MP 7,1 What does Apple's switch to ARM based processors mean for the future of the Mac Pro

[Azrael9]

Over 5 years. 8 grand a year for a 40k Mac Pro. Ouch.

Be better if they offered rational, affordable Mac towers.

Azrael.

ah...Chiquitita157...

Azrael.
[automerge]1591807256[/automerge]

What if Apple looks at the 7,1 as a stopgap meant to hold onto power users until they can roll out a long-planned ARM-based powerbox?

Not saying there's evidence one way or the other for that scenario, just trying to stretch imaginations a bit. Folks are so focused on "What is Apple going to take away from us this time" that it's worth wondering whether Apple might not mind grabbing for a bigger piece of the low-volume/high-margin end of computing, perhaps moving beyond media production into scientific/engineering as well. A price/performance powerhouse that might tempt some major developers in those areas to make the leap.

Apple saves money. Instead of giving to money to the 'old enemy' who sat on their advantage. Intel had their chance withe iPhone. They bottled it. Their hubris turned their nose up at the cost. More fool them.

And while we're shedding crocodile tears for Intel...what the hell have they done in the last 5 years? Incremental % performance, hot temps, creamiums on price...do I have to go on? Whilst Apple aren't blameless on form factor, Intel haven' exactly pulled up the Apple tree for Apple? Mehhhhh to Intel. Mehhhhhhhhhhhh. *Waves away protest.

It's just stockholm syndrome. Brothers. Sisters...embrace your spiritual PPC successor. The Mac ARM is coming to reclaim our Holy War against the forces of darkness...

And I'm glad. It forced Apple to do what had to be done. Take control of the key tech' in a tech' that's made them billions.

Intel are the past. They're not down and out. Keller will see to that. But...

I can't see the down side to Apple CPU in Mac. The iPad is just a heavenly foretaste of the banquet to come.

We can't rule out Mac ARM Pro giving Intel a stuffing on every level.

I *KNOW* Apple aren't doing this unless they can get on stage and completely *trouser the competition.

They have shown the phone and pad crowd no mercy with Apple cpu.

A 'Mac' with Apple's very own CPU in it? Surely this is a cause for celebration...?

Hopefully with Intel cripping benches to celebrate.

Azrael.

 

[PruneTracy]

This will be an odd shift for the time being but hopefully, lead to some great innovation on the processor front. I'm sure Intel wouldn't be too happy to be losing all this business.

That said, I'm sure this is just a stepping stone to Apple processors in the not too distant future.

 

[shaunp]

I always laugh when people just bring up something like "No way they can replace my 'real' desktop CPU with a phone CPU!"

There's nothing that makes an ARM CPU mobile only. There's already server ARM CPUs, but as consumers we usually only see the mobile ones. Just the same as a phone x86/x64 can be made too.

Apple has proven they can design some really kickass ARM based CPUs, they are far ahead of the competition in the mobile market. If they can take that expertise and apply it to bigger designs that can be actively cooled, I'm excited to see what they can do!

Exactly. My NAS is ARM based and while I was initially concerned about the lack of apps compared to the previous Intel based NAS, support for popular apps (Plex, etc) quickly caught up. What is has meant is I now get a NAS with 10Gig-E for a much cheaper price than an Intel based one and it's the transfer speeds that really mattered to me when buying a new NAS. I honestly don't care what CPU is in there so long as it is capable of doing the job and doing it well.

I can see Apple doing really well here. Introducing ARM on a less-expensive, but high volume product such as the MacBook so they can iron out any wrinkles and then scaling up to other laptops and the iMac. The Mac Pro will follow later as they can't afford to mess that up and it absolutely has to be much faster than anything on Intel.

I'm sat here writing this on an old PC that I bought when I gave up on my old trashcan back in 2016. Windows 10 is fine and the Adobe suite works perfectly well on PC. However it's the little things that I miss about Mac OS (preview, messages, better colour management), but I feel a lot of Macs of late have suffered as CPU's which run hotter and hotter are crammed into increasingly small spaces resulting in not so great reliability or lots of fan noise. So if Apple were to release an iMac with an ARM CPU that was for the most part silent because it was much easier to cool, but at the same time managed to be quicker than the current iMac, I'd buy it. Adobe will absolutely support ARM on there products if/when Apple go down this route, as will virtually every other developer who wants to continue selling their products for Mac.

