It makes me laugh whenever quantum leap is used. The quantum world is subatomic in nature. Why don't you use momentous step? Quantum leap is equivalent to no leap in measurement terms.
As a computer hardware engineer, this video made me insanely happy! It’s great to see the complex and nuanced details discussed in a way where, somehow, it has a low barrier to entry without feeling simplified for intermediate and advanced individuals in the field. This video is beautiful! You hit the nail on the head!
When Apple switched to Intel Steve told us that they had been running every version of OS X on Intel hardware all along. It would be naïve to think that they haven't been doing the exact same thing with the A series chips all along also.
Well, iOS and consorts were always based on the same base OS as MacOS X (later macOS), so in some way, this is definitely true. Whether they started to fully build Mac OS X (later macOS) for their iPhone/iPad chips in 2010, 2012 or 2016 doesn't really matter, but I think that "secret life" probably wasn't there all along on Apple's SoCs, but started quite a few years ago by now.
That was the most comprehensive, introspective, and accurate outlook on Apple’s new initiative. Thank you for sharing the details with so many it’s important for everyone to understand how monumental this move truly is.
Here's my iOS developer perspective. I do agree with what this video said, apple isn't selling us great hardware but are selling us better features every year but us developers use these features in our apps. I mean, I can literally make a photo app where we use machine learning to post the best picture from your camera roll to Instagram to get "more likes". Ever since Steve jobs came back to apple, it is about marketing and what each hardware brings to said marketing. When they released project catalyst, it blew my mind (and other developers minds) when it first got announced. Now with silicon coming to Macs, as a developer- I can easily make one app, tweak it a little for each device (when I mean a little, I really mean a little) and publish it to each apple device (maybe not necessarily the apple watch or TV) without any issues of working around Intel. Every WWDC, Apple brings developers a lot more features and functions of Swift to make our applications faster, more stable, and smoother for the user. This is where Apple truly stands out from Android because we know when we build an app for apple we will get the best results from said app. Of course all being said, apple really has to make an amazing silicon based Mac better than any iPad currently on the market or else the Mac will be an iPad in a bigger machine and nobody wants that (not even apple fanboys/girls). Apple has one job to bring success to the Mac and that is too compete with their biggest enemy and it is Apple itself. Apple is always competing with their selves with each iDevice and so far it's bringing in extremely great margins for them and now they have to do it with their Mac product line. As a developer, I really wish Apple make the Mac better as right now it is not as great what it can be (comparing it with their smaller iPad counterpart). Once these two years are up, and the silicon transition is over AND the silicon based Macs are successful- I, without any hesitation, will buy it because I know the features it will bring to the table
Even if Apple does make a decent chip, what are you going to use to create software for it? Xcode? That is probably the biggest piece of shit nowadays in terms of IDE's and compilers.
A mobile app is a mobile app, cant stand the utility of running it on a desktop. A mac has a very different use than an IPad one, and it should be designed in a completely different way in my opinion
TheItalianBard m. "can't stand the utility of running it on a desktop" This is so misleading. That's only true for feature-lacking mobile Apps. There are some great mobile Apps that can do all the stuff the Mac counterpart can do. As someone who likes to draw, the drawing Apps Clip Studio Paint and MediBang Paint have no missing features on the iPad and they even have the same interface as the Mac versions. In contrast, my favorite photo editing software has lots of features on MacOS, but the iOS/iPadOS apps are very lacking. Please keep in mind that drawing software and photo editing software are very closely related and the difference is sometimes blurred when then share many of the features, so there's absolutely no reason for Pixelmator to be lacking a lot of features when similar software has been shipping with all the desktop features for years
It is not the chip, it is the software the problem, is a totally new cpu with new instructions, that means you have to change all your code, I hope you do not have to start the program from the scratch, I don't know kind of weird, and the other thing it has to be fast sorry but to editing video it has to be fast.
Rene, As a “OLD” developer that has been off of the coding treadmill for a while my world is open again. I do not have to learn different APIs for Mac and iPad. I do not have to code to different architectures. I can reasonably scale from Watch to Mac. Swift, SwiftUi, on ASi standard hardware all work together for us. Do not let that door to opportunity hit you in the face, I have already run through it!
While I have concerns about new Apple silicon running 3D Animation software and the full Adobe Suite, watching this gives me the impression that they can, and will pull it off. I'm curious to see how this will play out. But for 99% of the Apple market, there is nothing the end user needs that Apple silicon cannot currently provide. And I say this as a Windows, Mac, Android, and occasionally Linux user.
I'm more excited for Adobe, this is their one chance to prove they can rewrite their code. If they do well, they might even win back the mobile/pro market (think of what Affinity, Pixelmator and Luma are doing with the iPad)
I have no doubts they will pull it off. Apple has already pulled off 3 hardware transitions exceptionally well. Their OS transition was also surprisingly well executed. Especially if you compare to how Windows went from win16 to win32 and dealt with their DOS legacy. By now Apple has really mastered hardware transitions. They tightly control the whole development pipeline from XCode, Swift/Objective-C/Clang down to LLVM bytecode. I actually think we are going to see much higher performance Macs. I don't think they are merely going to match intel x86 performance. I think they will kick them to the curb. At least for laptops. I don't know what higher end desktops will look like, but I am pretty confident a higher performance ARM can be made. Look at Graviton2 and Ampere ARM chips. They outperform intel x86. And those are not SoCs. They are general purpose stuff as far as I know. Apple OTOH will be able to build in specialized hardware to accelerate commonly used tasks. Thus even if the ARM cores themselves don't necessarily outperform intel, the whole package is likely to do so. I look at a talk about the Apple GPUs. The tight integration with the CPU on an SoC will allow total package performance which will be beyond what the competition currently sports.
for regular users (mom/pop/students) - this will be a non-event - it will be like the Window 32/64 migration in which you can download any windows program and it just works - same thing here - you can download anything on these new Macs and they will either run thru Rosetta translation or native and nobody will care
Finally someone not saying "arm macs". It's like saying an Intel cpu is equal to an AMD cpu because both are just x86... In case of SoC the difference is so much greater. The real advantage for Apple is not a faster general purpose CPU (the ARM part), but the specialist modules, which today already uses an area bigger than the CPU and GPU on the die. It's common knowledge in engineering that if your task requires too much of a CPU, you can either wait 5-10 years for the CPUs to catch up to the need or build a specialist module and get that today. But its expensive and hard, so only big players go for these options.
Modern x86 processors have been SoCs for ages. They have compute, graphics, IO, memory controllers on the chip. Connect RAM and storage, and expose the ports you want, and you're done. No chipset needed.
Well, x86 is the same Architecture so you usually don't differentiate other than brand... Usually you just say PC even... But Arm is a different architecture. So that's why you say it is arm.
Saying "ARM Macs" is useful for pointing out the change in instruction set architecture and existing application compatibility, rather than the change in performance. One of the things I'm most excited about from this transition is that proprietary desktop applications might finally end up being compiled for an architecture more open than x86. So for me, the phrases "ARM Macs", "ARM PCs", "x86 Macs", and "x86 PCs" make perfect sense.
@@ReneRitchie would you tend to agree that "back-tap" is a gimmick, considering that these taps are sometimes triggered by placing the phone on a table?
Just signed up for the 4K CuriosityStream and Nebula. Two items 1. Apple Pay didn’t work, error requiring a County. When the country was filled in, it was expecting the remainder of the credit card info. Tried twice, then just input my Apple Card info by hand and it worked. 2. CuriosityStream login doesn’t recognize the fill in of email and password from 1Password. Entered each by hand separately and it worked fine. Looking forward to the content.
The new 16' mbp is great. The next gen might be the best thing ever, but I'm waiting until next gen V2 to let them iterate, to let the software vendors catch up, etc.
Excellent analysis. I believe Steve Jobs learned early on from Xerox that you have to build your own software on your own hardware, and Apple Silicon is simply an extension of that philosophy, isn't it. It's also interesting to see Apple invest so much in personal computers, given the relatively small market share it already has in a shrinking market segment. They obviously believe the segment won't go away, and are willing to maximize its ongoing potential. However, to me, compatibility with widely available hardware and software has always been an issue with Macs, and Apple seems to be going back in that direction by departing from Intel. Then again, if you're willing to go with a Mac, compatibility is usually not the first concern. It's a move that comes with a lot of risk, but it's a risk Apple seems to have managed well in the past. It will be fascinating to see how this development turns out.
