“Word has reached SemiAccurate that Apple is going to show Intel the door, at least as far as laptops are concerned. It won’t be really soon, but we are told it is a done deal,” Charlie Demerjian reports for SemiAccurate.
“Apple is moving the laptop line, and presumably desktops too, to ARM based chips as soon as possible,” Demerjian reports. “Think mid-2013. At that point, Apple can move to ARM without worrying about obsoleting code with an ISA that is on the verge of changing, and no memory overhead worries either. Basically, it looks like the perfect time. Ironically, SemiAccurate’s moles tell us that the boys on infinite loop are planning to move laptops to ARM at about that time.”
Advertisement: Parallels Desktop 6 for Mac turbo-charges your Windows on Mac performance – $10 off limited time offer!
Demerjian reports, “So short story, x86 is history on Apple laptops, or will be in 2-3 years. In any case, it is a done deal, Intel is out, and Apple chips are in. The only question left is if they will use their own core, a Samsung core, or the generic ARM black box. My bet is on generic for the first round, with a custom uncore, and moving to progressively more proprietary features with each successive generation.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: As anyone with an iPad 2 can tell you, Apple’s A5 is quite an extraordinary performer. Imagine an Apple A6 (or even an A5) with access to much more than the 512MB RAM found in iPad 2 and coupled with high-performance SSDs. It’s easy to imagine a setup like that running a full-blown Mac OS X very well.
UPDATE: 11:11am EDT: As per concerns about Boot Camp / Windows Virtualization: Microsoft has already announced that their next version of Windows will support SoC architectures from ARM, as well and Intel and AMD. So, provided Microsoft follows through and ships, Boot Camp and Windows Virtualization on Macs could still be possible of Apple ARM-based Macs. See related articles below for more info.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]
Related articles:
IDC: ARM chips to own 13% of PC market by 2015 – May 6, 2011
Mysteries abound in analysis of Apple’s bold new iPad-powering A5 – April 14, 2011
Apple’s big, bad A5 whips Nvidia Tegra 2 handsomely in independent tests – April 8, 2011
Apple A5 chip production drives $3.6-billion Samsung fab expansion – March 30, 2011
Apple has become a formidable chip company – March 26, 2011
Teardown of iPad 2 WiFi shows recently-minted Apple A5 SoC, 512 MB RAM – March 13, 2011
RUMOR: Apple inks deal with TSMC foundry for A5 processor; possible setback for Samsung – March 9, 2011
ARM co-founder: Wintel faces obliteration – January 7, 2011
Microsoft to support SoC architectures from Intel, AMD, and ARM for next Windows version – January 5, 2011
I don’t know about this. What does this mean for boot camp or parallels?
It would seem to indicate that Apple is feeling Windows is history in a couple of years and no accommodations for the past indiscretions of the corporate world will be needed going forward.
Even with MS’ support of ARM, the virtualization will super slow, so ARM-based devices will be barely usable to run X32/X64 Windows code.
Also, even A15 are slow comparing to Intel, so, overall, the whole idea is pure fantasy.
Considering how shitty Atom is, Apple developing high-performance ARMs in the near future isn’t exactly something I’d call fantasy.
Well, Windows 8 is supposed to be supported on ARM, but the entire “legacy” Windows app arsenal will need recoding/recompiling because I understand there won’t be a compatibility layer like Rosetta.
Combined with with the Ivybridge announcements from Intel this week, I call “nonsense”.
This says it all: “Charlie Demerjian reports for SemiAccurate.”
Screw bootcamp and windows
I want a mac
preferably a R.I.S.C. one
and to anyone who says arm is slow compared to intel, they’r wrong
you can fit many intel instructions on one arm instruction
as for emulation, why do you think apple has been playing with llvm so much?
And there goes the end of Boot Camp.
Sorry, I don’t believe this one. Not gonna happen. Intel’s processors have so much more power than ARM’s and will continue to do so even when ARM comes out with higher end chips. The architecture transition would be another mess with emulation layers, universal binaries, etc. Running Windows, which is a big reason for the market share gains, would be done. There are just no positives here, except battery life.
ARM did announce they are actively going after the server markets. I would think their new designs will be very powerful indeed. They might have a legacy of little low power chips but…..
ARM meant new trend called “green servers”. They are not going to offer anything to compete with serious server chips like Intel’s Xeon.
