
ARMed mac: not again or for real this time? - miles
https://mondaynote.com/arm-ed-mac-not-again-or-for-real-this-time-a3548eece86
======
mortenjorck
There’s one thing I don’t think Gassée, or many of the people predicting an
ARM transition for the Mac, are considering: user patience and goodwill,
basically political capital with the user base.

Apple blew through an incredible amount of it on vanity projects in the 2010s,
from the abandoned trashcan Mac Pro to the Touch Bar and butterfly keyboard.
They’ve clearly changed course with the 16” MacBook Pro and the 2019 Mac Pro,
but they’ve asked a lot of users over the past decade, and this doesn’t quite
seem like the right time to ask the entire user base to please be patient once
again.

In other words, while there’s little question that a switch to ARM is worth
the headache _for Apple,_ the critical question is whether Apple can make the
case that the switch is worth it _for users._

~~~
brnt
Apart from sentiment, does anyone, including Apple, still care about OSX?
Seems that the potential move to ARM will merely be the final nail in its
coffin. Apple has removed a lot of backwards compat over the last releases,
large app developers seem to not be embracing new systems/APIs, software
largely isn't being ported, iOS now has the iPad pro, soon perhaps a laptop.

What is the reason for macOS at this point?

~~~
taylodl
Pixar does, along with many other video/movie producers. There are also a lot
of professional musicians and recording engineers using Macs as well. Not to
mention all the developers using Macs for iOS app development. None of these
activities are realistically viable on an iPad Pro. I think the real issue is
OSs aren't very interesting at this point - they're mature and there isn't a
lot of sexy sizzle to be added to them.

~~~
jdmg94
there's a Qemu implementation that now runs on iOS, and with services like AWS
Cloud9 you can get away with developing on an ipad only setup, at least for
most webdevs. Sooner than later someone is going to be able to run android on
this: [https://github.com/utmapp/UTM](https://github.com/utmapp/UTM)

and then the gates will open to ARM heaven, once developers find a way to do
their jobs on an ipad the rest of the industries follow

~~~
solarkraft
QEMU for iOS, Bochs, has been a thing for a long time. I remember running
Debian on my iPod touch 3G.

edit: Contrary to my memory it's its own project and not QEMU based.

------
Fnoord
"The iPhone and iPad have run on Apple-designed ARM chips since birth, and
while early entries into the Axx line were underpowered, the latest chips
created by Apple’s silicon design teams have yielded laptop- or even desktop-
class performance"

This is incorrect. iPhone's SoC until iPhone 4 was a 32 bit ARM Samsung SoC
[1]. From iPhone 4 and onwards they were designed by Apple. The first iPad
also had a SoC not designed by Apple [2].

I fail to see how the details of this are relevant though.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_(1st_generation)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_\(1st_generation\))
/
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_4](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPhone_4)

[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPad_(1st_generation)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPad_\(1st_generation\))

~~~
maallooc
Those SoCs were designed exclusively for Apple products by Apple and Samsung.
They were branded Samsung because then Apple failed to notice the importance
of brand power of APs.

~~~
Fnoord
> Those SoCs were designed exclusively for Apple products by Apple and
> Samsung.

Seems true [1].

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple-
designed_processors#Earl...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple-
designed_processors#Early_series)

~~~
eatonphil
Pretty sure they're no longer manufactured by Samsung. It's been TSMC since
the A8 [0].

[0]
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A8](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A8)

~~~
saagarjha
A9 was sourced from both Samsung and TSMC.

------
Mindwipe
The problem seems much more software based than hardware based.

The Mac has lost so much software through Catalina's 64 bit transition, and
that was telegraphed a decade ago. Between that, Apple's collapsing quality of
documentation, seemingly having two competing development frameworks due to
internal infighting, the prevalence of Electron, the loss of similarity to
software for popular Linux x86 distributions, and Metal being extremely
uninviting as a dev wanting to do any crossplatform work can Apple really
assume the software will come for an ARM based Mac?

I am very worried it wouldn't. Last time the Mac underwent a transition it
ultimately made things easier for developers and there was a fairly thriving
(if niche) Mac software base. There simply isn't any more. Mac gaming is going
backwards at a rate of knots and dual booting to Windows is more important
than ever. Large companies seem to just be abandoning Mac drivers entirely
(glares at Sony dropping support for their camera software for Macs rather
than transition to 64bit).

~~~
trevyn
> _can Apple really assume the software will come for an ARM based Mac?_

This is what Catalyst is for, no? Mac software is now iPad software. Macs are
now somewhat more capable iPads. The golden age of computing is over.

