The first ARM-powered Apple Mac will get a release date before the close of 2020 – here’s everything you need to know, including all the possible PROS and CONS…
Apple’s M1-Powered MacBooks & Mac Mini Launch
The first ARM-powered MacBooks and Mac Mini are now official, following their launch on November 10.
Powered by Apple’s new M1 chip, – are cheaper than previous models, have better battery life, and, according to Apple, are around 2X more powerful than their Windows-based competitors.
Apple’s new M1-powered iMac is now here too, and it is available in six distinct color options.
Apple will apparently confirm the following Apple Silicon-powered MacBooks at the November 10 launch event:
All of the new MacBooks announced at the event will run on Apple’s new Apple Silicon, the first laptop/PC processor developed in-house by Apple.
With respect to design and looks, leaks suggest the new range of Apple Silicon MacBooks will look more or less the same as what came before. The big changes will all be under the hood: the first batch of Apple’s Apple Silicon is expected to bring big performance and battery life boosts.
The first Apple Silicon chips for MacBook will use the same chip architecture as Apple’s A14 CPU – the chipset used inside the iPhone 12 and iPad Air. Tweaks have been made, however, that will allow for better thermal performance and more power.
Why Is Apple Moving Away From Intel Chips?
Apple’s switch from Intel to its own ARM-based chips is now official. During its first-ever online-only WWDC keynote, Apple CEO Tim Cook confirmed that Macs (including MacBook Pro and iMac machines) will run on ARM silicon from here on out – and will be with us before the close of 2020.
And if that wasn’t enough to get your juices flowing, a new report from DigiTimes claims that Apple’s first Apple Silicon-powered MacBooks will be with us before the close of 2020 – meaning some time in Q4.
According to the report, Apple’s first Apple Silicon releases will be the MacBook Pro and a new MacBook Air. Apple is expecting to shift around 16-17 million units in 2020, up from 14-15 million in 2019.
Where things get even more interesting is when you start talking about the cost of these new Apple Silicon MacBooks. Apple is no longer buying chips from Intel, so, theoretically, it will be saving money on component costs (at least, that’s what some are claiming) and this could mean reduced costs MacBooks in 2020 and beyond.
Here’s what Tim Cook had to say about Apple’s transition from x86 to its own ARM-based Apple Silicon:
“From the beginning, the Mac has always embraced big changes to stay at the forefront of personal computing. Today we’re announcing our transition to Apple silicon, making this a historic day for the Mac,” said Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO. “With its powerful features and industry-leading performance, Apple silicon will make the Mac stronger and more capable than ever. I’ve never been more excited about the future of the Mac.”
The complete transition, whereby ALL current applications will work on Apple’s new ARM chips, will take two years, according to Apple. Apple is confident that this will not be a problem, even at the beginning with the first run of ARM-powered Macs; Cook says Apple has already made progress with Microsoft and Adobe in bringing their respective suites of tools to Apple’s ARM silicon.
This will give the Mac industry-leading performance per watt and higher performance GPUs — enabling app developers to write even more powerful pro apps and high-end games. And access to technologies such as the Neural Engine will make the Mac an amazing platform for developers to use machine learning. This will also create a common architecture across all Apple products, making it far easier for developers to write and optimise software for the entire Apple ecosystem – Apple
Apple will still make Intel Macs, however, and support will remain in place for Macs running on Intel chips for years to come. As of right now, developers have been invited to start moving over their applications to work on Apple’s new ARM-based processors, a process that Apple says will take “a matter of days”, thanks to its Xcode 12 which brings everything – native compilers, editors, and debugging tools – under one roof, making life a lot easier for developers looking to move their apps over to Apple’s new ARM SoC for Mac.
Meet Kalamata, Apple’s 5nm ARM SoC For Macs
Apple did not detail any specifics about its first ARM-based processor. Instead, it used the announcement to ease worries amongst its developers and users about how the transition will be handled.
Still, there are plenty of rumors and leaks about Apple’s first 5nm ARM chip that’ll feature inside its first ARM-powered Mac before the close of the year.
The first of these processors to hit the market will be a 12-core CPU with eight high-performance “Firestorm” cores and at least four energy-efficient “Icestorm” cores which should translate into pretty solid performance across the board. And it’s likely we will see this new platform unveiled in either 2020 or 2021 – both Bloomberg’s sources and Ming-Chi Kuo are in agreement on this.
