Explore the new system architectire of Apple Silicon Macs

....that he won't back with his "facts".

On 2020-07-04 2:45 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
On Sat, 04 Jul 2020 17:22:04 -0400, nospam wrote:

To be fair, the A4 was not an all-Apple design.

I've been looking into this and the first all-Apple chip appears to have
been the A6.

maybe not entirely but it wasn't just an off the shelf part either.

Doublespeak.

What's interesting is Alan Baker apparently claims the ARM Mac is "Apple
Silicon", even as he must then ignore that the fundamental patented
technology comes from ARM (hence, it's really ARM Silicon but Apple is
frantic we don't realize that fact - which is why they're desperate for us
to not call it the "ARM Mac" or the "Mac ARM" or "ARM Silicon", etc.)...

What "fundamental patented technology" would that be, Arlen?

On 2020-07-04 14:23:42 +0000, sms said:
On 7/4/2020 12:49 AM, Paul wrote:

snip

If ARM was intended (by ARM Holdings) to be a rocket powered
car, it would already be a rocket powered car. I don't think
the ARM staff had any intention of going "head to head with Intel".

I fail to see how this can end well. Sorry.

To be successful in that business, you have to add some
value, and do it without patent overhang. And patents
are a major impediment to anyone running the gauntlet.
Is the Apple patent portfolio "Intel-proof" ?

Intel doesn't always play nice.

Now, if we assign reasonable expectations to the
outcome, what is the resulting chip worth ?

You have to believe that Apple made some sort of a licensing and
royalty arrangement with Intel before going down this road.

It also could be that there are still going to be a couple of x86 Mac
machines manufactured, like a Xeon Mac Pro, and maybe one Core i9
Macbook Pro, for power users.

*All* Macs will be going to Apple Silicon, but it will be a piecemeal
process. It's most likely it will start with the low-end laptops and
the Mac Mini (which is already available in the developers' Transisiton
Kit) - the up-coming iMac release is rumored to be still Intel-based.
The transition will move up through the ranks to eventually include the
iMac Pro and Mac Pro models over the next couple of years or so. I'd be
surprised if it takes more than two since Apple are not going to want
to drag it out.




For most users Apple probably figures that the potential battery life
improvements by using a CPU with a much lower TDP, as well as the cost
savings, outweighs the loss of the subset of customers that are using
x86 applications that would suffer a significant performance hit by
requiring both virtualization and emulation.

While some OS-X x86 applications may be re-written to run natively on
the A15 (or whatever the CPU is called), some companies may just not
bother and tell their users that there will be no future OS-X releases.

That's always been the case. Even with different versions of Intel OS X
there have been apps that have been left behind and never updated -
especially (but not only) with the recent MacOS Catalina which dropped
support for 32bit apps.

It also happens on other OSes. There are old Windows apps that do not
work in Windows 10.

It happens in every industry. Except for something extremely simple,
you won't be able to fit a part from an 1960 car into your brand new
2020 model.

On 2020-07-04 16:16:54 +0000, Alan Baker said:
On 2020-07-04 9:08 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
On Sat, 04 Jul 2020 11:03:02 -0400, nospam wrote:

based on existing devices using apple designed processors, it's *very*
likely that apple silicon macs running intel apps will be comparable to
or even faster than on a similar intel mac in most tasks.

*nospam proves, yet again, he's completely bamboozled by Apple MARKETING!*

Anyone using the idiotic phrase "Apple Silicon" for what is, was, and has
always been "ARM Silicon", in this case, fab'd by TSMC, is already proven
to be completely bamboozled by MARKETING bull****.

You're an idiot.

It has now been shown over and over that Apple designs its own chips.

No. Arlen Holder is a *known* moronic anti-Apple troll who doesn't have
a clue about anything he posts.

