Apple Silicon: What it means for the Mac and the computer industry
Originally published at https://tech-bytes.net on June 29, 2020.
Part of the WWDC 2020 series*
It’s no longer a rumour. Last week, Apple announced it was transitioning its entire line of Mac computers from Intel chips to its custom “Apple Silicon” over the next two years. Why is this transition so important? And, what will this mean for the Mac and the computer industry moving forward?
Why the move from Intel to Apple Silicon?
One of my favourite quotes is by the famed computer scientist Alan Kay.
“People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware”
— Alan Kay
If you look across Apple’s product line, it’s clear they’re not a typical electronics maker. The software and hardware for the iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch and Apple TV are all designed by Apple — including the chips that power them. The Mac is also in this camp, but there’s one piece Apple doesn’t control and that’s the CPU. Currently, Mac CPUs are made by Intel and have been since 2006. Apple made the switch from PowerPC chips (made by IBM) to Intel in 2005 because it gave them much better performance per watt of power consumed. Before PowerPC, Apple computers ran on Motorola’s 68000 chips. Jason Snell, writing for Six Colors, says that “this transition is likely to be the smoothest of the three.” I tend to agree.
Now, Apple is transitioning to “Apple Silicon” — chips based on the ARM (or RISC) architecture that powers all smartphones and tablets. Such a switch is much easier for Apple to make because they essentially have one customer base. They don’t make an operating system that has to work on hardware made by several companies. Apple knows what devices are in the wild and can account for that.
But what’s wrong with Intel chips? Is the performance they’re going to get from “Apple Silicon” so much better that this switch is worth the effort? Well, most definitely.
AnandTech notes that Apple’s chips are “top tier” at this point. Intel has effectively stalled for ten years, failing to make any breakthroughs in chip design. Intel made the classic business mistake: over-promise and under-deliver. For ten years, Intel has been missing its own deadlines. Rather than producing chip breakthroughs, Intel has relied on optimizing its existing technology, delivering increasingly more power-hungry chips that run on the same fabrication process. As Rene Ritchie points out, Apple is basically “taking the heat” for Intel’s lack of progress, figuratively and literally. Until recently, Mac laptops have been plagued by heat issues. While Intel was dropping the ball, Apple has forged ahead — creating groundbreaking chips for its other devices and building the technical expertise to supplant its partner in the laptop and desktop computing space.
Jason Snell thinks the transition will be smooth and worthwhile.
“All of that is to say that while the transition to be smooth, the reason for the transition will probably be readily apparent. These new Macs with Apple-built processors will almost certainly offer speed and power efficiency far beyond what the Intel equivalent models currently offer. Apple has judged that the leap is worth the inconvenience. ”
— Jason Snell, Six Colors
Graphics performance is another reason for Apple to make this switch. Modern-day mobile processors are known as a “system on a chip” (SoC). The processor, RAM, and graphics are all-in-one. The 2018 iPad Pro has already demonstrated how far ahead these chips are in terms of graphics, and Apple claims this device already possessed comparable graphics performance to an Xbox One S. It’s quite possible future Apple Silicon could trounce third-party graphics cards.
Apple doesn’t need to make money by selling chips like Intel. They make money on the devices they sell and by having loyal customers. By making this move to its own processors, Apple now has complete control over the Mac release schedule and design. Apple doesn’t have to wait on Intel to deliver something new. Now, macOS can start interfacing more seamlessly, and borrow features from, the iPhone and iPad since all platforms will run on the same architecture. In fact, the upcoming macOS release — “Big Sur” — is now macOS ‘version 11 of the operating system. To put this in perspective, macOS has been version 10.xx since 2000! Apple missed a great Spinal Tap reference in their keynote by not saying they’re taking macOS “to 11.”
How will Apple make this transition?
First, Apple executives said the company is planning to release a “family” of new chips for their entire computer line. Presumably, this will include not just low power chips for laptops like the MacBook Air and Pro, but also desktop-class chips for the iMac and even the Mac Pro.
I used to be skeptical that ARM could ever rival the x86 platform that Intel and AMD chips are built on. Coincidentally, the same week of WWDC, the Japanese companies Fujitsu and Riken announced the world’s faster super computer built on ARM processors. Checkmate.