I believe it. It will give Apple a huge advantage in notebooks (and most MacBook users are using fairly “normal” software that will be on the Mac App Store by then).
Desktops are where people tend to run the more obscure stuff (audio, video, scientific, etc.) that won’t be cleaned up for App Store anytime soon).
If true, too soon. Not true.
On what evidence do you base the opinion that running Windows “is a big reason for the market share gains”?
Mac market share really took off in 2006 right after the Intel transition. The ability to run Windows and have that “safety blanket” certainly helped Apple gain new customers.
It’s the reason, the only reason, why I am able to have a Mac at work.
… introduced a new iMac line with Quad-cores all around and speeds three to four times those of the A5 chip. Nothing against the A5 – my wife will be buying an iPad2 later today – but its speed is based on it using iOS, not OSX.
Seriously, ARM is going to boost speed six times as fast as Intel?
they were looking for some way to stop intel PPS momentum. They are very good at creative writing. I would like nothing better than to see both WINTEL fail but with thunderbolt just in it’s infancy, do you really think apple will bail? Thisisjust the man from redmondmaking sure the payola dollars bring some pain to it’s former conniving partner.
I hope this is not true.
If so there goes one of the best things about the Mac that I love, the ability to run pretty much any OS out there.
Bootcamp will be toast, and all the developers get to redo all their software AGAIN. w00t. NOT.
Oh boy….yet another big change for the Mac. Kind of makes sense. Hopefully there will be some sort of way to run some…..(windoz applications)….I still have to go to the darkside once a week to run my stock screening program. But then again, maybe the company that makes this application will finally get it in their head to port the software to the Mac natively….
I agree that this will not happen. This would put the Mac in the corner again. Right now, a Mac can run any desktop OS and any desktop application, and it can do it very well. This is because of Intel. Period.
This is a natural progression. Why use a 30-40 watt chip if a 2 watt chip will do.
(I’m still using a dual processor g4 from 2001 with few complaints and am guessing the current A5 is a fair bit faster. Fast enough for 95% of laptop users anyway.)
Wouldnt that also mean the end of thunderbolt?
Why can’t Apple’s new SoC have the controller, they did help in the Dev of Thunderbolt.
It took developers countless hours of work and effort not to mention costs to be able to move there software from 6800 to Power PC then from Power PC to Intel. Now finally the dust has settled and we get continuity and backward compatibility that can stabilize the platform. I finally have Photoshop, modo, Premier and After Effects running on native Cocoa 64 bit code. I really hope this is just a rumor, because at this point the users and developers would once again have to spend lots of money to get where we are today.
When they did the switch from PPC to Inetl the Dev tools didn’t change, well much. And they did say they had made OS X Processor independent by design. The only issue back then was people who’s code was not Xcode. Now that they are I think it would be quite easy and the Devs would hardly notice. As well, Mac’s are now big players in Computers and the pressure to keep you app up to date is much higher.
absolutely correct
as an example I point out the ios simulator, ios running on intel processors. the only difference here is that some of the perifials are not usable.
recompiling an app for the new A5/A6 based macs would be like switching from the simulator to an idevice: you just push a button
Nope, ain’t gonna happen. intel offers too much standardization to give up. Part of what makes Mac a superior platform is that it can run windows if needed. I just don’t see Apple allowing Microsoft the ability to cripple this feature on a whim. Intel also allowed Apple to dismiss the whole Megehertz Myth argument. I don’t see Steve Jobs wanting to go up there and explain why the numbers are different again and that ours are better.
I say standardization is one thing Apple wants out of. With the higher margins Apple makes on it’s products and the Cash horde they have I think it is very possible. Apple no longer cares about specs and I say they want out of the race. Real world performance is where it is at these days. But who knows, lets wait and see.
This may be in the cards long term, but I don’t see it in this kind of time frame.
Well, shit, there goes any chance I had at getting a G5 Powerbook.
Damn.
I don’t know. I like ARMH. I’m an ARMH investor. I want them to truly succeed.
But Intel has been on their game with current CPUs. I’d rather Apple user Intel and ARM together…
I say no way on this one. However there will be a hybrid iPad/Macbook AIR product that is ARM based.
What would this mean for thunderbolt. My understanding is that thunderbolt is currently incompatible with ARM processors…..
Will Apple create a new Universal app file format?
Just as there was the PowerPC/Intel Universal, will they create a Intel/ARM Universal?
It will be needed if lappies are ARM and desktops are Intel.