PREACH BRUTHA! I love it when you get on a rant like this! This is way bigger than most tech journalists are making this out to be. This will be a sea change in the entire industry too and I am so excited to see how it develops. The tide Apple produces in pursuit of excellence raises all ships. Great video.
I was working on phone processors when Apple announced ARM-64. Stunning achievement - the industry was shocked - the move happened years before it was expected. One question was "Why now? We don't have an addressing problem (yet)". It turns out that Apple used the transition to get a 2x speed up on some of the key iOS Objective C operations like creating and destroying objects - this improved real-app performance by a significant amount. Again, I don't think anyone foresaw this. I'm waiting to hear what magic they've done as they've move MacOS to ARM-64. (It's different because under iOS apps run in a small virtual space - I forget how big, something like 34-bits of address space - which lets various t^Hr^Hi^Hc^Hk^Hs^H techniques be used to overload pointers).
Nitpick time. The initial bit about ISA licenses not including access to the standard ARM core designs is flat out wrong, the ISA license is a high tier license that includes access to everything in lower license tiers, including the reference designs. In fact Apple's initial home grown chips were heavily based on ARM reference designs, with a few small customisations and additional components on the die. As they gained experience with the architecture they customised further, but their fist 64-bit chip was still heavily based on the ARM reference design. Even the secure enclave is actually an ARM design, though agains Apple customised it for their own purposes. It's not a matter of either-or, the Apple chips are heavily customised yes, but they are also very heavily derived from the ARM reference designs, and not clean sheet implementations of the ISA as implied here.
images.anandtech.com/doci/10366/1.PNG This is ARM's slide and they distinguish between Cortex and Architecture (ISA) license. For the latter ARM says: "Partner designs complete CPU architecture from scratch. No reference to Cortex designs." So they are not based on ARM's design.
Apple switching to ARM might have its little benefits But it’s just one more step to lock users more into the Apple walled garden and prevent compatibility with other OS like Windows MacBooks used to be great for all kind of Software developers because you could run all OS on them without the need to cross compile That’s why you saw pretty much every Silicon Valley engineer using Macs Now Windows is completely gone (for now) and as of right now you can only virtualize ARM Linux which doesn’t exist for every distribution And the other architecture means that there need to be cross compilers which also might not exist yet (if you want to develop for x86_64 which pretty much 98% of personal computers are running) So Apple pretty much fucks up every Software engineer that is not developing for Apple platforms
I think you are underestimating the number of ARM-based computers out there running Linux or some other operating system. It's true that Windows is crippled on ARM, but this is a problem Microsoft and its hardware partners need to figure out. You can't blame companies for trying to differentiate their products by doing things differently. I would suggest picking up a manual on ARM software development and adding it to your arsenal if you haven't already done so during the past decade or risk being left behind, because roughly half of all end-user computing devices sold these days are based on ARM, at least those not running any form of Windows.
This is one of the best developments for the computer market in a long time. I have been pretty negative on Apple for some time now, so I don't say this from a fan perspective. Tightly integrating system hardware and software opens exciting possibilities for performance that could more than justify the Apple price premium for me.
Just stumbled on this, the most insightful analysis I have seen so far. It gels with my own take on the recent macOS on Apple silicon announcements. Having been through the previous migration from PowerPC to Intel, Apple seems if anything, better prepared for this move. Can’t wait to see the result.
This is the type of high quality tech video that made me subscribe to Rene/Vector a while ago! I’m pretty tech savvy compared to the average person and yet you had me feeling like I know nothing about technology in this video. You set the bar very high and there are few (no?) tech RUclipsrs I know who can match( let alone surpass) what you’ve done here. Your diction and inviting, conversational tone combined with your knowledge of Apple, technology, and the tech industry is unparalleled!
So, Apple announced this during the developer conference. The main audience were developers. Developers care about stuff like instruction sets. We refer to Intel and AMD as x86, and ARM accross all manufacturers as ARM. Programs for this new thing will need to be ARM programs. So, for the audience it was announced to, it's ARM.
Well, Apple makes it's own custom Ax chips based on ARM ISA architecture (ARM V8A). That's an "architectural" license (not the Cortex or whatever cores). An architectural license IP from ARM Holdings is some sort of "perpetual license" (as used by Apple). But... not one realized that such kind of license also implies a ~2% fee out of every device sold that includes such ISA. It's going to be funny seeing Apple paying that toll to Nvidia if the latter eventually buys ARM Holdings (I don't think so, but maybe Nvidia's in the mood for revenge, who knows).
Just a theory, Hear me out, please. You know, apple’s been showing off a lot of server grade hardware lately, and the arm instruction set would be great for an efficient data centre. You know that Mac Pro with hyper V would be an unbelievable virtualisation solution. You know which OSs swift can run on? You know what OS they specifically showed besides macOS running on the test kit? It sure wasn’t windows ;). I keep thinking how a lot of windows users are switching to Linux, and that if Apple thinks that windows might just be about to start edging off the scene. If that’s true, and they are pushing to enter the enterprise space, maybe they’ve developed some Mac admin tools to run on top of a Debian flavour of Linux, natively on specific flavours of Mac hardware. Heterogenous Mac and Linux networks in corporations might just be “Windows’s” worst nightmare, seeing as client side windows will be easier to administer from Linux servers when Microsoft deepens Linux integration into windows. I guess they just think traditional windows is dead too. Note, Microsoft will be fine with this. But all that said, is apple about to make a giant leap forward with the Mac, far bigger than a silicon change? My opinion is that it is.
This is kind of IBM's playbook. They've been investing in modern RISC platforms like OpenPOWER. People often forget about IBM because they don't make consumer products and aren't 'sexy' but they've been innovating like crazy.
Amazon have already put in to production their second generation arm servers so I think that you definitely have something with the move to arm and what it could mean in the server space. Haven’t seen a xserve for years it might be time for a come back
So why do you think they chose ARM over RISC-V for the foundation of the customer silicon? I don't know that much about that end of technology, so I'm curious if you have any thoughts on that.
The following companies also license the ARMv8 instruction set rather for their SoCs than shipping Cortex cores: * nVidia * Cavium * Marvell * AMD * Qualcomm * Samsung * Fujitsu * HiSilicon So nVidia, Qualcomm and Samsung aren't using ARM, either?
People reckon it will be the death of x86, but it won't be. Gaming and graphic performance is superior on x86 then arm. The amount of cores Apple will need will be huge and it will get complicated to do the same thing on Intel or AMD
I didn’t even know Nebula existed until this video. I’ve been praying for a RUclips-like streaming service that was more like old RUclips and without the ads and ridiculous money-oriented algorithms. I’ve just downloaded and subscribed. I’m very excited. Please please keep it real and don’t lose touch of your audience like RUclips has.
I'm really loving to use iPhone SE2 every day which is my current go-to device, blazingly fast and taking photos at a different level: I fall in love with this iPhone. Its cheap price doesn't tell you the quality and experience you would get from it. I've tested in my codings (the game I'm developing) and found it is even faster than multi-core Intel i-7 laptops and all Android phones combined. Around the time I was shocked at the performance of this iPhone even if the price is a quarter of prices of the flagship Android phones and laptops, Apple announced "the plan of transition of Macs to Apple Silicon". And then I understood it myself. And then I finally stopped testing the game on iPhoneSE2, because it is too fast that I can not figure out if the newly deployed algorithm would be good: now I'm testing my game with a very old iPhone6+ or iPhone6S+. My conclusion is that for iPhoneSE2, 1 ms of time (or 0.001 seconds) is more like 1 year of work of a human, and in the same meaning 1 second is 1,000 year-of-human-work as well. (Reference: My game is loaded with tons of A.I. algorithms which may slow the normal laptops so much so that the gamer can not play my game on a normal laptop.)
This is why I love watching you’re videos Richie. Instead of jumping on the bandwagon you always think more critically and give me a xtra info I might not otherwise have
A ARM Mac is still a completely different instruction set than before. I think it’s perfectly reasonable for the media to call them that because your old programs will not natively work on these systems and potentially a lot of peripherals. Half of my apps stopped working on the latest Mac OS update... I cannot imagine how painful this process will be. Per usual, the time you’ve recovered they’ll invent something new to put you through.