The idiots are the ones who keep replying to that moron rather than
ignoring / kilfiling him. :-(

On 2020-07-04 3:09 p.m., Your Name wrote:
On 2020-07-04 16:16:54 +0000, Alan Baker said:
On 2020-07-04 9:08 a.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
On Sat, 04 Jul 2020 11:03:02 -0400, nospam wrote:

based on existing devices using apple designed processors, it's *very*
likely that apple silicon macs running intel apps will be comparable to
or even faster than on a similar intel mac in most tasks.

*nospam proves, yet again, he's completely bamboozled by Apple
MARKETING!*

Anyone using the idiotic phrase "Apple Silicon" for what is, was, and
has
always been "ARM Silicon", in this case, fab'd by TSMC, is already
proven
to be completely bamboozled by MARKETING bull****.

You're an idiot.

It has now been shown over and over that Apple designs its own chips.

No. Arlen Holder is a *known* moronic anti-Apple troll who doesn't have
a clue about anything he posts.

The idiots are the ones who keep replying to that moron rather than
ignoring / kilfiling him.Â*Â* :-(

Come on.... ...what's the point if you can't have a little fun?

:-)

On Sun, 5 Jul 2020 10:06:50 +1200, Your Name wrote:

*All* Macs will be going to Apple Silicon

Hi Your Name,

Do you even own a brain, Your Name?

You've always shown that you easily succumb to Apple MARKETING messages.
o Your brain has no concept of any independent adult thought processes.

It was "ARM technology" for _years_ and now, suddenly, now that Apple is
licensing the technology, all of a sudden, as of just about a week or so
ago, suddenly, desperately, frantically so... all of a sudden.. it's
"Apple Silicon"?

WTF?

*You call it that because Apple is _frantic_ to differentiate itself.*
o So what is, was, and always will be ARM technology...
... ... is suddenly (magically!) Apple Silicon! ... ...

You always prove, Your Name, to succumb rather easily to MARKETING BS.
... ... *Do you even own a brain, Your Name?* ... ...

You always instantly succumb to Orwellian math from Apple without a fight.
--
The problem with apologists is that they don't seem to own a brain.

On Sun, 5 Jul 2020 10:09:44 +1200, Your Name wrote:

No. Arlen Holder is a *known* moronic anti-Apple troll who doesn't have
a clue about anything he posts.

Hi Your Name,

I know you well.

I own and purchase Apple products perhaps more than you do, Your Name.
o And if you don't know that - it just proves you're immune to facts.

What you call "anti apple" is the same thing I do on Linux, Windows, &
Android newsgroups... which is I speak facts about the product.

Fancy that...
o Facts.

*Android Facts*
Nobody on the Android group says I'm anti-Android when I write about the
facts of Android.

*Windows Facts*
Nobody on the Windows group says I'm anti-Windows when I write about the
facts of Windows.

*iOS Facts*
It's _only_ on the Apple newsgroups that facts about Apple are, somehow, so
scary and dangerous to you that I'm "anti Apple" simply for speaking the
facts about Apple products.

Now why are facts so downright scary to you Apple apologists, Your Name?
o HINT: I know why... at least I think I know why... but do you?
--
Apologists, like cultists, are deathly afraid of anyone armed with facts.

On 2020-07-04 4:23 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
On Sun, 5 Jul 2020 10:06:50 +1200, Your Name wrote:

*All* Macs will be going to Apple Silicon

Hi Your Name,

Do you even own a brain, Your Name?

You've always shown that you easily succumb to Apple MARKETING messages.
o Your brain has no concept of any independent adult thought processes.

It was "ARM technology" for _years_ and now, suddenly, now that Apple is
licensing the technology, all of a sudden, as of just about a week or so
ago, suddenly, desperately, frantically so... all of a sudden.. it's
"Apple Silicon"?

You complete simpleton. There is no "suddenly" about it.

Apple licensed the technology literally decades ago.

It's "Apple Silicon" because (yes!) they decided to add a marketing name
to something that they have been doing since 2012:

Designing their own ARM architecture chips.

This is well known and well referenced across the entire internet.