~~~
IAmEveryone
Adding catalyst didn’t remove the ability to use any other UIKit, or to
compile and run whatever you want in any language there is. Everything that
ran before continues to do so, and it’s almost oxymoronically wrong to
consider a system that is a strict superset of another less free.

~~~
trevyn
Right, and we could find ourselves in a time when any meaningful non-developer
app is only available as a Catalyst app.

It’s kind of how like Microsoft’s “embrace and extend” made us less free,
because it’s actually “embrace, extend, and (later) extinguish”.

------
newscracker
I have a pessimistic view on Apple and Macs based on how this product line has
been neglected for years (and continues to be neglected: one case in point is
the iMac Pro which is three years old with no updates). It seems like the
focus is on "iOSifying" the entire ecosystem (overall, Apple hasn't done much,
or what was expected/possible, on the Mac over the past several years anyway).

Due to that pessimism, I'd expect the first ARM based Macs that are released
publicly to run inferior Apple software (this is already evident with the
Apple apps in the last few years). Many things will be further crippled and
lobotomized with even more sandboxing restrictions, and likely no longer
resemble what a "Mac app" has meant for a very long time. There have been
signs of the "non-nativeness" with the Catalyst apps. Perhaps the Finder would
be thrown out in favor of a Files app ported from iOS/iPadOS. What about
browser rendering engines? Would third party ones be disallowed, like they are
on iOS/iPadOS/tvOS? Safari on Mac has already removed support for
WebExtensions last year, leaving users who have more than casual browsing
requirements to switch to Firefox (or Brave or Chrome or other browsers). With
battery life, thinness and lightweight laptops considered very important by
Apple, there could be many things getting axed on the new ARM Macs. _Perhaps,
the very first ARM based Mac would actually be a new iPad with an integrated
keyboard and trackpad._

The article talks about splitting the Mac line, which certainly seems to be a
practical possibility. Would we then have macOS that runs on the ARM MacBook,
Mac mini and iMac lines and another macOS Pro that would continue to run on
the x64 Mac Pro for a much longer time? The stage is already being set to
encourage developers to build iOS/iPadOS apps and have them sold as a single
bundle on Mac. It's just a matter of pushing them further with the "promise"
of a single build running on all platforms (thanks, Catalyst).

Just a crazy thought on emulation of x64 apps: would Apple embrace a
"streaming app" emulation, similar to game streaming services where any
necessary heavy lifting is done on the server side, with the local ARM
processors just handling the minimal (pre-computed) rendering and I/O?

~~~
unlinked_dll
> Many things will be further crippled and lobotomized with even more
> sandboxing restrictions

Agree on the first half, strong disagree on the second. We need _way_ more
sandboxing restrictions on all operating systems. I have yet to see someone
run into sandboxing problems on MacOS (in production) that wasn't doing some
evil shit that _should_ be difficult.

As a developer it's a bit annoying. As a user it's why the OS experience sucks
less than windows and linux for user applications. The .app and permissions
design is fantastic - the experience of developing it not so much, but it
could be improved.

I really don't want your app spawning off god knows how many processes doing
god knows what with unfettered access to my filesystem and network.

~~~
newscracker
(GP here) I agree, and would like to have more restrictions on what data apps
can have access to. The problem I see is how to make it effective while also
keeping it easy to use. I don't see a point in an app asking a user (through
the system) for access to the Documents folder or Desktop folder and the user
granting it. I'd prefer something more granular...something that fits the
"sandbox" model with precise and granular access. I realize this may be
complex, but there's hardly any point arguing about restrictions if giving
access means opening up a really big chunk of data (folder) up for an app.

------
vondur
Eh, if Apple releases and ARM based Mac, they will start with notebooks,
something similar to the Macbook Air. People should appreciate a laptop with
better performance and longer battery life compared to the Intel versions.
Most of the software should compile just fine, and if not, maybe a version
from the iPad OS will be an ok stopgap. I'm assuming of course that most Mac
Apps don't have any Intel assembly code in them. I'm guessing that may be the
case for something like Photoshop.

~~~
hinkley
I think you're right and will go a step farther to say that I wouldn't be the
least bit surprised if everything without a 'Pro' in the name went to ARM over
a relatively short period.

Switching the Pro lines over is a tougher row to hoe, and has much higher
expectations from users. I do know that Apple was playing with ARM
coprocessing chips to allow for certain types of computations to be performed
while in sleep mode. Perhaps the Pros will end up with both.

