, or even a notebook, can be done on a $400 iPad, which takes up almost no space. No one burns anymore, because all the media content can easily be d/led and all the cars have either USB or BT or both.

So, as Macs go, the percentage of serious users is far higher than it used to be, especially considering the cost of entry. Apple absolutely has to cater to the needs of power-users, who are an increasing fraction of their customer base.

 

[HDFan]

Their telemetry might tell them a very different story. Windows apps may a drop in a bucket

I did find one reference to corporate users.

How many people still use Parallels or other virtualization for their Macs? I've... | Hacker News

news.ycombinator.com

There are a ton of legacy applications out there in corporate environments. The recent state unemployment insurance systems breakdowns being a prime example. Caused a demand for Cobol programmers!

If you are going to use a Mac in a corporate, non-mac centric environment (not graphics, video or few other areas) it is extremely likely you are going to have to run windows applications. Is apple willing to give up general corporate accounts entirely to just concentrate on the creative areas? Certainly could happen, but I would think that they would want to expand their sales into that market. That's where the money is. Sales are measured in quantities of thousands.

 

[satcomer]

Switching over to the new Apple Silicon will greatly benefit the user with longer battery life, less heat, and more efficient processing power compared to the Intel based systems.

I remember when Apple switched over from the RISC based PPC processors made by Motorola to the Intel that opened up Intel based apps to run on Macs.

But the Intel based Macs have never been efficient (heat, battery, computing threads) compared to the PPC which was super efficient.

I think Apple Silicon will have some growth pains but overall, Apple will return to RISC based processors.

Sense you use your Mac to make money! I say this in all seriousness that it will take Apple at least two years for full change to happen and another 5 years before software vendors to fully catchup! This happened back in day to new Mac OX 10 when it first comes on scene back in day and it happened that way!

 

[gnasher729]

The Apple Silicon announcement bodes very poorly for Quicken/Mac users. Quicken on the Mac has trailed the Windows version for over 20+ years. Don't you remember that long spell when there was only Quicken for Windows and no Quicken for Mac?

Quicken will run unchanged. It will run through emulation, so it's not quite as quick as it could be, but it should easily be quick enough.