I think the whole concept of the Mac moving over to ARM is really exciting and strategically one of the best things Apple could do. It makes perfect sense to own the entire product stack.

 

[quagmire]

No, you get over yourself! Don't presume to know people's finances and how said finances may or may not be recouped. You're completely missing the point anyway that this kind of investment should have some longevity regardless of the ROI. Have a nice day! ?‍♂️

Apple updates the Mac Pro this fall with newer Xeons. The 7,1 is EOL in 2025.

Apple replaces the Mac Pro with an ARM based version this fall. The 7,1 is EOL in 2025.

There is no difference when Apple EOL's the 7,1. ARM or Intel CPU. Unless you're going to advocate Apple to keep old hardware in the current machine while the competition keeps on putting in the latest and greatest hardware just so your machines support time doesn't start to tick down.....

 

[oneMadRssn]

If Apple successfully transitions their entire desktop OS running products to ARM and gets develops to actually cooperate in a timely manner, Apple will have pulled off what others have tried and failed.

Because Google and Microsoft have tried and failed in the past, I have my doubts Apple will succeed. Something about ARM for desktop-class operating systems is a tough nut to crack.

 

[trip1ex]

They will support current stuff for a good 5 years at least

 

[oneMadRssn]

I can see Apple doing really well here. Introducing ARM on a less-expensive, but high volume product such as the MacBook so they can iron out any wrinkles and then scaling up to other laptops and the iMac. The Mac Pro will follow later as they can't afford to mess that up and it absolutely has to be much faster than anything on Intel.

The issue with this is usually the fence-sitting approach results in developers not getting on board. It has to be all or nothing to force developers to make the decision now: adapt to macOS on ARM or leave the macOS ecosystem.

If they introduce ARM on lower-level consumer computers while leaving pro computers on Intel, I think most developers would take a wait-and-see approach and put off adapting their software to ARM on macOS.

Last time Apple did this, they introduced developer models of new Macbook Pros to get the developers hardware to test on as early as possible, and set pretty clear timeline for a full transition. This essentially took away any option for developers to wait-and-see. They either reacted, or they were left behind. I think if Apple does it again, they have to do it this way.

 

[Azrael9]

If Apple successfully transitions their entire desktop OS running products to ARM and gets develops to actually cooperate in a timely manner, Apple will have pulled off what others have tried and failed.

Because Google and Microsoft have tried and failed in the past, I have my doubts Apple will succeed. Something about ARM for desktop-class operating systems is a tough nut to crack.

Apple are the master of transitions. They have great experience on this.

'Mac ARM' has a 1 billion device ecosphere waiting for it.

All the software and hardware infrastructure is geared up for the move.

Azrael.

 

[Logamaniac]

There’s absolutely no way Apple doesn’t fragment the lineup between arm/intel for a year or two while their platform matures for both power and glamour users.

 

[Pressure]

There’s absolutely no way Apple doesn’t fragment the lineup between arm/intel for a year or two while their platform matures for both power and glamour users.

It took less than 7 months the last time around. Sure, it took years for software to transition but this time they have the flourishing iOS eco-system and Adobe already have working software.

 

[Azrael9]

It took less than 7 months the last time around. Sure, it took years for software to transition but this time they have the flourishing iOS eco-system and Adobe already have working software.

Yes. 7 months. :O

Your post neatly sums it up.

Apple are far better prepared in hardware and software this time.

Their own cpu. Their own X-Code compiler. A 1billion strong iOS eco-sytem. An App store. Hundreds of brick and mortar stores. A world class website. More developers than ever before.

...lol. and yes. This time...even Adobe have a working copy of Photoshop this time.

Good catch.

Azrael.

 

[rooftop]

I imagine at first there will be something like a "Booster-Card" for the Mac Pro. For special tasks to take advantage of an ARM-Processor.

 

[th0masp]

What do you gain from the 'flourishing iOS eco-system' on the (desktop) computer though? I admit I have zero experience with iOS beyond my iPod usage strictly as a music player but unless iOS applications are totally unlike what I use daily on Android then these little apps have nothing to offer for the desktop environment? It's like what used to be called shareware, no depth, not set up to work on large data sets, simplified interfaces that would be a cumbersome to use without the touch screen, etc.