It's correct to call it ARM because they are still using ARM instruction set. A CPU is just a chip that runs a certain type of instruction set. It doesn't matter if the design is totally custom. You could design a CPU that is big as an x86 processor and use arm instruction and that would still qualify as an ARM processor. All of this is just Apple naming scheme to make people believe that is something different. IT'S NOT. While being totally custom, it's still run the same instruction set. If Apple created an Apple silicon cpu that runs x86 instruction set, that would be called an x86 processor because well, it runs that instruction set. So it's not called ARM Mac because it uses ARM design. As an example Samsung used to create custom ARM CPU like Apple but still using the same instruction set. Nobody called that Samsung Silicon but Samsung Arm Chip. It's correct in saying this will be different as it's the entire ecosystem that Apple is developing and now more integrated in a way other companies can't
In the same vein that nobody calls them x86 Intel or x86 AMD chips, I think his point that was that it is equally fair to just call them Apple Silicon Chips
@@MrJairforce That's true but I'm not saying you have to call them Arm Chip. They can call it in any way they want as it's their product. What doesn't change is that you can still call it an arm chip in the sense it uses arm instruction set (which is the thing that defines a cpu). If Apple used RISC-V Instruction set, then it would be called a RISC-V Chip. Another easier example is this. If you pick two totally different people in America were they speak English as a first language, they are entirely different in every possible way. Are they the same? No, do they still speak the same language yes. So we can conclude that both are English speakers as they use the same instruction set (Alphabet and grammatical rules) while still being physically different.
You're completely correct up to the point where you say that it will take years for others to design new silicon. There are tons of talented hardware designers who have been sidelined in the last ten years because of productivity gains in the design software. Those people will be put back to work and they create an even bigger new wave.
It's so interesting to see that many actual developers that has hands-on experience with the DTK are all very pleased with it whereas a lot of people who doesn't write programs for macOS/iOS, or don't write programs at all, are so "worried" about this transition, based on their "understanding in performance, instruction set compatibilities... blah.. blah.. blah"
I'm really, really afraid of an ASi SOC for the Pro which would integrate system memory and video card, indicating user upgrades would not be possible at all.
Here's the thing though... PowerPC on Mac ultimately failed because it wasn't economical to design and build custom CPUs for the mac which had (and has) a pretty small market share. People will always expect more power from a desktop or laptop than a phone, and therefore they need different silicon. Sure that can be done with the ARM architecture, but will it really be economical to do so? I'm doubtful.
RamsesBic the Mac mini and iPad Pro are comparably priced, if you’re willing to pay 4-700 dollars more for the 5k screen and a little bit extra in a graphics card sure, but some just need a computer.
The prospect of a MacBook Pro that won’t overheat, or run fans at 110db, motivates me to wait before buying. There is no way I could buy an Intel machine now that’s already obsolete even before driving it off the lot. Great video!
What was missing to me is a note on apples integrated graphics. These don’t work like the ones we know where they steal part of your ram, instead they workmen your ram, so this insane copying of textures into graphics ram finally ends. (as shown in Apple's new WWDC 2020 Metal sessions)
OK but I think what is more important to most of us who are not system architects/programmers is the instruction set and how it will change what we can run and if what we run needs to be ported. So yes the Mac silicon may not be totally ARM but that not important because neither are PC's totally Intel/AMD there are other parts that have to come together. The importance is that it's IS moving from one instruction set to the other. I don't think any one is saying it's a bad move but it is a move and to say it's a move fro x86 to ARM is not wrong.
Well done! This is the best explanation I’ve seen about Apple silicon. I’ve read so many things written by folks who don’t seem to understand what Apple is actually doing with architecture transition. When I run across them going forward, I can just send them the link to this video. Thanks again.
Rene: Why would ASi be unable to run Windows (via Hypervisor at least) ...? Or is the concern that bootcamp was for game-play, and that (high performance Win10) will be over..?
Hi guys, I was thinking about buying a MacBook Pro, but after watching this, I’m thinking about waiting? I currently have 2013 MacBook Pro right now. How long would I have to wait for this technology that he’s talking about on the video?
We will see. But for sure, Apple want to sell as much as possible, so upgrading and repair was not on their radar for decades now. One reason why I'd like to see a complete prohibition of sale for most Apple products - unless they change their mind regarding repair and upgrading.
Exactly! I don’t think most people understand how fundamentally big of a change this is going to be. It’s not like they’re just replacing Intel chips and plugging in their own.
But what will Apple do with RAM pricing? If they make it impossible to add your own RAM, a 27” iMac will go from affordable to unaffordable, for me at least. I have a 2011 27” iMac that needs upgrading and I’m leaning towards buying the 2020 update based mostly on this unknown.
Interesting video, but somewhat misleading. You're making it sound like Apple controls the entire universe of how these new machines will perform by manufacturing their own chips. But I was there for the G4/G5 transition to Intel, and a HUGE part of its success will be dependent on software developers willingness to re-write their apps for the new Macs. Nothing runs in emulation as well as it does natively, and a Mac that can't run Photoshop or Microsoft Word is not a worth buying. Also, think of the hundreds of plug-ins apps like Premiere and Photoshop use. Those little developers have to re-tool their software for these new chips. That was one thing that made the jump to Intel somewhat clunky.
A closing point that I was hoping you would bring out is the "consistency factor" that Apple probably expects by tying up all the elements you mentioned. That way they can more tightly control their ecosystem to its minute details. If even the board designs get simplified, even the machines physical dimensions might and most likely will be affected by this change.
Depends on you. If you can wait a year, you’ll get a much better machine next year. If you need it now or need to run bootcamp with windows you should get the current mac. Windows will be possible in the future, but it won’t be that performant as on the current mbp
If you plan on buying a new one every 3 years or so it probably wouldn't matter too much. But if you intend to keep it for 5 years or more it is probably a bit risky as I doubt Apple will keep supporting x86 for that long. One day you wouldn't be able to update to the newest version of Mac OS X, the question is just how soon.
my guess -the same as Intel Macs - otherwise nobody will buy Intel Macs and they will need to continue selling those, how do I know? they have existing leases with countries/schools/businesses they will have to have support for many years (likely 6+ years)
The move makes perfect sense to me. The MacOS experience will be phenomenal because of the built in graphics on the chip itself. Other heavy lifting for things like editing will and can still be supported by egpu attachments or in the Mac Pro case, cards installed in the system. That kind of duty separation could create monster performance enhancements.
I think you are arguing semantics here. They will be "on ARM" for all intents and purposes and the big problem is for non-Apple software and the developers behind it. We have an existing x86 optimized software base, the need to support both architectures during a long transition (where high-end macs will continue to have x86 and AMD GPUs), and the pain of maintaining ARM software for mac and x86 sofware for Windows in the long term. If you look at what Adobe customers went through just with the elimination of 32-bit support in Catalina, it isn't outrageous to predict a long delay in software being ported and a huge segment of users crying about things not running on new ARM macs. What's more, right now, I can fire up a VM or a container on a macbook and run Windows and Linux software at almost full speed. That's going away. Emulation/translation is not a real solution. So, yeah, Apple will probably do a great job of integration and custom silicon and things will be great in 5 years. macOS may have lost half its users by then.
Clearly you know what you’re talking about. But a company worth bezillions, with bezillions in cash on hand, and buildings full of the best people on the planet working on this exact problem... I doubt they’re going to do something that’s going to result in them losing half of their user base in 5 years or whatever. Clearly that’s fucking retarded if you really think that.
P.s.-I would literally learn Mandarin before I switch to anything other than Mac OS. I’d learn a completely different set of programs before I switch back to using a PC.
@@kristiaankristiaan5278 I hope you are right. On the other hand, maybe those "best people" have figured out that most mac users will be happy with an iPad Pro with a keyboard bolted on and the money they save not buying chips from Intel will make up for the rest. The business experts often say to fire your worst customers.
One thing I’d like to see with the new MBP is a complete redesign from their ergonomic team. Integrate a sloping design like the MBA and please get rid of those sharp “dig into your wrist” corners of the current 13” MBP. Ergonomics is important in the user experience.
