The question is as users should we care? If this is cheaper for Apple will they actually lower product prices or just enhance their own margins. Will this result in any superior performance on a cost-adjusted basis?
Of course, we should care. We are talking about losing the standard x86 platform support (which allows for Windows/Linux support if not total OOB support) to a custom Apple platform that may be more locked down to the point that Linux may not even care to add any support for it (T2-Macs have been difficult to add support in Linux). This drops the value a lot if you're not an exclusive macOS user.
1. We don't know what impact this will have for Bootcamp and Windows, since Windows 10 on ARM right now is customized for specific ARM CPUs like Snapdragon.
2. Same for virtualization, we don't know the performance hit it is going to have. A lot of people still need to use Windows for specific software that is not available on Windows or macOS where 32-bit support can be retained with older macOS releases.
3. Going the other direction, ARM means we could also see easier porting of iOS apps to macOS via Catalyst with more consistent APIs. But that could also mean less focus on macOS overall and everyone switching to iOS to port to macOS rather than working on two separate versions. This has both pros and cons and we won't know the full extent until a few years later.
Porting iOS to Macs don’t require ARM. Almost every iOS app started life running on x86. The iOS simulator runs iOS software compiled for x86 linked to x86 versions of the iOS framework.
I didn't say it does, I'm just saying that it'll be easier. Instead of working on both x86/ARM frameworks, they'll just stop supporting x86 (freeze) and only update on the ARM framework from now on.
They did the same thing with PowerPC and x86-32. No reason to expect them to support x86-64 in 5-10 years if they switch all Macs to ARM.
Since Apple effectively stopped innovating OSX a decade ago (unless you really need each new iteration of emojis) just get a Windows machine if Windows software is essential to your workflow. I have used macs a long time but got a supplemental Windows machine for my office to not bother with fiddly virtualization issues. Windows has largely caught up with OSX as OSX has stagnated or outright decayed.
It makes me sad to say that given the Apple fanboy I once was but reality is reality.
I already have Windows PCs (SP4 + Desktop)and while W10 has come a long way, it's not as stable as macOS. Catalina is just as bad as Vista IMO.
However, macOS is still better IMO because I still have a lot of issues on Windows; all stemming from MS shipping bad updates. Two months ago, a Windows update broke my bluetooth completely and I had to wait a month for another Windows update/driver to fix it. Last year, a bad update forced me to reinstall Windows because it was freezing all the time and I couldn't restore a system point either.
As for macOS, I never had to do a reinstall (except one time that was entirely my fault) in more than a decade. W7/W10, I had to do it 5 or so times in last few years. Catalina however lost my respect for macOS, that was the worst update of all time.
I have 4 machines running Windows 10 from its release and never had to reinstall the OS. Everything is stable and I hardly reboot.
Most development tools have Windows versions: Node, NPM, Git, Docker. If I'd encounter one which doesn't run ob Windows, there's WSL.
I pretty much disliked Windows XP, Vista and preferred Linux, but since Windows 7,the OS got a lot better from my point of view.
I have the largest possible software library and the added possibility to run *NIX tools when needed.
I don't need to fiddle with Linux desktop or pay 3x the price for Apple branded hardawe which you can't even maintain or extend yourself. I can use cheap chargers, perriferals and I can connect almost any device to my desktops or laptops.
Agreed, VSCode is my favorite text editor, WSL2 looks to be awesome (I'm waiting for VMware to use it since VMware is required for my job), Github, WinUI looks awesome, etc.
Windows is slowly becoming a very developer friendly platform. Will it work out for Microsoft? Who knows.
I'm more excited for Microsoft than Apple at this point but I am looking forward to seeing iPadOS/macOS later this year.
Apple's gains in chip performance are incredible and I would prefer to have an alternative to Intel. If I can get better performance and they keep the price the same, I care.
Heh, well the list price for Waves Horizon bundle is $3,999 and that's one vendor...
A lot of the plugins those users acquire over time are produced by individual devs or small Indy shops, who may not be around any more or inclined to develop Arm versions of older products. You'll find threads on gearslutz.com where some people aren't upgrading to Catalina because 32-bit plugins aren't supported any more.
I was referring to the "Intel-specific" part of your comment, not the price. I'm a professional composer and haven't ever come across an Intel-specific plugin -- loads of people use AMD. I think what you meant is x86-specific, but as other people have pointed out in this thread and others, it's expected that Apple will provide the ability to simply recompile for ARM. No big deal.
for ARM, power per watt. It's always been the advantage.
Controlling the stack w/ better vertical integration as well will probably yield more coherent product design. You can tell re how "put-together" a product an iPad or iPhone is vs. a Mac these days.
While maybe not yielding direct customer, user-facing benefits, the under-the-hood benefits would definitely improve customer experience.
We have an existence proof. The iPads are already a better value when you compare price/performance.
Even the low end $329 iPad can hold its own performance wise to low and midrange laptops. The high end iPad Pros are cheaper and faster than lowend and midrange laptops.
1. We don't know what impact this will have for Bootcamp and Windows, since Windows 10 on ARM right now is customized for specific ARM CPUs like Snapdragon.
2. Same for virtualization, we don't know the performance hit it is going to have. A lot of people still need to use Windows for specific software that is not available on Windows or macOS where 32-bit support can be retained with older macOS releases.
3. Going the other direction, ARM means we could also see easier porting of iOS apps to macOS via Catalyst with more consistent APIs. But that could also mean less focus on macOS overall and everyone switching to iOS to port to macOS rather than working on two separate versions. This has both pros and cons and we won't know the full extent until a few years later.