On Sat, 4 Jul 2020 16:59:14 -0400, JF Mezei wrote:

Apple was first to market with ARM's new 64 bit architecture.

It has consstently been first to market with the smallest process mask.
And it has managed new chips year after year, always by september. The
ability to deliver on time is pretty unique.

Don't underestimate Apple's chip capabilities.

Hi JF Mezei,

Rest assured, I _respect_ the astoundingly immense POWER of Apple!
o While Apple is not in the least about R&D - Apple is all MARKETING!

The most powerful MARKETING organization on this planet.
o *Never lose sight of how much I respect Apple MARKETING*
*for its sheer shockingly immense POWER over people's minds*.

Since you're not an apologist, I will be very clear with you about what I
estimate about Apple's abilities... OK?

As you're aware, I'm very well apprised that Apple is driven frantic to
_differentiate_ itself from ARM with the new ARM-based Macs coming out.

So desperate is Apple to _distance_ itself from ARM that the word ARM
didn't even come out of their mouths during the conference when they
discussed this new direction.

Not even once.

You think that's an accident?

You think they simply _forgot_ it was ARM technology in the new Mac?

If you think any of that, then maybe you are an Apple apologists.
o But I hope you own a brain that can think independently of MARKETING BS.

So please listen to me, and please listen closely as I know Apple well.
.... What I do NOT underestimate...
.... ... What I cannot ever underestimate...
.... ... ... What I will never underestimate...

*Is the astoundingly inordinately Orwellian POWER of Apple MARKETING.*

Remember, Apple is all marketing... and almost no R&D whatsoever.
o Nobody spends less in R&D % of all high tech than Apple does.

Nobody.

And you know that I know that, so you know you can't refute that fact.
o What I do NOT underestimate, is the POWER OF MARKETING to sway your mind.

Apple MARKETING is brilliant... so rest assured, I do NOT underestimate it!
o *What is the most brilliant marketing move Apple ever made?*
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/wW-fu0jsvAU/iUMbvDSxAwAJ

If Apple can so easily turn a dead Chinese lady into such a powerfully
delivered MARKETING COUP, rest assured, I hope to never underestimate the
power of Apple MARKETING to sway its gullible users' minds.

While Apple is not in the least about R&D - Apple is all MARKETING!
--
Apple MARKETING holds a powerfully Orwellian sway over its users minds.

On Sat, 4 Jul 2020 16:46:27 -0400, JF Mezei wrote:

Many will see this as a really neat integration between their iPhone and
desktops, but others will need a "computer" and may be pushed onto
Windows or Linux.

Hi JF Mezei,

You're not an apologist, so a completely different conversation is possible
o As you note, the door will open for people to _choose_ at that time.

All reasonable, rational, logical people, make choices when they need to.
o What this new ARM-based Mac does, in effect, is open that door.

I can't say yet which choice people will make at that time...
o But Apple's decision to move to the Mac ARM _will_ open that door.

If any of us think Apple MARKETING is unaware of that situation, rest
assured they're well aware that the Mac ARM _will_ open that door.

Expect a MARKETING blitz from Apple, which has _already_ started, in so
much as Apple MARKETING is apparently petrified of the simple word ARM,
which wasn't uttered even once in the announcement about the new ARM-based
Macs.

You think Apple _forgot_ it was ARM architecture they're licensing?
o Apple MARKETING is _petrified_ we'll see this for what it is.

Given Apple is all about MARKETING and the lowest R&D of all high tech,
expect a MARKETING blitz like you can't believe, to shore up what gullible
people _think_ about the new ARM-based silicon that Apple will brand.

Even so, the door will be open, no matter what.
o I never underestimate Apple MARKETING so they may convince people NOT
to use that open door.

But the door will be left open for people to _choose_ at that time.
--
Never underestimate Apple MARKETING's astounding POWER to sway minds!

On Sat, 4 Jul 2020 23:23:37 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder
wrote:

It was "ARM technology" for _years_ and now, suddenly, now that Apple is
licensing the technology, all of a sudden, as of just about a week or so
ago, suddenly, desperately, frantically so... all of a sudden.. it's
"Apple Silicon"?