I have no doubt the transition will be fairly seamless for users, based on previous Apple transitions. Apple is even rolling out (or resurrecting) some software to help with this switch.
Rosetta 2 will allow these new Apple Silicon-based computers to run apps written for Intel (x86). Apple used Rosetta (1) when it moved from PowerPC to Intel, and it was very successful. Also, Apple’s Universal Binary allows apps downloaded from the App Store or the web to run on either the Intel or Apple Silicon platform. Whatever system you have, the correct version of the app will be installed.
Why transition now?
This is a more interesting question. For years, the Mac platform has languished while the iPhone and iPad got all the cool technological advancements. Just look at the iMac design — which has remained mostly unchanged since 2012. But if your company was planning to move to a new architecture, and that architecture would allow for drastically new designs and opportunity, it would make sense to hold off on doing anything mind-blowing.
In hindsight, there were some clues that this transition would take place.
Apple Insider put it perfectly
“It’s… simply inaccurate and misleading to say that Apple is “moving to ARM,” because the real transition Apple is making by moving the Mac to its own [system on a chip] involves leveraging the work it has already done to make its own Apple Silicon an industry leader. ”
— Daniel Eran Dilger, Apple Insider
“Already done” is the key phrase there.
The iPhone 5s (introduced in 2013) brought in the first 64-bit phone processor. Previous phones were 32 bit. [For those interested, here’s a video about bits]. More recently, Apple dropped support for 32-bit apps altogether in macOS Catalina (introduced October 2019).
If Apple knew that they would be moving away from Intel, why drop 32-bit apps first? Well, now all apps — regardless if written for Intel (x86) or Apple Silicon (ARM) — now support the 64-bit instruction set. That’s a boon for compatibility and performance.
Another clue was the introduction of Mac Catalyst in 2018. This “framework” allowed developers to transition iPad apps to the Mac. It was underwhelming at the time, but now Catalyst is poised to be a critical component for app development. All upcoming Macs that have Apple Silicon chips will be able to run the majority of iPhone and iPad apps as is. If a developer wants to “Macify” their iPad app — perhaps with better mouse and keyboard support — Catalyst is a tool to do that.
The last clue is Metal — a graphics API that Apple introduced with iOS 8 in 2014. It was intended to improve graphics performance on iPhone and iPad. With the move to Apple Silicon, developers can use this framework to build better games for the Mac.
I realize these tools are highly technical. Essentially, Apple has been putting all the building blocks in place to make this transition since 2013. Simply brilliant.
What will future Macs be like?
There have been rumours floating around for years of some pretty drastic Mac redesigns coming. Now it makes sense.
Apple Silicon means lower power while keeping great performance. I think we’ll see incredible battery life on future laptops — perhaps 16+ hours compared to the current 7–8. I think the power of these Apple Silicon chips will far exceed our expectations, delivering speeds that not only leave Intel in the dust but don’t kill your power bill.
Better heat management will probably be the number one factor that allows Apple to push the hardware design forward. Intel chips run hot. But think about your iPad? Does it need a fan? No. Does it get unbearably warm? No. An Apple laptop or desktop could be thin, silent and extremely fast thanks to these new chips.
If you use other Apple devices, the compatibility between the Mac and iPhone/iPad was already good. Now apps will be cross-platform almost by default. The design language will be shared across hardware and software, allowing for a level user familiarity not seen before. Any new device categories Apple introduces (such as the rumoured augmented reality glasses) would interface seamlessly with existing hardware. Apple’s famous for the saying “it just works” but now they’ll be able to fulfill that promise.
This transition also affects the computer industry more broadly. Every other company is going to look at this transition in awe and ask “how do we transition to ARM?” While Intel and AMD (the only real x86 chip makers) might continue to be successful thanks to PC gaming, what will happen to the long-term? Microsoft championed the famous “Wintel” partnership, but I think it’s only a matter of time before this era comes to an end. Windows on ARM has been a pretty terrible experience until now, but Apple’s lead might push them to ramp up development. Every computer manufactuer is going to start investigating how they have their own super fast, ARM-based computer.
It’s possible that within 5 years, the entire computer industry will shift from x86 to ARM. If that happens, it will be one of, if not ‘the’, greatest platform shifts in the history of computing and it would happen at record speed.
*Other sources of interest*