------
rathel
Moving personal computing to ARM is going to enslave us, the end users. The
temptation for the OEMs to lock everything down and integrate all components
into non-extensible hardware is too strong.

~~~
chaostheory
Since we're on the subject, how far are we from a truly open source machine?

~~~
pankajdoharey
Definitely more than a Decade, there is no true GPU equivalent Open Core,
There are some Open CPU Cores but these are basic compared to what ARM has on
offer.

------
kethinov
I find these rumors continually terrifying. Boot Camp and VMWare Fusion is
vital to my workflow. If Apple drops x64, they're dropping me as a customer.

~~~
londons_explore
Windows runs on ARM, as does Linux.

I'm sure if apple switched entirely to ARM, lots of other software would
switch too, and we might even eventually see the end of the x86 era.

~~~
jmull
It's not Windows itself that people want to run (need to run, actually), it's
Windows-based x64 software.

Windows is just one of many pieces of software people would need to run on an
ARM-based Mac. Seems pretty clear that this can only work if the ARM-based
machines have a pretty decent way of executing x64 binaries.

~~~
zerkten
It seems like they only have 32-bit app support right now based on articles
like [https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/surface-pro-x-arm-app-
com...](https://www.laptopmag.com/articles/surface-pro-x-arm-app-
compatibility). I'm curious what the blockers are for x64 software which would
obviously be desirable in many ways.

~~~
Const-me
Most likely Intel's patents on different ISA extensions. E.g. every x64 CPU is
required to support at least SSE1 and SSE2.

------
Eric_WVGG
One other question that I haven't seen addressed is, what about GPUs?

Apple makes a GPU for the iPads that seems to compare very favorably to AMD's
laptop offerings. I imagine anything written in Metal should "just work," but
what about OpenGL? It's now deprecated in MacOS but still sort of on life
support, and it seems a little premature to just cut the cord on that.

Or could AMD GPUs work on ARM? That also seems like kind of a heavy lift…

~~~
bluedino
The current AMD GPU in the 16" is the first one in a while (except maybe the
Vega series) which has 'acceptable' performance, and there's all kinds of
stink about how much extra power/heat the GPU generates when it is in use,
even though it's been that way with the MacBook Pro since Apple went to the
dual graphics models.

------
cmrdporcupine
I think the hypothesis at the end of the article ("Could the iPad’s rising
revenue (6.5% of total) help cover the hit once its user interface (and
keyboard with trackpad) makes it more laptop-like?") is most likely.

I think Apple will continue to add features to its tablets to make them take
over the niche of its OS X driven computers. Already I have student friends
who use an iPad + keyboard + stand as their primary device for productivity
work.

If they just keep doing this at a certain point the segment will be large
enough to just consider this type of configuration a "Macintosh"

~~~
dkersten
> Already I have student friends who use an iPad + keyboard + stand as their
> primary device for productivity work.

I use my ipad for _everything_ except programming (and all work-related tasks
are currently done on a work laptop due to being in a highly regulated
industry, for now) and gaming (besides a few games that work exceptionally
well on tablet, I never got into mobile gaming, I have a PS4 anyway).

All of my web browsing, youtube watching, document editing, spreadsheets etc I
do on ipad. I even occasionally SSH’d into a server to fix some stuff and used
a git client to push some minor edits. I also quite like ipad for animation,
photo editing and 3d modeling (although I’d like to learn blender since the UI
updates...), and Miro for digital whiteboarding.

I’m pretty happy with it, but though I’ve tried various setups, tools and
editors, I’ve not yet been happy with actually programming on ipad.

Note that outside of the ipad, my preferred setup is actually a very keyboard-
centric tiled WM Linux setup (i3 on manjaro currently), but I’ll use OSX
happily enough (and do for work). I was never really into Apple products much,
but I love my three year old 9.whatever inch ipad pro.

~~~
greggman3
Congratulations. I'd love to only carry an iPad as it's < 1/2 the weight of a
Macbook Air and it appears to be faster (runs Shadertoy shaders faster).

Unfortunately even simple things I find infuriating like trying to select text
with my fingers.

Trying to multitask while planning a vacation/business trip and trying to flip
between note taking, 4 hotel sites, 3 airline sites, airbnb, and multiple
instances of google maps (oh right, only allowed one map view on iOS and one
AirBnB view) ...

Shopping online I find similar, it's so much easier to compare items on a
desktop ATM with 12+ tabs open and some split in into separate windows.

The majority of tasks I do require multi-tasking and often seeing 2-3 apps at
once.

Even trying to write replies on HN is almost always infuriating, especially if
I want to grab some links to paste into the reply, but also if I see a typo
and try to use my fingers to move the cursor to the place to edit.

Maybe it's a learned skill or maybe I just use computers differently but I'm
always fascinated and somewhat jealous of people like you that some how manage
to avoid all that frustration on an iPad.