Apple can call it Apple Silicon, in the same way as :

- Broadcom SetTopBox SoCs are Broadcom design
with ARM cores licenced from ARM Holdings
- Qualcomm SnapDragon
- etc.

All containing ARM technology.

I don't feel like citing all of them.
See for yourself in this chapter:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_ar...ture#Licensing
and the rest of the article.

ARM Silicon does not exist. ARM's products are instruction sets
and configurable hardware definition libraries, almost
mask-ready, but several steps before it enters the ASML
wafersteppers.

--
Regards,
Kees Nuyt

On Sun, 05 Jul 2020 03:25:14 +0200, Kees Nuyt wrote:

Apple can call it Apple Silicon

Hi Kees Nuyt,

I don't know you, so I can't say whether your brain is so influenced by
MARKETING that it can't actually operate independently as an adult.

I also don't know how much MARKETING education you have, but, if you're
college educated, as I am, you have some if you have at least an MBA.

Based on what you wrote, you sounded rather logical, sensible & educated,
where, everything you said I agree with, since I'm also a cognizant adult.

However, you have to understand how then that you're _different_ from Apple
Apologists, who are cultists, first and foremost, who, like flat earthers,
actually believe anything and everything that Apple MARKETING feeds them.

My point to nospam (who is a Type I Apple Apologist, which means he is
capable of getting the point), and to Your Name (who is a Type III
apologist, and hence, not capable of independent adult thought), was simply
that Apple MARKETING is playing a game with their brains.

Just as Exxon used to have a tiger run across the TV screen to imply that
higher-octane fuel gave their Honda Civic magical powers, when it can't
possibly do anything other than waste their money, these Type III
apologists like Your Name actually _believe_ the bull**** marketing.

By way of contrast, Type I apologists, like nospam is, would "claim" that
Techron is better for your engine, but he'd know that his claim is bull****
since all Top Tier gasolines (e.g., Costco gas) have the _same_ 400 ppm or
so of polyetheramines that Chevron patented long ago (the patent expired,
as I recall, the point being that it's just a name at this point in time).

Notice that the Type I apologists (e.g., nospam) will bull**** everyone
that, for example, "Techron is better", all the while _knowing_ that it's
bull**** (and only backing down when caught)... but the Type III apologists
(like Your Name, Alan Baker, Lewis, Jolly Roger, BK, Joerg Lorenz, et al.)
will actually not only _believe_ the "Techron is better" bull****, but they
will argue with you until the end of time _claiming_ that it's better.

That's what it's like dealing with these Type I and Type III apologists
(where the Type II apologists like Alan Browne and Steve Scharf (sms)
simply filter out the facts so that they're simply ignorant of these facts,
so they _think_ "Techron is better", all the while simply being wrong.

Back to the "Your Name" troll...

He actually _believes_ it's somehow (magically) some super fancy special
only Apple can possibly do it kind of really special product this,
so-called "Apple Silicon", that is so special that it's worth whatever he
can possibly pay for it.

I don't mind him wasting his money and wasting his mindl; but I do mind
when he espouses his utter and total bull**** on Usenet.

When he does that, I will simply point out that this "Apple Silicon" is
coined simply because, IMHO, Apple MARKETING decided that the fact it's
based on ARM technology was something they _needed_ to hide from the
consumer like Your Name who desperately _wants_ to feel that what he's
buying is somehow different (like "Chevron gas" is to "Costco gas").

My job is simply to set the facts straight.
--
Apple is frantic that we NOT think of the new ARM Mac as an ARM Mac.

In message Alan Baker wrote:
On 2020-07-04 2:12 p.m., nospam wrote:
In article , Alan Baker
wrote:

On 2020-07-04 12:19 p.m., Paul wrote:
When Microsoft said "we're going to make an x86 software interpreter
for our new ARM box". Intel threatened them. Microsoft backed off.

