Why the ARM transition will suck, and why it won't.

[HQuest]

Virtualization involves running a different operating system as a guest on a host that uses the same architecture. When you're talking about a different architecture, you're talking translation or emulation. I have seen this work with the same operating system on two different architectures. I have not seen this done with different operating systems on different architectures.

*cough*Hercules*cough*

(ok, that's an emulator)

 

[surf4peace]

My current approach is to use a mix of hardware and operating systems cooperatively. I could use a faster Mac right now and the Mini is the most attractive to me out of Apple's lineup in terms of price/performance and thermals. A friend uses one for trading and tells me that it runs quite hot (no surprise as that's Apple's lineup today except for the Mac Pro). So bring it on. It may very well be that used equipment goes up in price because of this. But what would you buy? The Mini's CPU is two years old. The Mac Pro is pricey. MacBooks have a ton of power in a small space. Same with iMacs.

I suppose you could make it your dedicated Windows machine... at some point...

 

[pshufd]

I suppose you could make it your dedicated Windows machine... at some point...

My experience with Macs is that they don't run Windows well in terms of thermals.

I think that I'd just run old versions of macOS.

 

[darkgoob]

To be fair, a lot of the arguments you're making now people were making when Apple switched from PowerPC to Intel. The truth is we just don't know what's going to happen. The people who bought the last of the PowerPC machines got shafted, considering you could still buy a new PowerMac G5 in Aug 2006 and Snow Leopard dropped support for it in Aug 2009.

Yeah, if I had just bought a top-spec Xeon Mac Pro ultra-grater the day before WWDC for $55,000 (or whatever it costs), I might be feeling a tad bit sick.

That really kinda blows my mind. I mean if Apple was saying, "We're not going to drop Intel, we're just gonna have both for the foreseeable future," then that would make a lot more sense to me.

If top-end Macs could come with BOTH kinds of CPUs for awhile at least that would be sweet. I know a lot of devs who use Macbook Pro to develop for non-Mac x86 platforms, and to lose that ability would mean basically they all have to use a PC.

Apple has so far not really explained how well an x86 VMs or Docker container would work or if it's even supported.

Going to be curious how this unfolds

 

[Nugget]

Apple has so far not really explained how well an x86 VMs or Docker container would work or if it's even supported.

There is absolutely no reason to expect that this will ever work.

 

[groove-agent]

Wouldn't class-compliant audio interfaces still be compatible? Most of the audio interfaces (esp. the simpler 2 channel ones) do not require drivers or any kind of control panel software.

Update: I was thinking about it today and realized that most class compliant audio interfaces do in fact currently work with iOS (Apple silicon) devices (iPads, iPhones). So at the moment, unless they require a special driver or control panel software, they should in theory work with ARM Macs out of the box.

I'm not a silicon genius, but I'm curious how thunderbolt 3 ports will endure through this transition. I thought there was some sort of dependancy on the chipset to support it. Chipsets were also Intel no?

• goodbye to older peripheral hardware—like audio interfaces, for instance—these will stop working because it won't be worth it (or possible) for the devs to rewrite the drivers

 

[MyopicPaideia]

Wouldn't class-compliant audio interfaces still be compatible? Most of the audio interfaces (esp. the simpler 2 channel ones) do not require drivers or any kind of control panel software.

I'm not a silicon genius, but I'm curious how thunderbolt 3 ports will endure through this transition. I thought there was some sort of dependancy on the chipset to support it. Chipsets were also Intel no?

Yes, TB3 will be supporter via USB4, which has TB3 built in to the specification. Apple Silicon Macs will be probably some of the first consumer products released to have USB4.

 

[dburkhanaev]

Why do people insist on conflating “two years of transition to Apple silicon” with “Rosetta and it Universal binaries are being dropped in two years time”.

Where is that assumption coming from aside from blatant cynicism?

Did you go through that transition? To be fair, the move from 68k to PowerPC didn’t wreck that much of my software. But I remember buying a very expensive 17” PowerBook G4 at the end of 2004. Apple customers spending $2,500 in 2004 dollars, were also told that our shiny new PowerMacs would be supported for ”years to come”. I got one OS update cycle for MacOS on PPC (over two years) and three years of total Rosetta support. Then the thing was officially dead way before a $2,500 dollar computer should be at end of life. And PPC was at end of life well before official support for repairs had ended. Developers were leaving universal binary and a three year old machine wasn’t even getting an updated OS.

My late 2013 MacBook Pro retina was running Catalina when I sold it and it still supports Big Sur. I upgraded November 2019 to a new MacBook Pro at a cost of $3,500. I knew Apple silicon would come, but I didn’t know it would be right now or I wouldn’t have sold my old computer or bought the new one.
If history is an indicator I’ll get MacOS 11.2 and 11.3, maaaybe 11.4. Then Intel OS won’t support a three year old, $3,500 dollar machine. My choices will be Windows on BootCamp and stability and security patches for 11.3/4 for the rest of the life of my Mac. And I’ll be praying that I can still run my pro software as I have to abandon Safari and other internet apps in the short run for more secure third party software that will run for another 2 years. I’ll have to sell and replace a beautiful machine in excellent condition years before it has begun to be obsolete in terms of performance power.

