Apple plans on leaving Intel architecture even for their PCs and laptops.

[Bassman59]

The problem is Apple is considered fashionable, and PC manufactures clone Apple ideas from head to toe, including top tier PC manufacturers like Microsoft and the top sales trio (HP, Dell, Lenovo).
No matter how stupid an idea Apple makes, including soldered RAM, soldered SSD, obscure screws, adhesive seal, etc., PC manufacturers will clone.

This is why Apple's decisions matter to PC users. Just like iPhone has got rid of 3.5mm jacks, a number of Android phones have followed.

Well yes, I think you're right to a degree. I'm not saying all Apple's designs are bad, some are actually very good and I can see why other's copy. As for the 3.5mm jack, I think those that follow suite will piss off a lot of customers just like Apple did. This is largely the reason why the likes of Samsung have kept the jack or those that have removed it in favour of USB-C (like Sony) have at least given you an adapter in the box.

Apple puts an adapter in the box. 

[Halcyon]

The problem is Apple is considered fashionable, and PC manufactures clone Apple ideas from head to toe, including top tier PC manufacturers like Microsoft and the top sales trio (HP, Dell, Lenovo).
No matter how stupid an idea Apple makes, including soldered RAM, soldered SSD, obscure screws, adhesive seal, etc., PC manufacturers will clone.

This is why Apple's decisions matter to PC users. Just like iPhone has got rid of 3.5mm jacks, a number of Android phones have followed.

Well yes, I think you're right to a degree. I'm not saying all Apple's designs are bad, some are actually very good and I can see why other's copy. As for the 3.5mm jack, I think those that follow suite will piss off a lot of customers just like Apple did. This is largely the reason why the likes of Samsung have kept the jack or those that have removed it in favour of USB-C (like Sony) have at least given you an adapter in the box.

Apple puts an adapter in the box.

I stand corrected. They have made one good decision.

[Harb]

Apple are awesome......they cant do wrong, and I trust every decision they make 

[Mr. Scram]

Apple are awesome......they cant do wrong, and I trust every decision they make 

[NiHaoMike]

Smartphones going USB-C have created a large market for tiny high quality USB DACs. The DAC that came with my Le Pro 3 uses some custom USB 2.0 chip from SaviAudio. Beats the venerable PCM2707 and manages to hold its own against the PCM1792A. (As in it gets into the quality level where it is very difficult to hear the difference.)

Apple are awesome......they cant do wrong, and I trust every decision they make 

What they can't seem to do is make a cable that lasts. Or make a mobile device that is friendly to small third party developers.

[Halcyon]

Apple are awesome......they cant do wrong, and I trust every decision they make 

What they can't seem to do is make a cable that lasts. Or make a mobile device that is friendly to small third party developers.

Aussie sense of humour... he was joking. :-)

[ruairi]

I have almost 20 years in the IT industry. I've used both PC and Mac's since the early 1990's. I've repaired both and continue to repair all types of computers, laptops and portable devices, including Apple products to this day. I've seen how Apple has evolved both as a company and in terms of their hardware since the Apple Macintosh Classic. I use Apple's OS and software weekly and know their limitations well. I might not know Apple products as intimately as I do stuff in the PC world, but I'd say I'm pretty experienced and have University and industry qualifications to back it up.

I'd suggest that perhaps you are over qualified to comment, and not at all representative of the typical latter day Apple end user.  Apple are optimizing for weight and form factor and they are being rewarded for this design choice.  Yes, their modern products are less repairable because of this but most people don't care.  The Apple model is built around Applecare and high end support when things do go wrong.

If their approach was wrong the company would be in the toilet but they are hugely successful and profitable (not just "valuable" like so many tech companies).

Techies have been whining for years about Apple lagging on raw performance on their laptops and desktops, Intel have been a contributor to that lag.  Controlling the chipset is an obvious next step.

[BrianHG]

Apple are awesome......they cant do wrong, and I trust every decision they make 

[Halcyon]

So even further restricting what the end-user can and can't do with their machines and forcing them to buy Apple hardware and software?

No one forces you to buy apple, you can always buy PC and download windows for free, or you can buy nothing at all.
Weird way of looking at things you have, so if you want a Tek MSO5, tektronix is forcing is you to buy hardware and software? Also BMW and Mercedes do the same right? they force you to buy the stuff they designed. What world we live in...

That's an overly simplistic way of looking at it. Of course no one is forcing anyone to buy Apple or Microsoft products.