Which company has the richest patent portfolio ?

Will they go to patent war with one another ?

Will Apple boxes be stopped at the border, on their way from China ?

Would you care to make a small wager?

Which company has more MONEY: Intel or Apple?

Get this through your tiny, narrow, silly little mind:

APPLE IS ALREADY DESIGNING AND USING ITS OWN CPUs AND HAS BEEN SINCE 2012.

actually, 2010 with the a4, and prior to that, they designed a wide
variety of custom chips.


To be fair, the A4 was not an all-Apple design.

Yep. Mostly, but not entirely.

I've been looking into this and the first all-Apple chip appears to have
been the A6.

For the main iOS device chips that sound right.

--
"Are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
"Uh, I think so, Brain, but we'll never get a monkey to use dental
floss."

In message Alan Baker wrote:
Apple is demonstrably producing the best-in-class CPUs for smartphones.

'As of March 2020, the best mobile processor is Apple A13 Bionic which
powers the iPhone 11 Lineup.'

The cheapest iPhone (the 2020 SE) is more powerful than the most
expensive Android phone.

https://www.techcenturion.com/smartphone-processors-ranking

https://www.myfixguide.com/best-smartphone-processors-ranking/

https://www.phonecurry.com/benchmarks


--
You came in that thing? You're braver than I thought!

On 2020-07-04 6:25 p.m., Kees Nuyt wrote:
On Sat, 4 Jul 2020 23:23:37 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder
wrote:

It was "ARM technology" for _years_ and now, suddenly, now that Apple is
licensing the technology, all of a sudden, as of just about a week or so
ago, suddenly, desperately, frantically so... all of a sudden.. it's
"Apple Silicon"?

Apple can call it Apple Silicon, in the same way as :

- Broadcom SetTopBox SoCs are Broadcom design
with ARM cores licenced from ARM Holdings
- Qualcomm SnapDragon
- etc.

All containing ARM technology.

I don't feel like citing all of them.
See for yourself in this chapter:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_ar...ture#Licensing
and the rest of the article.

ARM Silicon does not exist. ARM's products are instruction sets
and configurable hardware definition libraries, almost
mask-ready, but several steps before it enters the ASML
wafersteppers.


As far as I can tell, ARM sells licenses that include designs for
specific chips...

....but it is well known (to people who don't have a huge axe to grind)
that Apple has only a license for the ARM ISA and designs its own chips
entirely in-house (and has since the A6 first released in 2012).

On Sun, 5 Jul 2020 03:18:22 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:

The cheapest iPhone (the 2020 SE) is more powerful than the most
expensive Android phone.

The sad thing is that Lewis actually _believes_ everything he writes!

While I'm the one who broke the news of the iPhone 2020 SE to the Apple
newsgroups, I'm well aware of the bull**** surrounding that phone.

For example, the _only_ Apple smartphone chip that wasn't well known to be
completely and fatally flawed is the stated reason _why_ it went into that
particular design, which tells you a _lot_ about how badly designed almost
all Apple smartphone CPUs really are.

In addition, it almost certainly _will_ be throttled to half speed, where
that "claimed" power, is then utterly and instantly worthless because it
will join the rest of the Apple smartphones - most likely "in about a
year", giving iPhone users the unenviable choice of:
a. *You _MUST_ choose either unacceptable stability*, or,
b. *You _MUST_ choose unacceptable performance*
c. ... ... YOU Absolutely Must Pick One! ... ...

BTW, the battery, by all accounts, is literally anemic, so, again, you'll
be at that throttling point in no time flat, which, of course, you expect
to be throttled to half speed in about a year nowadays for an iPhone.

So the sad thing is that Lewis actually _believes_ everything he writes!
--
And don't even get me started on how much _functionality_ my $100 Moto G7
has that is impossible on that iPhone SE 2020 (e.g., automatic call
recording, wifi debugging, ability to organize the screen any way you like,
etc.).