Is this move surprising? Not really, there has been talk about MacBooks running on ARM chips for the past 10 years or so. Things are a lot different now though; Apple is now one of the predominant chip-makers on the planet. It’s A-Series CPUs are market-leading in the mobile space, so it’s not a stretch to think it could create something equally impressive for its laptops.
As for technical details about Apple’s first ARM-based processor for Mac, Bloomberg’s sources outlined a bunch of interesting stuff which is broken down into bite-sized chunks below:
Why ARM-Powered Macs Matter
Imagine if Apple’s iPhones, iPads, and MacBooks all used the same chipsets. Now, imagine you’re an Apple developer. You can now deploy that application across three devices – the – thanks to the fact they all run on the same chipsets.
Sounds good, right? And in theory, it is. But the road to ARM-powered MacBooks is fraught with obstacles and stumbling blocks because Apple’s own ecosystem, on its computers, at least, is tied to Intel’s X86 architecture.
But you can’t just switch over and hope for the best, things have to be “made right” first and there will always be an inevitable transition phase, just like when Apple switched iPhone over to 64-bit.
As moves go, this kind of thing is about as risky as it gets.
But if anyone could pull it off, it is Apple – it has experience in doing just this both with Macs (PowerPC to Intel) and its iPhone platform (32-bit to 64-bit).
Just over five years ago, Apple did not have a dedicated chip-design division. In 2020, Apple is now one of the leading chip-designers in the mobile space; its ARM-based A13 CPU is monumentally powerful, easily comparable to Intel’s lower-spec laptop chips.
And Apple did this in the space of five years, so the idea of Apple switching its MacBooks over to custom ARM chips, while once considered heresy, is now – in a way – not so hard to imagine. Almost all tend to agree that this is more a case of and not .
Let’s examine all the PROS & CONS of Apple switching its MacBooks over to custom-built ARM chips in order to get a better idea of how things might play out.
ARM-Powered MacBooks PROS – The “Theoretical” Benefits
#1 – “Cheaper” MacBooks
In order to develop and make its MacBooks work, Apple has to source millions of CPUs from Intel every single quarter. This is expensive, as Intel is also in the business of making money. However, if you have the resources to develop your own chipsets, as Apple does, it’s actually cheaper and more efficient to build your own.
Apple already has a dedicated chip-design division. It also has mountains of cash. Literal mountains of the stuff. By making its own ARM-based chips for Mac, Apple is no longer restricted by Intel’s ups and downs with its own, often-turbulent chip fabrication. Apple can set the pace, control volume, and better plan for the years to come.
This is just scraping the surface, but you get the idea: if you have the capital and resources, it is always better to create your own product. You have more control and, eventually, significantly lower costs as the margins are better on products produced in-house versus products sourced from elsewhere.
And, theoretically, this could result in cheaper MacBooks. If Apple’s costs are lower, which they would be, it could effectively make the same margin it always has done with a lower price point. The only issue here is whether Apple would pass these savings on to you, the customer? Personally, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
#2 – The Beginnings of A Unified Platform
Unified computing platforms, whereby phones, tablets, and laptops and PCs, all work together seamlessly on the same code and the same chips are, for want of a better phrase, most tech companies wildest dream. Having the same chip architecture for your phones and laptops makes a lot of sense – and not just from a developer perspective.
Apple has been bringing macOS and iOS closer together for years. It does this because it wants iPhone users to buy Macs and Mac users to buy iPhones. But right now macOS and iOS run on completely different chipsets (ARM and Intel’s x86), so you can’t just make an app for iPhone and have it run on macOS machines.
Apple’s Catalyst goes some way to remedying this, but it is not a FIX ALL solution.
One FIX ALL solution, however, would be moving its MacBooks over to the same chip architecture used by iPhone and iPad. If this happened, Apple’s legion of developers code one application and deploy it across ALL platforms – phone, tablet, and laptop. It’d also make iPhones and MacBooks even better connected than they currently are which would be a huge USP for both casual and business users.
#3 – Different Macs, Different Chips
This is me spit-balling here but stay with me. Apple wouldn’t have to just make one ARM chip for its Macs, it could make all kinds of chips – one for lower-specced models and one for its Mac Pro system, for instance, as well as multiple additional options in between. It could basically develop whatever it wanted, once the “transition” from x86 to ARM was complete.