Look at it deeper. How often have you heard people say they use Apple products, but often accompanied by a groan and them admitting it's "too hard" to change, especially if those people aren't technically minded. I hear it frequently. I'm going through that exact mindset at the moment with Microsoft Windows. I refuse to use anything beyond Windows 7 because quite frankly, it's utter rubbish. In the coming years, I'm converting my entire workflow and everything I do from Windows to Linux and it's not easy.

Apple products are designed for the masses, not power users like it was back in the 1990's where graphics and video was almost exclusively on Apple machines. These days, they make simple to use products, with limited hardware and software support (comparative to PC). Then they turn the screws on their customers to make sure they keep going back, spending more money on Apple products. It's a clever business model, but people are becoming increasingly resentful of being treated like chumps. I think this the reason why Apple have lost the market share when it comes to smart phones.

I would have half a mind to actually buy an Intel-based Apple machine if I could just install Windows on it natively without resorting to trickery and messing around or I could just buy off-the-shelf components, remove the old ones and replace them with faster/larger/newer ones. But part of the reason I don't bother is I can build a far more powerful, flexible and stable machine for far less than I would to buy one off Apple.

For the most part, consumers of Apple products honestly couldn't give a crap about any of the things I've mentioned or what you and I have said. They buy them because they like them and more power to them. I'm simply pointing out my experiences and some of the reasons why Apple might be going down the path of custom CPUs.

[Brumby]

Apple are awesome......they cant do wrong, and I trust every decision they make 

See - even the Loonies get it.

[glarsson]

... and they won't have to go back to Intel again like they did with the PowerPC

What do you mean? Apple have never "gone back" when changing processor families.
6502 > 68000 > PowerPC > X86 > ARM?

[PartialDischarge]

What do you mean? Apple have never "gone back" when changing processor families.
6502 > 68000 > PowerPC > X86 > ARM?

You are right, "go back" misused here. I meant that whatever switch they make, hope it lasts long

[Cerebus]

Is that reasoned and logical enough?

No, because you haven't actually answered the question. You made a nonsensical assertion:

So even further restricting what the end-user can and can't do with their machines and forcing them to buy Apple hardware and software?

You further went on to assert:

I don't doubt for one moment that it won't just be a typical ARM processor, it'll have some kind of Apple-specific goodness in it.

When asked:

And how will that force people to buy Apple hardware?

You offer an 'I've been in the Industry 20 years and I've seen what Apple are like' argument. You don't actually answer the question as to how adopting a new processor architecture will have the effect of "forcing them to buy Apple hardware and software".

If you've got a proper argument as to why adopting a new processor architecture will have the effect of "forcing them to buy Apple hardware and software" then make it. If you can't, then I submit you're just Apple bashing by making an unsupportable assertion.

It doesn't matter how long you've been in the industry*, what you claim Apple's practices are, if you can't back up your claim with a cogent argument.

*For what it's worth, I've been in the industry over 40 years, and was labs manager for one PC magazine and technical editor of another PC magazine before your 'nearly 20 years' experience started.

[Ampera]

I love these sorts of debates. It's trying to dictate what stupid people should buy.

Apple has, since the Lisa, and always has sold specifically to stupid people, and I don't just mean that as an insult. Objectively, they specifically designed their machines for people who were too stupid to operate a CP/M or DOS prompt, and couldn't be arsed to learn how. The flashy windowing system and hipster design made it quite attractive to people who just wanted a computer, and didn't really give a shit about how powerful it was.

At the end of the day, if someone wants to buy a Macintosh, or other Apple product, they will. Screeching about it in a forum doesn't make it any better. I'm sure most people in the tech industry with a brain and a general understanding of mathematics could see that a crippled Unix workstation based on the same hardware architecture as the IBM PC, just heavily marked up, is an entirely stupid idea, especially considering you could get a much better Unix experience with a couple of cheap Xeons and a fresh install of FreeBSD, or your choice of now free Unix distro.

Idk what Halcyon is on about with forcing people to buy Apple hardware, maybe he means Apple's restrictive ecosystem. At least OS/X doesn't as severely limit what you can do unlike iOS, where the concept of installing your own applications is one that's met with haughty derision, followed by a kind, warm, pat on the back by the jailbreak developers who presumably were stuck with an iPhone after their nan bought them one for Christmas, so decided to make the best out of it. (Maybe a bit of humorous (I hope) projection here, but I'll move on)

ARM is best suited for eating next to no power, making very little heat, and kicking ass at very mobile tasks. I wouldn't ask an ARM CPU for a second to do something like proper video editing or any real CPU workloading. This is one reason why I don't fricking trust x86 compatible Windows NT on ARM.

x86 is the classic workhorse. Despite being outclassed at times by RISC chips like, well pretty much all of them, they have persevered to become the largest and most significant processor architecture in the industry. Apple abandoning it is another Apple move. They've done it before, and they may do it again. Screaming at people about how bad it it doesn't really do much, it's best to let people find out.