Apple is just concerned with streamlining their operation. There isn’t incentive one, for them to continue to support Intel Macs despite the cost to the consumer. I truly wish that Microsoft was real competition of good quality computers in an ecosystem that was integrated like Apples. I have been using Apple computer since IIe. But I swear they have got to figure out Rosetta and universal binary, and it can’t be for two years of new and four years of life-support. No one spends $3k for a computer to be on life support.

 

[Tech198]

The important part of the announcement is to get developers to start porting.
[automerge]1592968999[/automerge]


Virtualization involves running a different operating system as a guest on a host that uses the same architecture. When you're talking about a different architecture, you're talking translation or emulation. I have seen this work with the same operating system on two different architectures. I have not seen this done with different operating systems on different architectures.

So, in that case everything then would be emulation... nothing not be virtualization anymore. (..sounds like a step backwards), but with performance, i guess that makes up for it.

 

[dburkhanaev]

The important part of the announcement is to get developers to start porting.
[automerge]1592968999[/automerge]


Virtualization involves running a different operating system as a guest on a host that uses the same architecture. When you're talking about a different architecture, you're talking translation or emulation. I have seen this work with the same operating system on two different architectures. I have not seen this done with different operating systems on different architectures.

The only time I’ve seen this is with Windows emulation software on PowerPC Macs. But those companies had to do the R&D and develop theiR own emulation, Apple never did do that work.

 

[dogslobber]

Intel Macs will dominate for many years to come as they dwarf the amount of ARM Macs. Apple has sold about 195m Intel Macs since 2006 so it'll take a long time to make that with ARM Macs.

 

[pshufd]

Intel Macs will dominate for many years to come as they dwarf the amount of ARM Macs. Apple has sold about 195m Intel Macs since 2006 so it'll take a long time to make that with ARM Macs.

I have this scenario in my mind where the ARM Mac so wildly outperforms Intel and AMD in performance that it makes the platform irresistible to consumers and then businesses want in on it as well. And they just sell like gangbusters. It's not going to happen with gamers but, if there is a huge performance delta and the typical business/consumer software is there, they could have the problem of having to make a ton of them.

 

[johngwheeler]

Did you go through that transition? To be fair, the move from 68k to PowerPC didn’t wreck that much of my software. But I remember buying a very expensive 17” PowerBook G4 at the end of 2004. Apple customers spending $2,500 in 2004 dollars, were also told that our shiny new PowerMacs would be supported for ”years to come”. I got one OS update cycle for MacOS on PPC (over two years) and three years of total Rosetta support. Then the thing was officially dead way before a $2,500 dollar computer should be at end of life. And PPC was at end of life well before official support for repairs had ended. Developers were leaving universal binary and a three year old machine wasn’t even getting an updated OS.

My late 2013 MacBook Pro retina was running Catalina when I sold it and it still supports Big Sur. I upgraded November 2019 to a new MacBook Pro at a cost of $3,500. I knew Apple silicon would come, but I didn’t know it would be right now or I wouldn’t have sold my old computer or bought the new one.
If history is an indicator I’ll get MacOS 11.2 and 11.3, maaaybe 11.4. Then Intel OS won’t support a three year old, $3,500 dollar machine. My choices will be Windows on BootCamp and stability and security patches for 11.3/4 for the rest of the life of my Mac. And I’ll be praying that I can still run my pro software as I have to abandon Safari and other internet apps in the short run for more secure third party software that will run for another 2 years. I’ll have to sell and replace a beautiful machine in excellent condition years before it has begun to be obsolete in terms of performance power.

Apple is just concerned with streamlining their operation. There isn’t incentive one, for them to continue to support Intel Macs despite the cost to the consumer. I truly wish that Microsoft was real competition of good quality computers in an ecosystem that was integrated like Apples. I have been using Apple computer since IIe. But I swear they have got to figure out Rosetta and universal binary, and it can’t be for two years of new and four years of life-support. No one spends $3k for a computer to be on life support.

I'm in the same boat having bought an MBP16 in December last year. But I don't see the future as that gloomy. I expect that they'll be Intel versions of Mac OS for the next 4-5 years, and security updates for another 3 years after this. 8 years is quite reasonable to get out of a laptop. After this, you just need to be more security conscious about what you keep on the machine, set up firewalls and anti-virus. I only just got rid of my (still working) 2007 MBP last year, and still have a 2011 Mac Mini running as a file server.

I don't really care about keeping secondary computers that are > 8 years old running the latest and greatest version of the OS. I've given away so many old laptops to friends and family with simple needs that I just see it as the natural order to buy something new every 5-6 years. That's a long time in tech!
[automerge]1593488910[/automerge]

Intel Macs will dominate for many years to come as they dwarf the amount of ARM Macs. Apple has sold about 195m Intel Macs since 2006 so it'll take a long time to make that with ARM Macs.