Alternatively, Apple could simply use its custom ARM chips on lower-cost MacBooks and keep its more premium machines on x86. The App Store could then be used to automatically filter and assign available content based on the machine that it is connected to, and while this isn’t as exciting as the first example, it could well be how Apple tests the water in 2020/21.
Through things like Xcode and SwiftUI, Apple is already making it simple for developers to move iOS apps to macOS. And unlike Microsoft’s ill-fated ARM platform, Windows RT, developers are actually using it – even Microsoft and Adobe, two of Apple’s biggest enemies.
“Catalyst is at least trying to drive developers to code in a certain way that means leveraging the work they’ve done for the ARM processors in iOS,” notes Apple Insider. “Developers for both Mac and iOS will continue to use Apple’s Xcode software to create their apps, but they won’t have to think about the different technologies as much.
It added: “Apple can make the key elements that we see in the new SwiftUI work on both platforms, and can forget the legacy code it had to support and developers needed to understand.”
#4 – Apple’s Already Kind of Doing It…
Did you know that most modern MacBooks already run ARM chips? They’re just not used as central processors. Instead, Apple uses these custom ARM processors (T1 and T2 chips) for secondary tasks like powering the TouchBar, encoding video, increased encryption, and powering TouchID.
And the T2 chip, for instance, is already VERY impressive. The T2 essentially sits between the Intel CPU and macOS, providing a secure layer that prevents any erroneous software or malware from getting on to your MacBook via its secure boot feature. If something looks dodgy, the T2 chip will block it and prevent it from entering macOS.
On top of this, Apple’s T2 chip also makes Siri faster and is said to improve the audio quality of Macs too. Basically, it’s a really cool feature that does a lot of work on your behalf – and it was 100% developed in-house by Apple. Now imagine what it could do with this if it had a custom ARM chip powering the actual machine?
#5 – Performance & Thermals
Intel’s current flagship processors (and AMD’s) are more powerful than any current ARM chip that is readily available. They’re also way more complex, featuring support for things like ECC memory addressing, hyper-threading, process execution security, multi-channel memory access, and AVX. And while Apple has lots of cash, developing a worthy competitor to Intel’s current-gen chips is no mean feat.
But that’s now. And I don’t think Apple is thinking about now; it’s thinking about 10-20 years into the future. In this far off land, no one really knows what will happen. But it stands to reason that mobile devices, wearables, and AI will play a much more significant role in society than what we know think of as laptops.
Does it make sense to unify under custom ARM chips now, so you’re ready for a future where more mobile devices and wearables are sold? Kind of. Will people still even use laptops in 2040? Or will we have something completely different? Whatever happens, one thing is certain: whatever products you’re selling, it will pay dividends, in the long run, to have them all running on the same code base.
This is the #1 reason why Microsoft and Apple are both looking at ARM chips. Another reason is that ARM chips are more efficient and run cooler. This means they can run longer and harder at lower temperatures without the need for throttling. And remember: when it comes to performance, as any custom PC builder will tell you, heat is your #1 enemy.
#6 – It’s Good For Developers
Developers would no longer have to think either/or – you can make an app and it’ll run on Apple’s core products: the iPhone, iPad, and MacBook. This means more money in your pocket, potentially, and fewer R&D costs when building-out applications.
But it’s also great for customers too. How? Simple: by bridging the gap – the chipset – between Apple’s mobile offerings (iPhone and iPad) and its computers (in this context, the MacBook), you get closer integration between those devices. Apps for your iPhone will work on your MacBook and iPad, and vice versa.
CONS – The Scary Stuff…
#1 – The Transition
The #1 thing that might stop Apple from pulling the trigger on the switch from x86 to ARM is the painful transition phase that it would have to go through. I know Apple has already done this a couple of times, but the case for switching to ARM – or the wider vision for why it makes sense – would have to be truly compelling for Apple to take on this challenge again.
If we do see ARM MacBooks, it will be for a very good reason: Apple is looking to the future of its MacBooks and where it wants to position itself against the wider market in years to come. Shaking things up for the sake of it is not something Apple would do; not when the #1 reason people use Macs is that they’re simple and stable.