As an avid fan of hackintosh, I have been concerned about inevitable the lack of official support for intel since the announcement, but holding out that some group will be able to hack it all together once the transition is complete. This video really put into perspective how tightly apple can design and integrate their silicon into the OS and I think that will be the real death of hackintosh. Sad times
It's still arm though. It's custom apple arm chipsets, but if its using the arm instruction set, it's still arm. And lets be serious just calling it "Apple Silicon" is both pretentious and intentionally obscure. I agree this move will allow apple to do more with their ecosystem. If this ends with objectively better computers then I'll be just fine with it. In the end it's an arm based custom apple SoC. The part that actually bothers me is this could further make it impossible to economically repair a damaged macbooks. It means they have to really ramp up their engineering to better protect the end users investment into their platform. As it stands all componants are soldered on now. Including componants that are considered consumables. SSDs are a consumable, and the moment it fails you would have to replace the whole logicboard. It turns a variable cost part replacement whos cost is determined by just how much space you need or want to a near fixed cost that is nearly the msrp of the laptop to begin with. That difference is not insignificant, its the difference of a $200 part replacement and a $700+ or even $2000 or more on higher end models. All because your SSD ran out of R/R cycles, or had a fault the was missed during the binning peocess of the chips. Apple needs to appreciate the cost to the end user, and that computers are not a consumable like a roll of paper towels, but more like a vehicle. If you bought a truck, and had to replace the whole drive train because your brakes were failing, and had to replace the engine because the drive train and engine are serialized to eachother and that engine will not work with any other drivetrain besides the one the truck came with, that would be awefully expensive, and you would never want to buy that kind of truck again. But I've gotten far off topic, Apple Silicon is just a custom apple designed Arm SoC, we call intel and amd processors just by their brand name but everone knows they are x86 based. Trying to say these arent Arm based is muddying the waters, apple is still licensing the arm instructionset, the same way intel licenses the 64 bit architecture from amd they are both building their own silicon, but it doesnt make them something else from what they are. Apple's SoCs have features apple wants them to have, thats why apple is making them themselves. It's not a Qualcomm arm SoC, or a broadcom arm SoC, it's an Apple arm SoC.
As a company, it's always a good idea to keep it owned and operated instead of having a third-party do it for you. Sometimes a third-party can be beneficial, but in the long run it's better to go O&O.
The Qualcomm 4100+ is (finally!) not just another rehash of old phone chips. It might use some older ARM cores but they are not the same cores as the 3100 (and 2100) and they are part of a total package that is a much better design for wearable devices. So much so that I feel the "can't even pay them to make one" comment isn't justified. Other than that I think your analysis of Apple Silicon is better than most others that I have seen.
I guess people already forgot the 80s and early 90s. Apple been working with RISC almost as long as I have been alive. This is Apple's own version and vision of it on steroids and finally found a better market for it with more support than they had with The Apple Newton and Power PC era. Since Apple makes the hardware and software in house with their own ecosystem this is PERFECT. Microsoft, Intel among others that's on them but I am willing to almost bet my life that Apple can careless about them since Apple makes their own product for their own customers while Microsoft and Intel among others just license themselves off in the desktop field. It didn't need to take Apple years to make this move because they had it already in the background just making it better. Linux/Unix already ran on Arm (RISC) so the switch to intel was very easy so switching back with the latest tech will be even easier for Apple. The Newton was ahead of its time however things just got smaller. I loved your video and my comment was directed towards the concepts that confuse the new people in modern era.
What reactionary garbage? This is so simple. It's you guys who want to turn this into an issue. See my main post in the thread. It's ARM RISC technology built into Apple designed CPUs. What is so hard about that to accept? Sheesh.
@Derek Currie I actually meant most tech RUclipsrs who just regurgitate basic info and news I can very well find on my own, but it took no time to look up that it’s not actually the same as you say. It’d be like saying because all instrument families have general design, a piano is a piano or a sax is a sax.
This was a great explanation of the difference between ARM and ASi. I wonder how much of Apple's current design is still based on ARM CPU and GPU cores, even if it has diverged over the last few years?
Not having the license for the ARM chipset, doesn't mean it's not ARM. It just means Apple is to BS about paying so they tweaked it enough to skip licenses. So it still is Mac on ARM. You could not be more wrong
![Chino Pacas - Modo Capone (with Drake & Fuerza Regida) [Video Oficial]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zjv8TQ0gBkg/mqdefault.jpg)
Part 2 is live! ruclips.net/video/OmO_oewq_2c/видео.html
Also, the curiositystream.com/reneritchie/ bundle is back down to $14.79, which is amazing!
Steve Jobs quoted Alan Kay in a keynote: "People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware"
Darren Allatt Bill Gates, same keynote: “No, I can resist that.”
@@RyanRuark and Microsoft today makes its own hardware
@@mrbreaker101 not primarily. FOSS people do the exact opposite. :D
Red Phoenix I don’t think so. Look at arduino for example. Sooner or later, you want your own hardware.
Microsoft $1.56T vs Apple $1.67T ..... Apple is $10bn bigger
Apple's approach to integrated ecosystem has always made perfect sense to me. Now it takes a quantum leap.
I agree!
The tightly integrated software and hardware and ecosystem is the reason that makes it superior to other platforms
It makes me laugh whenever quantum leap is used. The quantum world is subatomic in nature. Why don't you use momentous step? Quantum leap is equivalent to no leap in measurement terms.
@@dggratton A quantum leap is literally the _smallest possible_ step forward
don gratton it's from the TV series
As a computer hardware engineer, this video made me insanely happy! It’s great to see the complex and nuanced details discussed in a way where, somehow, it has a low barrier to entry without feeling simplified for intermediate and advanced individuals in the field. This video is beautiful! You hit the nail on the head!
When Apple switched to Intel Steve told us that they had been running every version of OS X on Intel hardware all along. It would be naïve to think that they haven't been doing the exact same thing with the A series chips all along also.
Well, iOS and consorts were always based on the same base OS as MacOS X (later macOS), so in some way, this is definitely true. Whether they started to fully build Mac OS X (later macOS) for their iPhone/iPad chips in 2010, 2012 or 2016 doesn't really matter, but I think that "secret life" probably wasn't there all along on Apple's SoCs, but started quite a few years ago by now.
Exactly. I'd say risc has been there all along, was before intel so why not.
@@MrDDawson I'm pretty sure they said during the keynote that they have been trying and optimising it for years.
@@fryke Steve Jobs said Mac OS X was designed to be architecture independent from day one. Likely only drivers needed to be adjusted
@@fryke FreeBSD and Linux, yup running on all platforms.
That was the most comprehensive, introspective, and accurate outlook on Apple’s new initiative. Thank you for sharing the details with so many it’s important for everyone to understand how monumental this move truly is.
Here's my iOS developer perspective.
I do agree with what this video said, apple isn't selling us great hardware but are selling us better features every year but us developers use these features in our apps. I mean, I can literally make a photo app where we use machine learning to post the best picture from your camera roll to Instagram to get "more likes".
Ever since Steve jobs came back to apple, it is about marketing and what each hardware brings to said marketing. When they released project catalyst, it blew my mind (and other developers minds) when it first got announced.
Now with silicon coming to Macs, as a developer- I can easily make one app, tweak it a little for each device (when I mean a little, I really mean a little) and publish it to each apple device (maybe not necessarily the apple watch or TV) without any issues of working around Intel.
Every WWDC, Apple brings developers a lot more features and functions of Swift to make our applications faster, more stable, and smoother for the user. This is where Apple truly stands out from Android because we know when we build an app for apple we will get the best results from said app.
Of course all being said, apple really has to make an amazing silicon based Mac better than any iPad currently on the market or else the Mac will be an iPad in a bigger machine and nobody wants that (not even apple fanboys/girls).
Apple has one job to bring success to the Mac and that is too compete with their biggest enemy and it is Apple itself. Apple is always competing with their selves with each iDevice and so far it's bringing in extremely great margins for them and now they have to do it with their Mac product line.
As a developer, I really wish Apple make the Mac better as right now it is not as great what it can be (comparing it with their smaller iPad counterpart). Once these two years are up, and the silicon transition is over AND the silicon based Macs are successful- I, without any hesitation, will buy it because I know the features it will bring to the table
And this is why i‘m going to buy a mac for video editing. I have a top of the line gaming pc but premiere is unstable and unintuitive as it could be.
