Jump to content

Sneaky Snake

Member Since 28 Jul 2007
Offline Last Active Today, 06:27 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Apple CPUs to Replace Intel in Macs?

Today, 06:28 PM

View PostSpike, on 19 April 2018 - 10:37 AM, said:

A lot of the discussion here lately has redirected to saying what everyone here already knows - that iOS is popular and has its larger market. So people here are saying they believe Mac growth will halt and get replaced by iOS? That Macs are then doomed? I have heard this for decades all the time. I think a different thread would be better for these Macs are doomed rants, as this is suppose to be about rumor of Macs replacing Intel. I admit Macs are doing badly right now as Apple hasnt updated the Mac Pro, Mini, and Air in many years along with MacOS development currently so bad with High Sierra. I wish Apple had a better CEO.

I don't believe the Mac is doomed. I do believe Apple will narrow its focus. Right now the Mac is something aimed at both the casual user and the professional. I think that iOS will continue to evolve as the operating system for the casual user and eventually Apple will introduce 'Macs' (that are running iOS - with an ARM processor and touch screen support) that are meant to service the casual user. The x86 Mac lineup will be pruned to power/professional systems only that aren't really meant for the casual user.

View PostSpike, on 19 April 2018 - 10:37 AM, said:

Intel isnt just about processing power, it also has many features that Apple's CPU does not. Also, Intel is NOT the problem with Apple refreshing their Macs. All the Windows laptop makes dont have a problem with Intel refresh cycles, the PROBLEM IS Apple. Intel refreshed to Skylake and all the manufacturers went to it except it took Apple a year. Intel refreshed to Kaby Lake and all the manufacturers went to it except Apple who still have most models that have not refreshed.

I don't think anyone is blaming Intel for the lack of Mac updates. Intel, AMD, and Nvidia have released a wide range of new CPUs and GPUs that would be fantastic in the Mac. Apple is definitely very slow to update their models.

The move to ARM certainly not because of some 'dead end' with x86.

In Topic: Apple CPUs to Replace Intel in Macs?

Yesterday, 01:03 PM

View PostSpike, on 18 April 2018 - 09:09 AM, said:

No, I disagree. People who want ecosystem, ease, perception of security, etc, will want an Intel Mac. Once people see that an ARM Mac offers nothing except slightly lower cost and only offers incompatibilities, confusion, and headaches will show that the vast majority then see Intel is the way to go as already seen by Microsofts ARM computers being fail. Apple ARM would not have slightly more battery life, they would instead build with a slightly smaller battery.

I would counter by saying that I do not believe Apple would release an ARM mac if it would lead to confusion and headaches for its target market. They don't need to move to ARM, and as such, they can take as much time and care as they want to nail the execution.

When Apple moved to x86 from PowerPC it was out of necessity - the PowerPC platform wasn't really getting the updates that Apple needed it to be getting, and it wasn't compatible with Apple's largest selling computer category (laptops). Apple had to move to x86 in order to continue advancing their notebook line of computers  (The Powerbooks and iBooks were stuck on the very old G4 architecture). This forced move came with all of the headaches and incompatibilities that most users here are familiar with, and forced Apple to release software like Rosetta that allowed PowerPC apps to run on x86 architecture. I firmly believe that this will not be the case when Apple moves to ARM for some of their computers.

I would be willing to bet that the ARM Mac will actually be running iOS. This will give it the huge advantage of being able to use iOS's massive software library, and it will also give it the advantage of not being confused with 'real' Macs. Apple is clearly trying to position the iPad Pro as a laptop competitor and given a few more years of development and a few more years of iOS updates I would guess that iOS will finally be in a place where its target market won't just be able to use it as a computer but will prefer using it as a computer. (Keep in mind that I'm referring to the 'average joe' user here, not the power user that many on this forum are). The may even bring back the 'iBook' name to symbolize the union between the iPad and the Macbook.

Look at how far mobile operating systems have come in just 10 or so years. I tried using an iPad 1 as a laptop replacement and the experience was pretty bad. Almost zero good applications for the iPad. Many websites required Flash. iOS had barely any features. Just an overall bad experience. The current iPad and iOS are so much better now. Give it another 3-5 years and it'll be even better for the average joe who doesn't care about all of the power user features of Windows and macOS.

In Topic: Apple CPUs to Replace Intel in Macs?

15 April 2018 - 04:36 PM

View PostCamper-Hunter, on 15 April 2018 - 03:20 PM, said:

This reminds of ByteMark when the PowerPC was still used by Apple, and this benchmark showed it crushed Intel Pentium series. I liked that, since I was kind of a fanboy at the time... But in practice, the real world advantage wasn't there. Synthetic benchmarks are basically useless.

PowerPC was actually pretty good in the desktop/server situation. It just didn't translate well to the laptop since it was too hot and power-hungry. Intel's Pentium 4 chips got destroyed by both PowerPC and AMD's Athlon chips.

IBM still develops the POWER architecture and 2 supercomputers got built last year with it.

In Topic: Apple CPUs to Replace Intel in Macs?

11 April 2018 - 08:18 AM

View PostThain Esh Kelch, on 10 April 2018 - 02:47 AM, said:

Which is a bit crazy, considering GTAV just hit a staggering 6 billion dollars of revenue... It is the largest entertainment franchise ever!
Apple is really missing out on something, not having proper gaming Macs.

Not to downplay how successful GTA5 has been, but hasn't WoW made considerably more then 6 billion? Back when WoW had 12 million subs they were making 1 billion every 6 months on subscription revenue alone. Add up all of the money the made from selling the game+expansions, and all of the subscription revenue over the past decade and I would bet that WoW is significantly over the $10 billion mark.

In Topic: The Elder Scrolls Online Launched

05 April 2018 - 09:31 AM

View Postikir, on 05 April 2018 - 12:43 AM, said:

For me is the opposite 10.13 perform great with gaming, thanks to Metal 2. I'm also have an eGPU so I need last software anyway. usually many issue are related to exiting drivers and software, since I'm a IT tech support I work everyday with old machine with 10.13 and nobody have issue, my friends have some old Macs too. Anyway the bug IS NOT 10.13 related since it happens ONLY on ESO, no one other game have a single issue. Me and my friends all play with macOS at many games, only ESO have these.

Performance on my machine are higher than before, in dungeon I stay at 60fps capped with all max playing in 4K. IN open world it vary from 30 (in complex fights) to 60fps. So I can say the game is performing ok, can't be better considering it runs on OpenGL.

Good to hear about the performance being decent. Is this with your 580 as an eGPU?

As an aside, OpenGL doesn't limit a games performance any more then DirectX does. Games that are coded for OpenGL (the new Doom game for example) run amazing with OpenGL. The issue is that many games are coded for DirectX and then ported over to OpenGL and not properly optimized. That is why you see the big performance discrepancy. The PS3 used OpenGL ES for many of its games.