Thousands of hours of work would go into making a decision like this, fuelled by some of the cleverest minds in the world. And the ONLY reason it would be allowed to happen is if Apple was 100% confident that it would somehow benefit its business in the medium to long term. If you can establish a clear case for that, a bit of short-term pain isn’t something you worry about.
#2 – Bottle-Necking
Apple uses Intel chips at present for its Macs and MacBooks. But what happens if something happens to Intel? What happens if Intel delays the launch of its new chipset (an all-too-common occurrence these days)? Apple is screwed. That’s what happens. And not just Apple, any PC-maker that placed an order is forced back to the drawing board. This bottleneck effect is one of the #1 reasons why Apple might switch to making its own SoCs.
But on the flip side, it is also one of the biggest risks associated with it too. For instance, what happens if Intel or AMD suddenly makes huge, unprecedented strides forwards with their fabrication process and Apple cannot keep up? Again, you get a bottleneck that would have far-reaching implications for Apple’s theoretical ARM-based chip business. The media would attack, claiming Apple’s chips can’t keep up, and this would hurt its sales.
As with most major decisions like this, you’re dealing with a double-edged sword. And sometimes it really is a case of better the devil you know…
#3 – Intel Hook-Ups
When you work with Intel, you don’t just get processors – it hooks you up with all kinds of additional features, ports, and connectivity solutions. Things like Thunderbolt 3, for instance. And you’d definitely need that on a Mac, especially one designed for work – as all Macs are.
But if Apple ditched Intel and started making its own ARM chips, would Intel even let it use Thunderbolt 3? Even if it did, it’d come with a charge. And to make matters worse, it’s not just Thunderbolt 3; there are plenty of additional extras that Intel provides that would need to either be sourced from elsewhere or licensed.
Basically, it’s not just as simple as switching chips and telling Intel to do one…
#4 – Windows Emulation
This isn’t a deal-breaker, but it is a Mac feature that a lot of users like. Because the Mac runs on x86 chips, you can dual-boot Windows on any MacBook, iMac, or Mac Pro machine. It’s a handy feature that, while not a deal-breaker, would certainly irk a fair few Mac users if it were suddenly taken away.
#5 – It Might Not Be Worth It…
Apple’s Mac – or, its computer business, in general – only accounts for about 15% of its revenue. The rest is made up of (the lion’s share), its software (iTunes and The App Store), and newer product lines like its AirPods and Apple Watch. Basically, Mac now accounts for a very small slither of Apple’s core business.
Which begs the question: is switching over to ARM even worth it? To make the switch would require a monumental amount of resources, resources that could be used elsewhere in more lucrative areas of its business, and this, I think, is one of the main reasons why Apple might not do this…
Why would it move from a position of stability to one of instability and uncertainty? And make no mistake, the transition – even if it went smoothly – would not be pleasant. You’re talking about 12+ months of confusion and instability, endless stories about what a massive mistake Apple is making, and potentially a negative impact on sales until the dust settles…
Given ALL of the above, the only thing that I am 100% certain about is that I am glad it is not me that has to make this decision!
Frequently Asked Questions
When Will The First Apple Silicon MacBook Be Available?
Apple will launch its first Apple Silicon MacBooks on November 10. There will be three models announced, according to reports. And these three models are as follows:
What Will Apple Silicon Do?
Apple Silicon is the first time Apple has designed its own, bespoke chipsets for its MacBooks and iMacs. With Apple Silicon, there are quite a few benefits over Intel’s x86 chips. Apple Silicon, because it runs at lower temperatures and is more efficient, will lead to big increases in battery life for Apple Silicon MacBooks. Apple is also being pretty bullish about performance too, although the jury is still out on this one…
Is Apple Silicon Worth Waiting For?
Yes, Apple Silicon MacBooks (and iMacs) are definitely worth waiting for. The promise of Apple Silicon looks to be fairly impressive: you’ll get better battery performance, great performance, and even more cross-over between iPhone and Mac. As always, it is worth waiting to see how the first generation of Apple Silicon MacBooks go on with reviewers before pulling the trigger on one. Many experts are very confident about Apple’s switch to ARM chips, however, so we’re pretty excited about this tectonic shift in how Apple powers its iconic MacBooks.
Richard Goodwin has been working as a tech journalist for over 10 years. He is the editor and owner of KnowYourMobile.