There are (I assume) a lot more Intel Macs in use today than there were PowerPC Macs back in 2006 during the last transition, so Apple will be more incentivised to keep existing customers happy, while encouraging them to upgrade to ARM Macs, as they ramp up the numbers in circulation.

Once there are more active ARM Macs than Intel ones, then we'll start to see a decline in support for Intel-based Macs.

I expect Apple is looking at the average update cycles for each model, and trying to align end-of-support for MacOS at about the same time frame. So after "x" years, as you were starting to think about an upgrade, Apple will make the choice easy by removing ongoing OS-updates, and this will give you the "push" to move to ARM Macs.

 

[pshufd]

I have a PowerMac G5 next to me right now in my home office. It's my charging station for mobile devices. I haven't booted it in at least a year. I think about what it could be useful for and I don't have an answer to that. Yeah, Apple did abandon it.

 

[Jimmy James]

I have this scenario in my mind where the ARM Mac so wildly outperforms Intel and AMD in performance that it makes the platform irresistible to consumers and then businesses want in on it as well. And they just sell like gangbusters. It's not going to happen with gamers but, if there is a huge performance delta and the typical business/consumer software is there, they could have the problem of having to make a ton of them.

And translation results in a minimal hit.

 

[pshufd]

And translation results in a minimal hit.

If they can get translation to work 99% of the time - it would be fantastic. If they could only get emulation to work and get passable performance, that would go some ways - just being able to run it would be better than nothing.

 

[Hexley]

First, let me get this out of the way: Intel has not been able to deliver 5nm chips. Taiwan Semi has.

• 5nm means much better performance-per-watt.
• 5nm runs much cooler.
• 5nm means no more throttling due to heat like what happens today in a MacBook Pro, where heat is the limiting factor.
• Apple could elect to support CHERI in their ARM implementation—a super-secure new processor architecture

All that said... this transition is going to be a royal pain in the butt for all users (except for brand new ones).

I have lived through all the major transitions: 16 to 32 bit. Motorola CISC to PowerPC RISC. MacOS 9 to MacOS X. PowerPC to Intel. 32-bit to 64-bit.

So let me tell you what this transition really means for many you:

• many x86 binaries won't run natively, which means
• goodbye to any Intel-platform-based VMs running with native performance (in WWDC 2020 Platforms State of the Union, Apple demo'd Parallels running an ARM version of Linux)
• goodbye to locally running the same binaries in Docker that run on the server (Apple says Docker is not initially supported but they're "working with Docker over the coming months"—but I can't see how it could possibly work reliably with binaries that were precompiled for Intel servers)
• goodbye to older peripheral hardware—like audio interfaces, for instance—these will stop working because it won't be worth it (or possible) for the devs to rewrite the drivers
• goodbye to older software plug-ins, like all your current VST and AU3 plugins, Photoshop plugins, etc.—especially 32-bit ones (currently those can still be made to work on Catalina using compatibility wrappers, but I'll be shocked if that works on ARM Macs)
• goodbye to BootCamp
• goodbye to WINE games
• goodbye to the few mainstream PC game ports we get nowadays... it will be a long time (possibly forever) before enough of these ARM macs are out there for it to be worth it for PC game makers to bother with native Mac versions, so we'll be forever doomed to the same horrible third-world garbage games as the dreadful Apple Arcade (sorry, speaking as a gamer, it SUCKS—none of these games come remotely close to taking advantage of devices like iPhone 11 Pro Max or iPad Pro 3rd/4th gen.)
• reliability and performance of Intel apps running under Rosetta 2 will NOT be a guarantee—expect crashy, spotty performance
• just like Rosetta 1, Rosetta 2 compatibility will get phased out sooner than many would like—after the end of the two-year "transition period", so by 10.18 or 10.19, which will be here much sooner than you'd like, forcing many users to have to rebuy thousands of dollars in software or not update

I've kept hoping after each of these transitions that it would finally have been the last one.

Each has laid waste to my software library and created a graveyard of unusable scanners, silent audio interfaces, unplayable games, and dead plugins that litter my closets and leech heavy metals into local landfills. All these items WOULD still be usable if Apple wasn't addicted to making users rebuy everything they own once or twice per decade.

So here is my advice:

Buy a really nice Intel Mac this year or next, and keep it forever.

Rather than look at this as a transition, look at it is an investment opportunity, because the final Intel Macs will hold their value extremely well.

Look at this as an opportunity to create a final version of what the Mac once was, which you can always keep as a treasure of a forgotten era. You'll now have a way to always and forever run your prior software and still use your old hardware.

I've been following this tenet the entire time. Yes, I own 37 Macs, stored across four rooms of my house on various desks. No, my significant other is not fond of this.

I can still run World Builder on my SE/30, and I can still run 10.6 and Windows 98 through Windows 8 VMs on my Mac Pro 2009.

I can still use my SCSI Nikon film scanner on my Beige G3 desktop. I can still run A-10 Attack on my 9600.

What I do with my IIfx and Quadra 950, however, is classified. Literally.

Just some advice.

You must have a lot space in your house. Are you sure you aren't a hoarder?