131–140 of 263 posts
Can you just imagine how long the battery would last on an arm based macbook? Days?!
There are ARM Chromebooks and I don't think they last for days. I'm pretty sure most of the power draw on a laptop is the monitor
Earlier quoted context omitted.
why not, for example allow iOS apps to run in macOS That's not what the article is talking about and it's a bad idea for UX reasons (no touchscreen). And who's to say that macOS.next will be anything similar to the current macOS? Don't even go there; a vocal minority of Mac users including me do not want anything like that. And getting back to the article, if the OS is radically different then presumably it doesn't n…
No touch screen at the moment. Apple could be looking at making a hybrid ipad/mac.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People have been saying this since the inception of iOS; given the trajectory of Cocoa vs UIKit, I don't see much sign of this.
I'm not familiar with either API, but why wouldn't it be possible to get Cocoa working in iOS? I imagine UIKit would be optimized for small, low power, devices, which will always exist in some, ever shrinking, form. It's all just a BSD variant, when you get down to it.
This sounds weird. Are they going to have two versions of every executable? One arm and one intel? Or would this low power/power nap mode only support a tiny subset of functionality that apple chooses to include in their OS release?
You make it sound like they've never done that before (Universal binaries).
Thinking about this I've convinced myself that what will happen is the ARM core will periodically check for various statuses (i.e. connect to your imap/pop server and see if there is new mail) and turn on an indicator or perhaps wake the intel cores. Which is to say that the powernap/low power functionality will be restricted to either things apple delivers ootb or to a special API. Not as something that automatically migrates whatever workload is running on the powerful intel cores into a slow motion version of the same thing running on the ARM cores.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is actually quite difficult to beat Intel on power efficiency once you start talking about laptop class CPUs. The combination of Intel's advanced fabrication tech and their highly efficient core family of microarchitectures gives them a significant advantage outside of the ultra-low-power space.
I don't think that's true. Arm chips just don't clock as high as intels can, and no one* cares about clock speed any more. That ship has sailed. Multiprocess web browsers will drive the sales of massively multicore arms (with tons of ram!), and intel will be sunk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This sounds incredibly kludgey and at odds with Apple's de-investment in macOS. (As in "reduced investment", not "divestment".) Adding massive complexity to eke out another hour or two of battery life seems like a poor choice when there are so many things to be fixed in the OS.
Why so? A Mac is a very high ASP item - why not, for example allow iOS apps to run in macOS (using the ARM processor). Ultimately, the 2016 MBPs are a great example of why Apple needs to divest from Intel. The poor timing for Kaby Lake mobile processors and lack of low-power RAM were both Apple's reasons stated when the topic of "the MBP isn't keeping up with the competition" arises. And who's to say that macOS.next…
Never say never, but that is the sort of thing Apple would never do.
I think that in the long run you'll see a hybrid ARM/x64 Mac sharing the same case in the same way we have hybrid graphics. If you look at most of the processes running on a Mac, how many of those need to be running on the power-hungrier Intel chip? You could easily offload much of the kernel, Dock, compositor, Twitter desktop, etc to a lower-power ARM. In the case where you aren't running any x64 apps, you could the…
This sounds incredibly kludgey and at odds with Apple's de-investment in macOS. (As in "reduced investment", not "divestment".) Adding massive complexity to eke out another hour or two of battery life seems like a poor choice when there are so many things to be fixed in the OS.
HP and Dell have gotten smarter and are making better devices. Apple has powerful resources in the ARM space that their competition cannot match -- they are 100% dependent on Intel, who are having issues shipping product.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Remember the time when software X on wintel ran circles around software X on macos/ppc and people pretended it was not the case? Guess we are going to see more of that soon.
Speculating about what Apple's going to do is a great way to be wrong but I don't really see it. In both of their CPU migrations the switch was to substantially more powerful CPUs. I can see them making more 'pro' iOS devices, Macs with ARMs as coprocessors, etc. Ditching Intel altogether? I can't think of ways the advantages would outweigh the disadvantages.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
why not, for example allow iOS apps to run in macOS That's not what the article is talking about and it's a bad idea for UX reasons (no touchscreen). And who's to say that macOS.next will be anything similar to the current macOS? Don't even go there; a vocal minority of Mac users including me do not want anything like that. And getting back to the article, if the OS is radically different then presumably it doesn't n…
No reason they couldn't put a touch screen on a MacBook or imac, though I guess they can't guarantee one on a mac pro
That's not to say Apple doesn't release terrible things at times (hockey puck mouse[1]?), but I have trouble imagining Apple releasing one of those. (Laplet? tabletop?)
[1] I actually think that may have been calculated - it is impossible that Jobs didn't know it was a shitty mouse, but alongside the iMac, it got a ton of attention at the time Apple really needed it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Apple's de-investment in macOS Citation needed. "We love the Mac and are as committed to it, in both desktops and notebooks, as we ever have been." http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/fea...
Actions speak louder than words, and it's been 3 years and 1 month since the Mac Pro saw any action.