~~~
Wowfunhappy
> and multiple instances of google maps (oh right, only allowed one map view
> on iOS and one AirBnB view) ...

I'm not too experienced with this but I'm 99% sure this is in fact something
you can do in the latest version of iPadOS. You can have three apps on screen
at once too.

The problem is that the gesture system for doing so requires too much effort
versus just using a laptop with multiple windows.

~~~
dkersten
Yes, you can have two apps side by side and a third floating app.

------
imtringued
Unfortunately I have heard these rumors way too often. I won't believe
anything anymore until Apple itself releases a product.

~~~
dep_b
We kept hearing stories about x86 for years too. I'm sure ARM based MacBooks
already exist as testing devices.

~~~
1123581321
Did successive stories about the x86 change provide additional information
before the actual release was imminent? The ARM stories are not.

~~~
dep_b
They never did, just new sources of rumors.

------
OrangeMango
I still think that the AppleTV is where this will start. They now support
multiple accounts, have an app store, etc. iOS supports keyboards and mice,
and they have a "conference room display" mode that brings them into a
business setting.

Release the iWork suite and some sort of thin client/remote desktop app and
then see how people use them. Learn, iterate, repeat. They can build an ARM-
based Mac bit by bit, out in the open, without anyone freaking out and killing
their x86 sales.

~~~
saagarjha
Apple TV is already ARM (at least the new ones are…), and it runs what's
essentially a skin of iOS. I doubt they will switch that out with macOS
anytime soon.

~~~
jsjohnst
The original Apple TV (that looks sorta like a half-height Mac Mini) was based
on a stripped down version of OSX, but you are correct, everything from the
Apple TV 2 and on is ARM and running a derivative of iOS.

~~~
solarkraft
Isn't iOS a version of Mac OS? :-)

Do they share any new code nowadays?

~~~
saagarjha
They share most of their code.

~~~
jsjohnst
Now, sure, but not back then to the same extent.

------
mobilio
"ARM started as a branch of Acorn Computer in Cambridge, England, with the
formation of a joint venture between Acorn, Apple and VLSI Technology. A team
of twelve employees produced the design of the first ARM microprocessor
between 1983 and 1985."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture)

------
ken
> Why invest in the development of such a high-end chip for Mac Pro’s low
> volume?

\- Control of the whole stack (Apple's stated M.O.)

\- Consistent architecture across all their product lines

\- If it's roughly twice as energy efficient, as claimed, the floor-standing
heat sink known as the Mac Pro could potentially be smaller and lighter again
(or they could keep the case the same and increase internal expansion, as they
did when they switched the cheesegrater from G5 to Xeon, or they could double
the core count with the same cooling)

\- Depending on how much cheaper it would be, you could put the same CPU into
less expensive Macs (high-core-count-Xeon-level performance in an iMac or Mini
would be quite compelling)

How much difference is there in architecture between a Xeon-level chip and an
i3-level chip? I assumed most of the added cost of a Xeon was market
segmentation, so if you had another way to do that (e.g., by only selling CPUs
in complete systems), you'd be able to increase performance on the low end
without losing money.

------
ksec
>Nuvia [1] is developing a chip to power cloud servers. Williams, who spent
nearly a decade at Apple, says he raised the possibility of developing such
technology years ago, but the idea was rejected by then-Chief Executive
Officer Steve Jobs, who died in 2011, and by Johny Srouji, who’s now Apple’s
head of hardware technology, because they thought it would detract from the
company’s work on consumer facing technology. Apple continues to hold that
position today, according to Williams.

>"In 2010 [2], Williams and [co-worker Jim] Keller raised this idea with Mike
Culbert, their former supervisor at Apple. Culbert suggested that they put
together a presentation for Steve Jobs, pitching the idea of Apple building a
server chip. Williams and Keller did so, and Culbert presented that
opportunity to Jobs," the court filing reads.

"Following the meeting, Culbert reported to Williams that Apple would not be
pursuing the server chip project because Jobs was only interested in pursuing
Apple’s development of consumer-based products."

I dont know why anyone would think Apple is making its Desktop Class CPU for
Mac. As a matter of fact, even Jim Killer tries to pitch the idea to Steve
Jobs on ARM Server Chip [2] . Apple was very late into its own Datacenter
play. I am not sure if the economy of scale would have worked in flavour of
Apple if the Server and Mac Pro were using the same chip.

Basically I still dont think the pros are so clear. It is far easier to switch
to AMD for cost saving measures and even Apple couldn't be bothered to do
that.

[1] [https://finance.yahoo.com/news/nuvia-exec-sued-apple-
says-18...](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/nuvia-exec-sued-apple-
says-181807641.html)

[2]
[https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/02/14/nuvia_apple_server/](https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/02/14/nuvia_apple_server/)

------
gwbas1c
I thought most MacOS applications compile to universal binaries that are
something like bytecode, not direct x64 code? Assuming I understand this
correctly, most applications should run correctly on ARM without any
modification?

Anyway, one of the big appeals of Apple computers and MacOS is that I can run
whatever I want in a VM. That little one-off Windows utility that I use once a
year that never made it to Mac? Runs fine under VMware. I also hear of plenty
of people who dual boot.

What happens when Apple switches to ARM? Are we going to loose dual booting
and rich virtualization? At least for me, as much as I love MacOS,
virtualization has always been what made it work for me.