The thing that pisses me off about modern Macs is they don't even have any element of class that older Macs did. What I mean by that is you could run a G3/4/5 tower with PCI cards, a custom configuaration, etc. You could run it as it was, a unique RISC Unix workstation with it's own special architecture. As a legacy hardware enthusiast, that just sings to me. Even older NuBus machines like the Macintosh 2 just attract me so much. Today, you just get a load of below the curve parts that they sell without update for years without price cuts. Macintoshes are and always have been the machine for idiots.

[BradC]

Macintoshes are and always have been the machine for idiots.

As I sit and read your post on my Macbook, I'll assume the lack of experience, eloquence and worldliness is a result of your age and means you've not communicated yourself effectively.

Heaven forbid someone buys a machine that happens to fit their specific use case.

[Ampera]

You got a problem with me or something?

I'm not wrong. Maybe I'm a bit harsh because that's how I talk in general, but Macintoshes were designed to fit the use cases of people who didn't want to learn the slightest bit of computing, and now they are designed to pull every nickel and dime out of the consumer as possible. There have been entire businesses built around giving the repair support that Apple doesn't even remotely bother with themselves. The exact same hardware I can find in any Macintosh I can find for cheaper, or for par price and faster. They barely even run higher ground with software support.

When I say idiot, I use it as an insult mostly out of a matter of crass humor and as a brash description of how I see the situation. Ultimately all of what I said, and almost all of what has been said here is completely subjective. I've bought stuff that definitely makes me an idiot, and I have liked those products. I've plowed probably a grand, if not more into buying old computer parts of E-Bay and assembling them for the fun of it. When I say idiot, I also sort of mean it with a sense of pride, to do something against what people say, just because you like it, even if it might be objectively down in several places.

I can't call myself a Macintosh collector, but I do hope to one day have a good collection of Macintoshes. I find something interesting and special about some of the machines, even if some of them weren't up to par to their contemporaries. They are a different world I do like to explore.

As a techie, and even someone who enjoys a nice POSIX environment from time to time, I can't think of a single scenario where a Macintosh would do a task better than an alternative on an NT or Unix/Linux machine. That's just me, and I can imagine there are some I haven't thought of. I honestly believe all of the purchases of Macintosh are based on subjection. You like it because of how it feels and it's atmosphere, and while I call you an idiot, I respect you for it.

[Cerebus]

I love these sorts of debates. It's trying to dictate what stupid people should buy.

Apple has, since the Lisa, and always has sold specifically to stupid people, and I don't just mean that as an insult. Objectively, they specifically designed their machines for people who were too stupid to operate a CP/M or DOS prompt, and couldn't be arsed to learn how. The flashy windowing system and hipster design made it quite attractive to people who just wanted a computer, and didn't really give a shit about how powerful it was.

The Lisa was designed after the Apple bods discovered the work being done by Alan Kay at the Learning Research Group at Xerox PARC. That work was specifically aimed at making computers accessible to non-experts, down to the level of primary school children.

If you're going to deride all non-experts as idiots whenever you encounter them, then you're going to spend a lot of time in Emergency Rooms as many of the non-experts will take objection to being called idiots and some of them are domain experts in short tempers and the use of big fists.

And that "flashy windowing system" from Xerox was copied by everybody and his dog. It's called Microsoft "Windows", not Microsoft "DOS Prompt". Ditto "X Windowing System" etc. etc.

Alan Kay et al managed to get average 6 year old children programming on the system they designed, and all the copiers (Apple, Microsoft,...) have failed to produce a system that is properly comprehensible to the average adult, let alone programmable by them. If Apple aim a little closer to the Xerox original (and that's a highly dubious and debatable 'if'), and produce computers usable by 'idiots' then that surely is a good thing unless one wishes, for whatever reason, computing to be the sole preserve of some intellectual elite.

[edavid]

This report raised many questions.

The PA Semi team is undoubtedly good, but can they really compete with Intel and AMD's armies of CPU designers?  Consider the cumulative man hours that have gone into a current generation X86 CPU core.  There's no way even Apple can match that.