 

[oneMadRssn]

Apple are the master of transitions. They have great experience on this.

'Mac ARM' has a 1 billion device ecosphere waiting for it.

All the software and hardware infrastructure is geared up for the move.

Azrael.

They have 1 recent experience in this, and it wasn't even that recent and they were a MUCH smaller company with a MUCH smaller market presence back then.

I don't see where you're getting 1 billion from. Not every iPhone/iPad user is an Mac ARM target. But even if they were, it's not been enough historically.

Microsoft has a 1 billion device ecosphere (computers running Windows) that they have now tried twice to transition to ARM; failed once and the recent move is still a work-in-progress.

Google has a device ecosphere larger than Macs (Chrome devices have outsold Macs) that they tried to convince to use to use ARM on laptops and consumer desktops, and have mostly failed.

Also, a lot of very important software is not geared up for the move. Tons of important Mac software is not written in Swyft and does not use standard Apple APIs.

 

[Azrael9]

What do you gain from the 'flourishing iOS eco-system' on the (desktop) computer though? I admit I have zero experience with iOS beyond my iPod usage strictly as a music player but unless iOS applications are totally unlike what I use daily on Android then these little apps have nothing to offer for the desktop environment? It's like what used to be called shareware, no depth, not set up to work on large data sets, simplified interfaces that would be a cumbersome to use without the touch screen, etc.

Procreate on a 23 inch iMac Air?

Azrael.
[automerge]1591813527[/automerge]

They have 1 recent experience in this, and it wasn't even that recent and they were a MUCH smaller company with a MUCH smaller market presence back then.

I don't see where you're getting 1 billion from. Not every iPhone/iPad user is an Mac ARM target. But even if they were, it's not been enough historically.

Microsoft has a 1 billion device ecosphere (computers running Windows) that they have now tried twice to transition to ARM; failed once and the recent move is still a work-in-progress.

Google has a device ecosphere larger than Macs (Chrome devices have outsold Macs) that they tried to convince to use to use ARM on laptops and consumer desktops, and have mostly failed.

Also, a lot of very important software is not geared up for the move. Tons of important Mac software is not written in Swyft and does not use standard Apple APIs.

"When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all."

Well, as you say. Hopefully we won't notice.

Azrael.

 

[omenatarhuri]

Software developers are going to be more inclined to support the greatest install base. So for a long time that will be x86 and ultimately, some day, ARM. Much like we saw with G5 -> x86.

 

[th0masp]

Procreate on a 23 inch iMac Air?

Well, looks like a shareware paint tool in the vein of Sketchbook pro or Artrage or a myriad of others alright? Tablet interface - check. Will it load 32 bit TIFF files though or interpret the alpha channel on a TGA and can you do multi selection in that filebrowser? What's the performance going to be when working on 8K layered images?

I mean what are the benefits of that proposed iOS/macOS convergence? Surely if Apple is pushing for that they have loftier goals than enabling access to a myriad of small-ish utilities with limited scope and games that aren't even made with a desktop computer in mind? We are after all in the Mac Pro forum.

And I did run some Android software in an emulator once or twice for the LOLz. Not exactly what I'd call a replacement for desktop software.

 

[MichaelDT]

These rumors are very suspect to me. It'd make more sense if this is combined with either a purchase of or license from AMD. A multicore chip on the high end with X64 cores combined with ARM cores (in little endian mode). That way low end can use instruction translation (macbooks) and highend can run native executables.

 

[aid]

I would THINK but I don’t know that drivers for components (screens, drives, ports) are still written in machine or assemblers but I haven’t messed with adding components, I just plug whatever into a USB port so maybe that isn’t an issue.

The majority drivers are wrote in C or C++ (perhaps with small segments of assembly code) – so a wholesale rewrite is not required to move them to ARM. Of course, any device that is already supported by iPhone/iPad will already have an ARM driver available to Apple...

 

[Kevin Dem]

Wondering the same thing myself.

I am within the return window for my 7,1 MP, but I am not sure if it is worth returning.