Even if Apple does make a decent chip, what are you going to use to create software for it? Xcode? That is probably the biggest piece of shit nowadays in terms of IDE's and compilers.
A mobile app is a mobile app, cant stand the utility of running it on a desktop. A mac has a very different use than an IPad one, and it should be designed in a completely different way in my opinion
TheItalianBard m. "can't stand the utility of running it on a desktop"
This is so misleading. That's only true for feature-lacking mobile Apps. There are some great mobile Apps that can do all the stuff the Mac counterpart can do. As someone who likes to draw, the drawing Apps Clip Studio Paint and MediBang Paint have no missing features on the iPad and they even have the same interface as the Mac versions. In contrast, my favorite photo editing software has lots of features on MacOS, but the iOS/iPadOS apps are very lacking. Please keep in mind that drawing software and photo editing software are very closely related and the difference is sometimes blurred when then share many of the features, so there's absolutely no reason for Pixelmator to be lacking a lot of features when similar software has been shipping with all the desktop features for years
It is not the chip, it is the software the problem, is a totally new cpu with new instructions, that means you have to change all your code, I hope you do not have to start the program from the scratch, I don't know kind of weird, and the other thing it has to be fast sorry but to editing video it has to be fast.
Rene,
As a “OLD” developer that has been off of the coding treadmill for a while my world is open again. I do not have to learn different APIs for Mac and iPad. I do not have to code to different architectures. I can reasonably scale from Watch to Mac. Swift, SwiftUi, on ASi standard hardware all work together for us. Do not let that door to opportunity hit you in the face, I have already run through it!
While I have concerns about new Apple silicon running 3D Animation software and the full Adobe Suite, watching this gives me the impression that they can, and will pull it off.
I'm curious to see how this will play out. But for 99% of the Apple market, there is nothing the end user needs that Apple silicon cannot currently provide.
And I say this as a Windows, Mac, Android, and occasionally Linux user.
I'm more excited for Adobe, this is their one chance to prove they can rewrite their code. If they do well, they might even win back the mobile/pro market (think of what Affinity, Pixelmator and Luma are doing with the iPad)
I have no doubts they will pull it off. Apple has already pulled off 3 hardware transitions exceptionally well. Their OS transition was also surprisingly well executed. Especially if you compare to how Windows went from win16 to win32 and dealt with their DOS legacy.
By now Apple has really mastered hardware transitions. They tightly control the whole development pipeline from XCode, Swift/Objective-C/Clang down to LLVM bytecode.
I actually think we are going to see much higher performance Macs. I don't think they are merely going to match intel x86 performance. I think they will kick them to the curb. At least for laptops. I don't know what higher end desktops will look like, but I am pretty confident a higher performance ARM can be made.
Look at Graviton2 and Ampere ARM chips. They outperform intel x86. And those are not SoCs. They are general purpose stuff as far as I know. Apple OTOH will be able to build in specialized hardware to accelerate commonly used tasks. Thus even if the ARM cores themselves don't necessarily outperform intel, the whole package is likely to do so.
I look at a talk about the Apple GPUs. The tight integration with the CPU on an SoC will allow total package performance which will be beyond what the competition currently sports.
for regular users (mom/pop/students) - this will be a non-event - it will be like the Window 32/64 migration in which you can download any windows program and it just works - same thing here - you can download anything on these new Macs and they will either run thru Rosetta translation or native and nobody will care
This might be my favourite RR video yet. Such a clean breakdown. 🙂
Wow, thank you!
Seriously, it's the best ever.
It was amazing ! The other YT tech channels gotta sit and learn from him !
Finally someone not saying "arm macs". It's like saying an Intel cpu is equal to an AMD cpu because both are just x86... In case of SoC the difference is so much greater.
The real advantage for Apple is not a faster general purpose CPU (the ARM part), but the specialist modules, which today already uses an area bigger than the CPU and GPU on the die.
It's common knowledge in engineering that if your task requires too much of a CPU, you can either wait 5-10 years for the CPUs to catch up to the need or build a specialist module and get that today. But its expensive and hard, so only big players go for these options.
Modern x86 processors have been SoCs for ages. They have compute, graphics, IO, memory controllers on the chip. Connect RAM and storage, and expose the ports you want, and you're done. No chipset needed.
Is ASi still using the ARM instruction set? If so, then it's an ARM CPU.
Well, x86 is the same Architecture so you usually don't differentiate other than brand... Usually you just say PC even... But Arm is a different architecture. So that's why you say it is arm.
Saying "ARM Macs" is useful for pointing out the change in instruction set architecture and existing application compatibility, rather than the change in performance. One of the things I'm most excited about from this transition is that proprietary desktop applications might finally end up being compiled for an architecture more open than x86. So for me, the phrases "ARM Macs", "ARM PCs", "x86 Macs", and "x86 PCs" make perfect sense.
"Innovation distinguishes between a leader and a follower."
--Steve Jobs
That's true, and equally important to distinguish gimmicks from pushing technology forward.
@@ReneRitchie would you tend to agree that "back-tap" is a gimmick, considering that these taps are sometimes triggered by placing the phone on a table?
@@LacklusterOfficial That doesn't suggest a gimmick. It suggests a poor / beta implementation.
@@darrenblack2594 if it were to remain as a poor / beta implementation, only then I'd consider it a gimmick; like bixby for example lol
LacklusterOfficial I don’t think it’s a “gimmick” when it’s in reality an accessibility feature
Love to see the subscriber progress on the new channel!
Let’s give Rene that 100K plague already
Same tbh. 😂
You are pushing me away from upgrading my 2015 MBA this September on the hope that 2021 MBA/equivalent on Apple SoC is gonna be FAR SUPERIOR
I'm still running on a 2011 MBP 17 and a 2013 MBP 13, both working seamlessly for what I do, and I'm waiting for Apple Silicon.
That is a difference of 3 months (Apple said "by the end of the year"). You are the only one who can decide.
I would not go for the first generation of Apple silicon Macs. They always have problems that are fixed by the 2nd generation.
Same here, I could use the update but I guess I’ll wait
In the same boat, and I totally know that you're right.
Just signed up for the 4K CuriosityStream and Nebula. Two items 1. Apple Pay didn’t work, error requiring a County. When the country was filled in, it was expecting the remainder of the credit card info. Tried twice, then just input my Apple Card info by hand and it worked. 2. CuriosityStream login doesn’t recognize the fill in of email and password from 1Password. Entered each by hand separately and it worked fine. Looking forward to the content.
I just wish the 16” MacBook wasn’t an even longer wait for Apple silicon. I unfortunately won’t be able to wait for it.
that’s my situation right now
Yup.. guess ill try it next time around 🤷🏾♂️
Just bought my mbp 16inch today
The new 16' mbp is great. The next gen might be the best thing ever, but I'm waiting until next gen V2 to let them iterate, to let the software vendors catch up, etc.
“They gave absolutely zero fabs about leapfrogging them all as fast as Sroujily possible”
Great punmanship. 😆💯
Rene has the best puns :)
Fabs
Well, let's see when they launch the first MAC device. Hopefully a budget Mac Mini. I would buy it in a heartbeat.
Current rumors suggest a MacBook Pro and iMac, like last time, but I'd love to see an ASi Mac mini as well.
Would love to see that Mac Mini as well!
Macbook pro 13 inch or 16 inch?
@@aniplays9216 Pretty sure that it will be a 13''. Get them out ASAP with the iMac.
@M Livehd Pretty sure that it will be a 13''. Get them out ASAP with the iMac.
The thing I like about how are you narrator videos that is the closest narration to a tech article
Yet another incredible video! I really appreciate your thorough analysis and deep understanding of Apple
Excellent analysis. I believe Steve Jobs learned early on from Xerox that you have to build your own software on your own hardware, and Apple Silicon is simply an extension of that philosophy, isn't it.
It's also interesting to see Apple invest so much in personal computers, given the relatively small market share it already has in a shrinking market segment. They obviously believe the segment won't go away, and are willing to maximize its ongoing potential.
However, to me, compatibility with widely available hardware and software has always been an issue with Macs, and Apple seems to be going back in that direction by departing from Intel. Then again, if you're willing to go with a Mac, compatibility is usually not the first concern.