~~~
ken
> I thought most MacOS applications compile to universal binaries that are
> something like bytecode, not direct x64 code?

No, "Universal Binaries" are still native code:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_binary](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_binary)

------
otterpro
I'd love to see an ARM-based Macbook, especially if it can last 20+ hours on
battery, is highly portable, and has great thermal/low heat output. I believe
history can repeat itself, as in the past 4 decades, we've seen Macs
transition from Motorola 680x0 to PowerPC, and from PowerPC to Intel x86, and
from Intel x86 32bit to x64 64bit-only. This brings me back to memories of fat
binary and PPC emulation.

------
fierarul
ARM Macs will be the end of the line for many "prosumer" customers of Apple.

It will probably sell quite well though. And it will bring back fanless
designs.

~~~
chrisseaton
> ARM Macs will be the end of the line for many "prosumer" customers of Apple.

Why do you think that? Do you just think ARM can't match Intel performance? Or
do you think the prosumers need Intel-specific functionality like counters?

What I'm worried about is implementing top-quality ARM backends for software
like the JVM. We need someone doing this rapidly as I think an ARM MacBook Pro
will just turn up one day, unannounced.

~~~
H1Supreme
> Why do you think that? Do you just think ARM can't match Intel performance?

Can it match single core performance? Audio production plugins are often
running on single cores. The A13 maxes at 2.65ghz, and the 80-core Altra maxes
at 3.0 (turbo boosted). Both of those are too low for me to use in audio
production. I intentionally went with less cores and a higher clock speed on
my last computer because of this.

~~~
ken
Clock speeds aren't comparable between different architectures.

You're also looking at a CPU designed for a phone, and a CPU designed for a
server farm. If Apple were to design a CPU for professional multimedia
workstations, it would not have the same parameters as either of these.

------
geesejuggler
If Apple moves to a full ARM line-up, they will need to copy AMD's chiplet
strategy.

As Apple understands economies of scale, they will need an architecture that
will enable them to cheaply mass-produce millions of chiplets to combine them
into low, medium and high-end cpus to suit their different use-cases.

Just like AMD is doing now.

There is no way Apple can create a monolithic Mac Pro-level cpu at low volume
for a profit.

It might be easier to just go AMD with the whole Mac line-up. Requires only a
little adaptation on OS level and will give users less nuisance trying to run
their old apps.

In addition, they will gain performant GPUs as a bonus.

------
rjsw
Another thread here:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22524315](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22524315)

~~~
dang
Now merged hither.

------
nottorp
[quote] The Pro is a monstrously powered machine that costs tens of thousands
of dollars and is designed for a (relatively) small audience of content
creator professionals and other high-end technical users running fluidics
dilutions and the demanding calculations involved in machine-learning
applications. [/quote]

I really don't get that. You can have a $8000 Mac Pro that is decently
configured as a general purpose workstation that will last you 5-10 years if
it's well built. Yet everyone only talks about the $50000 or whatever the high
end config is.

~~~
_ph_
Not sure how much you can get a decent configuration of the Mac Pro for just
$8000, but this is a very steep price, considering that the Mac Pro just
doubled the entry price compared to its predecessors. From the build quality,
this is certainly one of the nicest machines one could get, but the pricing is
a new pinnacle even by Apples standards.

~~~
nottorp
Sorry, 7000 US prices. 48 G ram and 2 Tb storage, rest default.

Not everyone needs more than 8C/16T or uses GPU compute. Which was my point.
The price may be inflated (not sure by how much, a similar Dell is what, 5K
instead of 7?), but there are configurations that cost less than a good car.