The ARM thread is causing a lot of hype and panic that Apple is going to suddenly obsolete machines they just released within a year or two. Would they really do that with this all new 2019 MP design? It seems to me that they put a whole lot of effort into developing it. It is quite a polished machine and built phenomenally.

I would think that Apple has had a roadmap laid out long before they released it. So if ARM was right around the corner why wouldn't they just save it for that?

The 7,1 sure does feel like the modular design all us MP users were begging for. It seems like a machine that should still be current 10 years from now...?

When I saw the modular design of MP 7,1, which departs from the philosophy of Apple about user-upgradability, at that time itself I had a hunch that the machine would be obsolete soon.

 

[1193001]

It means you need to start thinking about either moving your hack to Windows or purchase a real Macintosh. The Hackintosh movement has about 2-4 years left before it disappears. Ultimately, it depends on how long Apple supports macOS on Intel, but it won’t be more than 5 years and probably less.

only used hackintosh for airdrop and stuff so guess I can give that up. Mac OS sucks for the things I do anyway

 

[aid]

I always laugh when people just bring up something like "No way they can replace my 'real' desktop CPU with a phone CPU!"

There's nothing that makes an ARM CPU mobile only.

Indeed, the first ARM chips were for desktop computers - Acorn Archimedes – where they trounced the Intel 386 of the time... Time for this to go full circle?

 

[codehead1]

Don’t lose sight of why Apple made the processor changes in the past—both were to be competitive in areas they were rapidly falling behind in:

Why did Apple switch from 68k to Power PC?

Horsepower. Motorola was selling 68K processors to a market much smaller than Intel was selling their processors to, and the architecture was not advancing. Apple went to a RISC-based architecture that had more power and room to grow.

Why did Apple switch from Power PC to Intel?

Lower power dissipation (more completely, CPU power per watt, and it was clear from Intel’s roadmap they were running away). As the laptop market grew, Apple was at a serious disadvantage—IBM was selling the Power PC processors to a smaller market than Intel (notice the pattern), and didn’t have much motivation to chase Intel towards lower power. IBM didn’t care a lot about laptops (and apparently, not a lot about fan noise), and ignored Apple’s pleas for lower power high performance chips.

I could have simplified both changes to an "economies of scale" issue—Apple solved it permanently by using what it's bigger competition was using, you could say there should have been one change to Intel the first time.

OK, so why would they change to ARM for the Macs?

This is different, because in the two changes before, they were clearly nearing the end of the line in being competitive. The only reason to switch now—for laptops and desktops—would be if they think they can make a leaner more power competitor at lower cost and more control for themselves. Plainly, they would be going after cost improvement undoubtedly with the goal of not hurting themselves. But at that point, what is the motivation to continue with Mac OS unless you make it 100% compatible with existing code? If they don't, it makes no sense to extend a 4-decade-old imagining of an OS—you might as well branch and go in a different direction like the iPad did.

To put it a different way, if Porsche suddenly went heavy in the direction of electric vehicles (yes, I know the Taycan, I mean a fundamental shift), the 911 won’t suddenly ditch the ICE and become an electric, much less with have focus on AI driving the car. It would continue as the classic 911 until there wasn’t a market for it.

Anything people worry about with regard to the Mac Pro would be a much bigger setback to their laptop and iMac markets—it would make zero sense to keep pushing a 4-decade-old OS that cut ties with compatibility.

 

[high heaven]

It probably takes 4~5 years to discontinue. But it took only one year to release Intel Mac from PPC so we don't know exactly.

 

[ChrisA]

I would imagine apple's new processor would eventually apply to their whole mac lineup. Wondering if that means Mac Pro 7,1 will be phased out sooner or later?

Always remember what Apple did with Aperture. They simply dropped it and told their professional users to "just use Photos"

Apple could decide to drop the Final Cut X tomorrow an with it the Mac Pro and tell their professional users to "just use iMovie and an ARM". Apple has shown that they are capable of writing off whole segments of their user base if they are unprofitable.

That said, if I had to guess Apple's plans, I'd guess that keep improving the iPad until it actually can replace the low-end MacBooks but keep the higher end Macs using the Intel CPU until ARM has comparable performance.

But you never know, if they dropped one very widely used and popular professional product, they could do it again.