It's a move that comes with a lot of risk, but it's a risk Apple seems to have managed well in the past. It will be fascinating to see how this development turns out.
PREACH BRUTHA! I love it when you get on a rant like this! This is way bigger than most tech journalists are making this out to be. This will be a sea change in the entire industry too and I am so excited to see how it develops. The tide Apple produces in pursuit of excellence raises all ships. Great video.
I was working on phone processors when Apple announced ARM-64. Stunning achievement - the industry was shocked - the move happened years before it was expected. One question was "Why now? We don't have an addressing problem (yet)". It turns out that Apple used the transition to get a 2x speed up on some of the key iOS Objective C operations like creating and destroying objects - this improved real-app performance by a significant amount. Again, I don't think anyone foresaw this. I'm waiting to hear what magic they've done as they've move MacOS to ARM-64. (It's different because under iOS apps run in a small virtual space - I forget how big, something like 34-bits of address space - which lets various t^Hr^Hi^Hc^Hk^Hs^H techniques be used to overload pointers).
Nitpick time. The initial bit about ISA licenses not including access to the standard ARM core designs is flat out wrong, the ISA license is a high tier license that includes access to everything in lower license tiers, including the reference designs. In fact Apple's initial home grown chips were heavily based on ARM reference designs, with a few small customisations and additional components on the die. As they gained experience with the architecture they customised further, but their fist 64-bit chip was still heavily based on the ARM reference design. Even the secure enclave is actually an ARM design, though agains Apple customised it for their own purposes. It's not a matter of either-or, the Apple chips are heavily customised yes, but they are also very heavily derived from the ARM reference designs, and not clean sheet implementations of the ISA as implied here.
I came here to say this. Thanks!
images.anandtech.com/doci/10366/1.PNG
This is ARM's slide and they distinguish between Cortex and Architecture (ISA) license. For the latter ARM says: "Partner designs complete CPU architecture from scratch. No reference to Cortex designs." So they are not based on ARM's design.
Apple switching to ARM might have its little benefits
But it’s just one more step to lock users more into the Apple walled garden and prevent compatibility with other OS like Windows
MacBooks used to be great for all kind of Software developers because you could run all OS on them without the need to cross compile
That’s why you saw pretty much every Silicon Valley engineer using Macs
Now Windows is completely gone (for now) and as of right now you can only virtualize ARM Linux which doesn’t exist for every distribution
And the other architecture means that there need to be cross compilers which also might not exist yet (if you want to develop for x86_64 which pretty much 98% of personal computers are running)
So Apple pretty much fucks up every Software engineer that is not developing for Apple platforms
So true!
Disagree. ARM is the future. Microsoft, Google, Facebook and other Big Companies already is developing apps optimized for ARM.
I think you are underestimating the number of ARM-based computers out there running Linux or some other operating system. It's true that Windows is crippled on ARM, but this is a problem Microsoft and its hardware partners need to figure out. You can't blame companies for trying to differentiate their products by doing things differently. I would suggest picking up a manual on ARM software development and adding it to your arsenal if you haven't already done so during the past decade or risk being left behind, because roughly half of all end-user computing devices sold these days are based on ARM, at least those not running any form of Windows.
This is one of the best developments for the computer market in a long time. I have been pretty negative on Apple for some time now, so I don't say this from a fan perspective. Tightly integrating system hardware and software opens exciting possibilities for performance that could more than justify the Apple price premium for me.
I think of smart homes. Imagine you have a problem in your smart home and have to contact every single company you bought stuff from ?
Just stumbled on this, the most insightful analysis I have seen so far. It gels with my own take on the recent macOS on Apple silicon announcements. Having been through the previous migration from PowerPC to Intel, Apple seems if anything, better prepared for this move. Can’t wait to see the result.
Your coverage for Apple ARM to IOS to macOS and iPadOS has been gold!
This is the type of content I follow you for.
Amazing break down! 😍😍😍
This is the type of high quality tech video that made me subscribe to Rene/Vector a while ago! I’m pretty tech savvy compared to the average person and yet you had me feeling like I know nothing about technology in this video. You set the bar very high and there are few (no?) tech RUclipsrs I know who can match( let alone surpass) what you’ve done here. Your diction and inviting, conversational tone combined with your knowledge of Apple, technology, and the tech industry is unparalleled!
So, Apple announced this during the developer conference. The main audience were developers. Developers care about stuff like instruction sets. We refer to Intel and AMD as x86, and ARM accross all manufacturers as ARM. Programs for this new thing will need to be ARM programs. So, for the audience it was announced to, it's ARM.
Well, Apple makes it's own custom Ax chips based on ARM ISA architecture (ARM V8A). That's an "architectural" license (not the Cortex or whatever cores). An architectural license IP from ARM Holdings is some sort of "perpetual license" (as used by Apple). But... not one realized that such kind of license also implies a ~2% fee out of every device sold that includes such ISA.
It's going to be funny seeing Apple paying that toll to Nvidia if the latter eventually buys ARM Holdings (I don't think so, but maybe Nvidia's in the mood for revenge, who knows).
Question why is there so much bad press about Apple silicon M1. I have the Apple M1 MacBook Pro. I think it’s grate so what’s the problem?
Got through half of this. I’m an engineer, so the terminology wasn’t the problem. But this guy is annoying.
Just a theory, Hear me out, please.
You know, apple’s been showing off a lot of server grade hardware lately, and the arm instruction set would be great for an efficient data centre.
You know that Mac Pro with hyper V would be an unbelievable virtualisation solution.
You know which OSs swift can run on?
You know what OS they specifically showed besides macOS running on the test kit? It sure wasn’t windows ;).
I keep thinking how a lot of windows users are switching to Linux, and that if Apple thinks that windows might just be about to start edging off the scene. If that’s true, and they are pushing to enter the enterprise space, maybe they’ve developed some Mac admin tools to run on top of a Debian flavour of Linux, natively on specific flavours of Mac hardware. Heterogenous Mac and Linux networks in corporations might just be “Windows’s” worst nightmare, seeing as client side windows will be easier to administer from Linux servers when Microsoft deepens Linux integration into windows. I guess they just think traditional windows is dead too. Note, Microsoft will be fine with this. But all that said, is apple about to make a giant leap forward with the Mac, far bigger than a silicon change? My opinion is that it is.
This is kind of IBM's playbook. They've been investing in modern RISC platforms like OpenPOWER. People often forget about IBM because they don't make consumer products and aren't 'sexy' but they've been innovating like crazy.
I TOTALLY AGREE!!!! This thing is much bigger than just an upgraded processor..
Amazon have already put in to production their second generation arm servers so I think that you definitely have something with the move to arm and what it could mean in the server space. Haven’t seen a xserve for years it might be time for a come back
The reason no one has been leaving windows is because games, that's the only reason.
So why do you think they chose ARM over RISC-V for the foundation of the customer silicon? I don't know that much about that end of technology, so I'm curious if you have any thoughts on that.
The following companies also license the ARMv8 instruction set rather for their SoCs than shipping Cortex cores:
* nVidia
* Cavium
* Marvell
* AMD
* Qualcomm
* Samsung
* Fujitsu
* HiSilicon
So nVidia, Qualcomm and Samsung aren't using ARM, either?
People reckon it will be the death of x86, but it won't be. Gaming and graphic performance is superior on x86 then arm. The amount of cores Apple will need will be huge and it will get complicated to do the same thing on Intel or AMD
If I’m in the market for a MacBook Pro, should I wait?
Rene is the boss of explanatory videos. Keep them coming sir, nicely done 👌
I didn’t even know Nebula existed until this video. I’ve been praying for a RUclips-like streaming service that was more like old RUclips and without the ads and ridiculous money-oriented algorithms. I’ve just downloaded and subscribed. I’m very excited. Please please keep it real and don’t lose touch of your audience like RUclips has.