I call B.S. on this rumor.
Just because Windows is doing an ARM version too, hardly means that bootcamp/Windows virtualisation will still flourish. I can’t seriously imagine that a large portion of the Windows camp will be moving to Arm especially on the desktop, it will simply allow them to compete in products that mostly are already on ARM in the Applesphere and perhaps the Air.
This makes some sense, at least for the Air. Imagine the battery life on an Apple laptop running an ARM chip. The sucker will last forever before you had to recharge.
For those folks worried about Boot Camp, do you really think Windows is going to be around much longer. In two years Windows will be sucking air. Last year hell froze over when Autodesk ported AutoCAD to the Mac. Any software maker with an ounce of sense will be jumping onboard the Mac train before Windows sinks.
Man, talking about the demise of Windows–is this a good day or what!
idiot hit whores published this story.
I’m not so sure, but the ARM Cortex A15 will be plenty fast enough for low-end laptops, as it is supposed to be more than 5x faster than current A9 chips.
http://www.arm.com/products/processors/cortex-a/cortex-a15.php
This is all wrong IMHO. I think Apple is going to dump Intel processors for AMD processors. Just watch…
What if the plan is to incorporate iOS on a whole new line of lighter, thinner, long battery life, touch based instant on lapttops that will eventually replace the current line? Microsoft is porting windows to ARM and all the software folks will then be forced to come out with Touch versions. This could work and Intel will have to become a fab.
Personally i don’t see it happening any time soon (if at all).
Applications such as Adobe photoshop, in design, Premiere, Final Cut require so much processing power that an A5, A6, A8 is not going to be enough.
You probably think that A5 is a great performer, but that’s because it’s just running one optimized app at a time, throw 6 full apps at the same time at it and its going to choke. ARM is a technology designed for small devices, with small power consumption not for full scale workstation.
Jobs has always preferred to have a unique, and uniquely superior chip. When Motorola and then IBM stopped development on the ppc risc chip, Apple hadn’t the resources to take it over and was forced to use Intel. This company has a history of accomplishing miraculous fundamental conversions. I don’t think they would make this switch until they have all major concerns resolved, but it wouldn’t surprise me if they pull it off.
A move to AMD is a more credible story.
AMD have some interesting GPGPU/CPU hybrid tech in the pipeline and that would suit Open CL very well.
So I suppose you could say Apple will be well-ARMed.
Steve did say in his “transitions” keynote a few years back that the “designs for OS X must be processor independent.” Perhaps OS X has been leading a new “double life” with versions for Intel and ARM…just in case!
isn’t Apple trying to be too many things at once ?
Apple competes with Microsoft on OS, with HP/Dell on computers, with Google/Samsung/HTC on phones/tables, with Adobe on software and philosophy, with brick-n-mortar stores on iTunes, soon with netflix/pandora/amazon on cloud, and now even wants to compete with Intel/AMD on chip design ?
How is Apple doing “too many things” when they are so obviously doing all of them with such great success?
Some people just love to find a problem; and if they can’t find one, they’ll make one up.
not a chance. period.
Totally bogus. There is a big difference between iOS and Macos. The amount of processing power for all the services in Macos will kill an ARM processor.
Maybe in five years they will be powerful enough and be able to manage all the I/o.
Apple could come out with a superlight laptop running iOS but that really sounds cheesy and will compete with both iPad and the MacBook air.
To extend battery life it is possible to use a dual dynamic system that will allow the use of the arm processor for normal email and iPad, iPhone, and OSX lion apps. Intel processors for more demanding programs such as Photoshop.
Do not over look the advantages in heat abatement. Apple could slim down a tablet like laptop with high end Netbook power and when needed desktop class power. Allowing the use of a docking system similar to the iMac. Thus allowing multiple Tablet/Laptop to dock into one multiple tablet supporting desktop dock. Taking an edge to edge display as with the iPhone 5 and you can create a wide screen display with multiple arm/intel processors and a dock with the latest desktop Intel processors. All working together.
Maybe this is an assembly of the past patents into one modular hybrid system that is tablet, laptop, and desktop.
Ummm, just a thought.
It means the iPad will get bigger screen options/form factors, not that the MBP will leave Intel.
Anyone who believes this hasn’t spent the time reading through Intel’s road map.
If anything, I’d see Intel replacing ARM architecture and replacing Samsung for production.