Also, considering the cold war between Apple and Adobe, would Adobe port the Creative Cloud apps to a new architecture?  Or is Apple planning to definitively dump Adobe and build their own Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign?  Neither option seems very plausible.

Then there is Windows.  I have heard that Boot Camp is actually quite important for corporate sales of Apple hardware.  I don't think corporate customers would accept emulated X86, or Windows on ARM, as a solution.

My guess is that there will be 2 lines of computers, low end ARM laptops and iMacs running a beefed up iOS (Apple's version of Chromebooks), and higher priced X86 (or hybrid) machines running MacOS.

[gertux]

Is Apple moving to ARM not the logical next step in their evolution ?
Their most profitable business is iPhone/iOS so why wouldn’t they move their desktop machines to ARM and an evolution of iOS ?
The gap between an iPad pro and a MacBook is narrowing anyhow.

[glarsson]

Apple has, since the Lisa, and always has sold specifically to stupid people, and I don't just mean that as an insult.

I think you have identified the wrong group as stupid.

At the end of the day, if someone wants to buy a Macintosh, or other Apple product, they will. Screeching about it in a forum doesn't make it any better. I'm sure most people in the tech industry with a brain and a general understanding of mathematics could see that a crippled Unix workstation based on the same hardware architecture as the IBM PC, just heavily marked up, is an entirely stupid idea, especially considering you could get a much better Unix experience with a couple of cheap Xeons and a fresh install of FreeBSD, or your choice of now free Unix distro.

Why do you call a workstation running a certified UNIX crippled and instead recommend various uncertified UNIX distributions?

[Ampera]

Would it help if I apologized?

I see your various points. When I say idiot, it's more of a jab than anything serious. The same way someone who supports an opposing sports team is an idiot, someone who is an Apple fanboy is an idiot.

I guess OS/X isn't that crippled. I'd have a much better time with pretty much any other version of Unix.

[james_s]

I was always a PC guy, never cared for Macs, and then I ended up accumulating a number of vintage 68k Macs along side my vintage PC gear and then I really started to appreciate just how far ahead the Macs were at the time. 640x480 256 color graphics with 8 bit sound and everything plug n play (that actually worked) back when I was using DOS on a primitive VGA graphics system that could do 640x480 with a paltry 16 colors, sound through a beeper and fighting with IRQ, DMA and address settings. The Mac came standard with SCSI, it could use the entire installed memory without silly tricks, it was polished. There's a good reason why it became the defacto standard in the graphic arts industry.

PCs did eventually catch up, but through a period from the late 80s through the mid 90s the Mac was so far ahead it's not even funny. Where they failed most is in not encouraging or in fact even discouraging game development. Steve Jobs notably said "The Mac is not a toy" which ignores the fact that in the consumer market gaming has long been a major driver of PC purchases and upgrades.

Something that has bothered me for decades is how much time and effort people spend childishly promoting their platform of choice while bashing the other platform, instead of actually doing something useful with their computer.

[Marco]

With NT the Mac OS was made to look quite archaic for a while as well, they've both had their periods of complacency.

My main problem with the Mac is that their vertical integration is poison to the industry, it will make it so very very boring. Windows even at its peak because their relative laisse faire attitude towards hardware was a vehicle for innovation in a way Apple will never be. Their dominance is rather scary.

PS. also Apple's use of patents/IP is even more obnoxious than Microsoft. Rounded corners, look and feel, their habit of just trying to dam off technology with kitchen sink type patents with clearly no research behind it ... bleh.

[Jeroen3]

This is some really bad news for Intel.

Is there a technical reason why ARM is difficult to optimize for performance?

There is a legacy reason. Everything was and up until recently still is being made for x86.
Only the last decade saw a major change. In 2007, the iPhone was released and created the App Developers.
This is a major group of ARM programmers, optimizing for low power and memory targets.

[nctnico]

ARM is pushing higher and higher in the server market.

They are pushing in a market where actual computing performance is secondary, like web servers, VPS, and all that stuff. That's where they are great, because you can put more of them into the same volume. Nobody puts ARMs in high-performance computing, where calculations are a primary task.

I' not sure how those processors will do in desktop applications. If Photoshop or Premiere runs slow, people will not be happy.

It will depend on how fast an ARM CPU can be if it dissipates 50 to 90 Watts. Most of the ARM stuff we see around today is limited at a few Watt max.