I'm really loving to use iPhone SE2 every day which is my current go-to device, blazingly fast and taking photos at a different level: I fall in love with this iPhone. Its cheap price doesn't tell you the quality and experience you would get from it. I've tested in my codings (the game I'm developing) and found it is even faster than multi-core Intel i-7 laptops and all Android phones combined. Around the time I was shocked at the performance of this iPhone even if the price is a quarter of prices of the flagship Android phones and laptops, Apple announced "the plan of transition of Macs to Apple Silicon". And then I understood it myself. And then I finally stopped testing the game on iPhoneSE2, because it is too fast that I can not figure out if the newly deployed algorithm would be good: now I'm testing my game with a very old iPhone6+ or iPhone6S+. My conclusion is that for iPhoneSE2, 1 ms of time (or 0.001 seconds) is more like 1 year of work of a human, and in the same meaning 1 second is 1,000 year-of-human-work as well. (Reference: My game is loaded with tons of A.I. algorithms which may slow the normal laptops so much so that the gamer can not play my game on a normal laptop.)
This is why I love watching you’re videos Richie. Instead of jumping on the bandwagon you always think more critically and give me a xtra info I might not otherwise have
A ARM Mac is still a completely different instruction set than before. I think it’s perfectly reasonable for the media to call them that because your old programs will not natively work on these systems and potentially a lot of peripherals. Half of my apps stopped working on the latest Mac OS update... I cannot imagine how painful this process will be. Per usual, the time you’ve recovered they’ll invent something new to put you through.
It's correct to call it ARM because they are still using ARM instruction set. A CPU is just a chip that runs a certain type of instruction set. It doesn't matter if the design is totally custom. You could design a CPU that is big as an x86 processor and use arm instruction and that would still qualify as an ARM processor. All of this is just Apple naming scheme to make people believe that is something different. IT'S NOT. While being totally custom, it's still run the same instruction set. If Apple created an Apple silicon cpu that runs x86 instruction set, that would be called an x86 processor because well, it runs that instruction set. So it's not called ARM Mac because it uses ARM design. As an example Samsung used to create custom ARM CPU like Apple but still using the same instruction set. Nobody called that Samsung Silicon but Samsung Arm Chip.
It's correct in saying this will be different as it's the entire ecosystem that Apple is developing and now more integrated in a way other companies can't
In the same vein that nobody calls them x86 Intel or x86 AMD chips, I think his point that was that it is equally fair to just call them Apple Silicon Chips
@@MrJairforce That's true but I'm not saying you have to call them Arm Chip. They can call it in any way they want as it's their product. What doesn't change is that you can still call it an arm chip in the sense it uses arm instruction set (which is the thing that defines a cpu). If Apple used RISC-V Instruction set, then it would be called a RISC-V Chip.
Another easier example is this. If you pick two totally different people in America were they speak English as a first language, they are entirely different in every possible way. Are they the same? No, do they still speak the same language yes. So we can conclude that both are English speakers as they use the same instruction set (Alphabet and grammatical rules) while still being physically different.
joker102 ahh, gotcha
Interesting video. What does this mean for software developers? Will any new market niches appear on this new platform?
best analysis on any apple *anything* i have seen/heard/read in a long long time... like before SJ left Apple Computer.
You're completely correct up to the point where you say that it will take years for others to design new silicon. There are tons of talented hardware designers who have been sidelined in the last ten years because of productivity gains in the design software. Those people will be put back to work and they create an even bigger new wave.
It's so interesting to see that many actual developers that has hands-on experience with the DTK are all very pleased with it whereas a lot of people who doesn't write programs for macOS/iOS, or don't write programs at all, are so "worried" about this transition, based on their "understanding in performance, instruction set compatibilities... blah.. blah.. blah"
I'm really, really afraid of an ASi SOC for the Pro which would integrate system memory and video card, indicating user upgrades would not be possible at all.
It wasn't even possible in the first place on the recent Macbooks.
@@supertigerman013 I meant the Mac Pro, forget about anything in the Macbook and MBP line having anything user upgradeable
So should I just buy the current 13” model?
Here's the thing though... PowerPC on Mac ultimately failed because it wasn't economical to design and build custom CPUs for the mac which had (and has) a pretty small market share. People will always expect more power from a desktop or laptop than a phone, and therefore they need different silicon. Sure that can be done with the ARM architecture, but will it really be economical to do so? I'm doubtful.
ASi has me seriously excited for a mac mini. I only need the power of about a iPad Pro. I'm excited for a small package that is silent and optimized.
You will still need a screen. If you want a really good one why not buy an iMac?
RamsesBic the extra screen is almost 1k for the price of the internal comparison,
RamsesBic I have a 4K Display
@@lwwells The 27" iMac is 5K and all specs are better. I have chosen an iMac every time when I have compared. But that is me... :-)
RamsesBic the Mac mini and iPad Pro are comparably priced, if you’re willing to pay 4-700 dollars more for the 5k screen and a little bit extra in a graphics card sure, but some just need a computer.
The prospect of a MacBook Pro that won’t overheat, or run fans at 110db, motivates me to wait before buying. There is no way I could buy an Intel machine now that’s already obsolete even before driving it off the lot. Great video!
What was missing to me is a note on apples integrated graphics. These don’t work like the ones we know where they steal part of your ram, instead they workmen your ram, so this insane copying of textures into graphics ram finally ends. (as shown in Apple's new WWDC 2020 Metal sessions)
OK but I think what is more important to most of us who are not system architects/programmers is the instruction set and how it will change what we can run and if what we run needs to be ported. So yes the Mac silicon may not be totally ARM but that not important because neither are PC's totally Intel/AMD there are other parts that have to come together. The importance is that it's IS moving from one instruction set to the other. I don't think any one is saying it's a bad move but it is a move and to say it's a move fro x86 to ARM is not wrong.
Well done! This is the best explanation I’ve seen about Apple silicon. I’ve read so many things written by folks who don’t seem to understand what Apple is actually doing with architecture transition. When I run across them going forward, I can just send them the link to this video. Thanks again.
Your videos are so well done. Thank you for your work to make such great content.
Rene: Why would ASi be unable to run Windows (via Hypervisor at least) ...?
Or is the concern that bootcamp was for game-play, and that (high performance Win10) will be over..?
Hi guys, I was thinking about buying a MacBook Pro, but after watching this, I’m thinking about waiting? I currently have 2013 MacBook Pro right now. How long would I have to wait for this technology that he’s talking about on the video?
Gio Garnada
Well Apple said they will release an Arm Mac before Of the year - think October
But the question is, will it be possible installing 3rd party app outside from app store in Apple silicon Mac?
Now that I think about it. Does component inside chip breaking means a complete brick Macs? Also, no more upgradable RAM even on iMacs/Mac mini?
We will see. But for sure, Apple want to sell as much as possible, so upgrading and repair was not on their radar for decades now. One reason why I'd like to see a complete prohibition of sale for most Apple products - unless they change their mind regarding repair and upgrading.
LumaFusion can handle real-time 6 4K video/audio tracks plus additional 6 audio tracks on iPad Pro.
I was already geeking out but now im double geeking out
Exactly! I don’t think most people understand how fundamentally big of a change this is going to be. It’s not like they’re just replacing Intel chips and plugging in their own.
This is such a superb video, well done Rene! Excellent explanations and in-depth analysis.
But what will Apple do with RAM pricing? If they make it impossible to add your own RAM, a 27” iMac will go from affordable to unaffordable, for me at least.
I have a 2011 27” iMac that needs upgrading and I’m leaning towards buying the 2020 update based mostly on this unknown.
Interesting video, but somewhat misleading. You're making it sound like Apple controls the entire universe of how these new machines will perform by manufacturing their own chips. But I was there for the G4/G5 transition to Intel, and a HUGE part of its success will be dependent on software developers willingness to re-write their apps for the new Macs. Nothing runs in emulation as well as it does natively, and a Mac that can't run Photoshop or Microsoft Word is not a worth buying. Also, think of the hundreds of plug-ins apps like Premiere and Photoshop use. Those little developers have to re-tool their software for these new chips. That was one thing that made the jump to Intel somewhat clunky.
Had low expectations when this vid made it to suggested list. Boy was I wrong.
Man, you condensed a lot of reading into one video. 👍🏼
A closing point that I was hoping you would bring out is the "consistency factor" that Apple probably expects by tying up all the elements you mentioned. That way they can more tightly control their ecosystem to its minute details. If even the board designs get simplified, even the machines physical dimensions might and most likely will be affected by this change.