The two actually go hand in hand. Intel has technologies coming online that nobody else has and can leverage this with core design resulting in chips that are a generation ahead of everyone else.
So a better question would be whether architecture can be (or should be) consolidated such that one fabbed chip could be used on everything from iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple TV, MacBook, MacBook Pro, Mac Mini and iMac, and if so, can Apple leverage this into a custom order at significant savings, early delivery, an efficiency from Intel.
Given other custom supply from Intel as well as the Thunderbolt development, it sure seems like this would make a lot of sense.
Do expect the A6 or maybe A7/A8 to be based on Intel CPU architecture instead of ARM, exclusive to Apple, and supplied by Intel as they’d be the only ones who could technically fab it.
Exactly. This article assumes Intel is just going to fall over and not innovate. 24-36 months from now, Intel will likely have an x86 chip that waxes arm the floor in battery life and power which is acceptable in power.
It also doesn’t take into account battery technology 2-3 years from now that can handle faster chips. So at the very least, you get a faster chip but the same if not improved battery life now.
In general I agree with MrEd.
Where I differ is Parallel computing OS design and ownership of intellectual property.
Does Intel remain Wintel or make its own OS? Why buy McAfee?
CPU design was connected to OS design Why? Who directs the future? Hardware? Software?
And finally WHO gets the Money? 50/50 49/51 60/40?
This is not going to happen. Not for awhile, anyway. The switch momentum is fueled by the fact that the faint of heart can feel reassured by the fact they can still run their legacy programs if they need to. In a while, when Mac hits 50% of consumers, a switch might be a good idea.
Intel/AMD both have a problem Microsoft Windows. If Windows is going to ARM CPUs then what use is Intel CPUs?
Apple twice before made new CPUs – 1 with IBM/Motorola 2 with Acorn for ARM. WHY? Because the others were BAD.
Apple has bought two CPU design companies -Why?
I think because the software patents are difficult to enforce but hardware patients are easier to enforce and make different to the rest of the breed.
So the choice is 1 partnership with Intel or 2 go it alone.
Apple already has a “partnership” with Intel over LightPeak – I believe poorly thought out. It is the internal integration of LightPeak with CPU/GPU design that is the future of computing.
Till Apple’s “partnership” with Intel it was Apples (?) idea.
So Apple’s independence of Intel’s CPU has messy ramification with LightPeak advance. The only way should be a partnership with Intel for specific “Apple CPU” to maintain cooperation in both spheres – LightPeak and CPU/GPU design!
It has a side effect that is useful to Apple and Intel in that they are not made by third parties. The IP remains American! And USA made!
Sounds like a new version of the old RISC v SISC debates. Oh well, I suppose we got a break from it for a while.
Maybe for a lower end laptop focused on portability and battery life. No way this happens on the MBP and if it does, I will not be getting one.
Its all about power usage. Ipad can run for 8 hours, imagine a laptop PC that can run for 1-2 days, only charging because you want to instead of because you have to. Couple that with SSD storage that does not look like a standard 2.5 laptop drive and you can offer entire laptops that are the thickness of today’s laptop screen part… very ipad like.
Yes, not being able to run windows code at full speed may hurt some sales, but in three years the shift could be on full force, and the need to run windows programs within the mac community may be very low.
I’m sure that os x already runs on ARM chips, it’s just unix code back in the lab. It wasn’t surprising when apple forked os x to run on both intel and power pc chips. Can’t wait to buy one. I hope they make one with a 15 inch screen and sell it with a connectionless induction charger.
Steve Jobs make a very clear statement, what they think about Netbooks. So what should be the difference if you change a low performance ARM chip for a low performance INTEL Atom? The basic problem would be the same. Even if future ARM Chips will do better compared to todays INTEL Core iX, but INTEL wont stop the development for X86 chips now.
My prediction is that Apple will be creating ARM, Intel Hybrid machines, and the user will be able to either manually switch between the two architectures, or the OS will dynamically switch between the two on an As needed basis, similar to what Apple has done with the graphics cards.
So when an user is doing non cpu intensive tasks, the OS will be on the ARM chip and the lower end video card, saving power, and dramatically extending battery life.
When a user fired up a pro application that demands more CPU, the OS will switch to the higher performing Intel Chip and the higher end graphics card.
Does no one else see this trend?
I also believe that the Macbook, Macbook Pro names with change. There will be only be Macbook Air ( ARM Only ) and The new Macbook Hybrid.