Should i buy the 16” MBP, or wait a year for the ARM 16” next year
Depends on you. If you can wait a year, you’ll get a much better machine next year. If you need it now or need to run bootcamp with windows you should get the current mac. Windows will be possible in the future, but it won’t be that performant as on the current mbp
If you plan on buying a new one every 3 years or so it probably wouldn't matter too much. But if you intend to keep it for 5 years or more it is probably a bit risky as I doubt Apple will keep supporting x86 for that long. One day you wouldn't be able to update to the newest version of Mac OS X, the question is just how soon.
uh.. so what did i get wrong about apple silicon?...red roses are red...blue berrys are blue...thank you for pointing out the obvious..facts.
Your analysis is so high quality. It's a level above many others.
How much will arm macs cost though?
my guess -the same as Intel Macs - otherwise nobody will buy Intel Macs and they will need to continue selling those, how do I know? they have existing leases with countries/schools/businesses they will have to have support for many years (likely 6+ years)
The move makes perfect sense to me. The MacOS experience will be phenomenal because of the built in graphics on the chip itself.
Other heavy lifting for things like editing will and can still be supported by egpu attachments or in the Mac Pro case, cards installed in the system. That kind of duty separation could create monster performance enhancements.
I think you are arguing semantics here. They will be "on ARM" for all intents and purposes and the big problem is for non-Apple software and the developers behind it. We have an existing x86 optimized software base, the need to support both architectures during a long transition (where high-end macs will continue to have x86 and AMD GPUs), and the pain of maintaining ARM software for mac and x86 sofware for Windows in the long term. If you look at what Adobe customers went through just with the elimination of 32-bit support in Catalina, it isn't outrageous to predict a long delay in software being ported and a huge segment of users crying about things not running on new ARM macs.
What's more, right now, I can fire up a VM or a container on a macbook and run Windows and Linux software at almost full speed. That's going away. Emulation/translation is not a real solution.
So, yeah, Apple will probably do a great job of integration and custom silicon and things will be great in 5 years. macOS may have lost half its users by then.
Clearly you know what you’re talking about. But a company worth bezillions, with bezillions in cash on hand, and buildings full of the best people on the planet working on this exact problem... I doubt they’re going to do something that’s going to result in them losing half of their user base in 5 years or whatever. Clearly that’s fucking retarded if you really think that.
P.s.-I would literally learn Mandarin before I switch to anything other than Mac OS. I’d learn a completely different set of programs before I switch back to using a PC.
@@kristiaankristiaan5278 I hope you are right. On the other hand, maybe those "best people" have figured out that most mac users will be happy with an iPad Pro with a keyboard bolted on and the money they save not buying chips from Intel will make up for the rest. The business experts often say to fire your worst customers.
One thing I’d like to see with the new MBP is a complete redesign from their ergonomic team. Integrate a sloping design like the MBA and please get rid of those sharp “dig into your wrist” corners of the current 13” MBP. Ergonomics is important in the user experience.
Such an excellent presentation of the difference the transition portends- and I love the way you talk it through. Thanks.
As an avid fan of hackintosh, I have been concerned about inevitable the lack of official support for intel since the announcement, but holding out that some group will be able to hack it all together once the transition is complete. This video really put into perspective how tightly apple can design and integrate their silicon into the OS and I think that will be the real death of hackintosh. Sad times
It's still arm though. It's custom apple arm chipsets, but if its using the arm instruction set, it's still arm. And lets be serious just calling it "Apple Silicon" is both pretentious and intentionally obscure. I agree this move will allow apple to do more with their ecosystem. If this ends with objectively better computers then I'll be just fine with it. In the end it's an arm based custom apple SoC. The part that actually bothers me is this could further make it impossible to economically repair a damaged macbooks. It means they have to really ramp up their engineering to better protect the end users investment into their platform. As it stands all componants are soldered on now. Including componants that are considered consumables. SSDs are a consumable, and the moment it fails you would have to replace the whole logicboard. It turns a variable cost part replacement whos cost is determined by just how much space you need or want to a near fixed cost that is nearly the msrp of the laptop to begin with. That difference is not insignificant, its the difference of a $200 part replacement and a $700+ or even $2000 or more on higher end models. All because your SSD ran out of R/R cycles, or had a fault the was missed during the binning peocess of the chips. Apple needs to appreciate the cost to the end user, and that computers are not a consumable like a roll of paper towels, but more like a vehicle. If you bought a truck, and had to replace the whole drive train because your brakes were failing, and had to replace the engine because the drive train and engine are serialized to eachother and that engine will not work with any other drivetrain besides the one the truck came with, that would be awefully expensive, and you would never want to buy that kind of truck again. But I've gotten far off topic, Apple Silicon is just a custom apple designed Arm SoC, we call intel and amd processors just by their brand name but everone knows they are x86 based. Trying to say these arent Arm based is muddying the waters, apple is still licensing the arm instructionset, the same way intel licenses the 64 bit architecture from amd they are both building their own silicon, but it doesnt make them something else from what they are. Apple's SoCs have features apple wants them to have, thats why apple is making them themselves. It's not a Qualcomm arm SoC, or a broadcom arm SoC, it's an Apple arm SoC.
Buying gen 1 doesn't feel very comfortable. Which sucks cause I need to buy something soon.
Your hoodie/jacket game is on point!
Ha, I need more!
Loves when Rene comes up with a video titled "Wrong".
Ha! It's a fun construct to work with.
As a company, it's always a good idea to keep it owned and operated instead of having a third-party do it for you. Sometimes a third-party can be beneficial, but in the long run it's better to go O&O.
You have really outdone yourself this time, Rene! Great video!
The Qualcomm 4100+ is (finally!) not just another rehash of old phone chips. It might use some older ARM cores but they are not the same cores as the 3100 (and 2100) and they are part of a total package that is a much better design for wearable devices. So much so that I feel the "can't even pay them to make one" comment isn't justified. Other than that I think your analysis of Apple Silicon is better than most others that I have seen.
I guess people already forgot the 80s and early 90s. Apple been working with RISC almost as long as I have been alive. This is Apple's own version and vision of it on steroids and finally found a better market for it with more support than they had with The Apple Newton and Power PC era. Since Apple makes the hardware and software in house with their own ecosystem this is PERFECT. Microsoft, Intel among others that's on them but I am willing to almost bet my life that Apple can careless about them since Apple makes their own product for their own customers while Microsoft and Intel among others just license themselves off in the desktop field. It didn't need to take Apple years to make this move because they had it already in the background just making it better. Linux/Unix already ran on Arm (RISC) so the switch to intel was very easy so switching back with the latest tech will be even easier for Apple. The Newton was ahead of its time however things just got smaller. I loved your video and my comment was directed towards the concepts that confuse the new people in modern era.
Awesome vid Rene...keep up the great work
The way you transitioned to you sponsor was smooth as butter haha. Good video too :-)
Thank you for producing such high quality and thought provoking content in a sea of reactionary garbage
Very much appreciate the kind words!
What reactionary garbage? This is so simple. It's you guys who want to turn this into an issue. See my main post in the thread. It's ARM RISC technology built into Apple designed CPUs. What is so hard about that to accept? Sheesh.
@Derek Currie I actually meant most tech RUclipsrs who just regurgitate basic info and news I can very well find on my own, but it took no time to look up that it’s not actually the same as you say. It’d be like saying because all instrument families have general design, a piano is a piano or a sax is a sax.
Can we use that hacked or pirated adobe apps on apple silicon macs or now it will be not continued?
So it is ARM, except it's not ARM designs, which is good because they don't have to worry about selling those chips to others.
Cool splash screens/transitions!
Thanks!
Incredible video Richie, every time I come here it’s just a lot of deep information. You’re great!
I love how excited Rene is in this video 😆
This was a great explanation of the difference between ARM and ASi.
I wonder how much of Apple's current design is still based on ARM CPU and GPU cores, even if it has diverged over the last few years?
None.
When we get the mini will see a compatible Apple touch display?
Thanks for the detailed video. Glad to find everything in one place that I gathered from lots of sources after the Apple keynote.
Not having the license for the ARM chipset, doesn't mean it's not ARM. It just means Apple is to BS about paying so they tweaked it enough to skip licenses. So it still is Mac on ARM. You could not be more wrong
High performance virtualization on a MacBook xD
That's a dream that will never come true.
Why so optimistic?