does apple switching to arm benefit other devices?

[mahyar]

well imo it will

sbc like raspberry pi and other will have better software support if arm mac succeeds the software support for arm cpus will be a lot better and there will be no need for a translation layer to x86 for running simpler software (which does exist for none apple arm based systems)

but why do you think so? you might say

well because compiling thing for other OSs like linux isnt that hard

speaking of linux. it might also have small benefits to linux community. why? well if a arm-based-mac user wants to switch to a different os because they are tired of mac os there is only linux because: windows on arm is pretty bad and driver and software support will be none exitance 

with apple using custom hardware only linux based OSs can have real hardware and software support. because the os can be modified by community.

[Master Disaster]

Everything Apple is doing with Arm & macOS is proprietary to their own infrastructure, don't expect any of it to benefit other Arm devices.

 

Arm will never be able to run Native X86 code at full speeds and will always require some kind of translation layer. Something has to translate the RISC instructions into CISC, be it a hardware or software solution. Its simply not possible for a RISC CPU to run CISC code, it doesn't understand the instructions hence why Rosetta exists.

 

While technically your Linux example is true there's no telling what special sauce (APIs and the likes) macOS Big Sur is using to run its X86 code and lets not forget Apples claim that their ARM SOC is the fastest on the planet. Just because an Arm version of, lets say, Premier Pro exists and runs well on Mac does not mean it can be converted to run well on all Arm devices and this example also relies on the developers caring enough about Linux support to spend the time porting and recompiling.

 

I'm guessing here but I honestly would not be surprised if Apple dropped support for other OSes entirely on Arm. They seem pretty hell bent on making the ecosystem a fully walled garden.

[mahyar]

Just now, Master Disaster said:

Arm will never be able to run Native X86 code at full speeds and will always require some kind of translation layer. Something has to translate the RISC instructions into CISC, be it a hardware or software solution. Its simply not possible for a RISC CPU to run CISC code, it doesn't understand the instructions hence why Rosetta exists.

you are right but you missed the point

i meant there will be more native software

2 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

While technically your Linux example is true there's no telling what special sauce (APIs and the likes) macOS Big Sur is using to run its Arm code and lets not forget Apples claim that their ARM SOC is the fastest on the planet. Just because an Arm version of, lets say, Premier Pro exists and runes well on Mac does not mean it can be converted to run well on all Arm devices and this example also relies on the developers caring enough about Linux support to spend the time porting and recompiling.

well if devs dont community will! and as i said because of linux kernel open source whatever sauce is on top of big sur can be replicated

and adobe will eventually make a linux port

[WereCatf]

2 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Everything Apple is doing with Arm & macOS is proprietary to their own infrastructure, don't expect any of it to benefit other Arm devices.

Well, not exactly. I mean, it's still ARM, so e.g. Adobe and the likes, while making their apps compile and run on ARM, may decide to whip up Windows ARM - compatibility on the side as well. They have to do like 90% of the work to get the apps to run natively on Apple Silicon anyways, so the added 10% to get Windows - compatibility as well isn't going to be that big of a stretch.

[WereCatf]

1 minute ago, mahyar said:

i meant there will be more native software

Of course there will be more native software for Apple Silicon over time. It just won't happen overnight and not everything will see native versions at all, like e.g. for smaller apps the devs may just simply decide that it's not worth it, since Rosetta 2 can run them just fine as-is.

[mahyar]

Just now, WereCatf said:

Of course there will be more native software for Apple Silicon over time. It just won't happen overnight and not everything will see native versions at all, like e.g. for smaller apps the devs may just simply decide that it's not worth it, since Rosetta 2 can run them just fine as-is.

i mean arm arch in general not apple silicon

[mahyar]

2 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

Well, not exactly. I mean, it's still ARM, so e.g. Adobe and the likes, while making their apps compile and run on ARM, may decide to whip up Windows ARM - compatibility on the side as well. They have to do like 90% of the work to get the apps to run natively on Apple Silicon anyways, so the added 10% to get Windows - compatibility as well isn't going to be that big of a stretch.

from what heard the software development  for newer mac os versions will be worse in general because apple wants to close their ecosystem even more

[Master Disaster]

15 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

Well, not exactly. I mean, it's still ARM, so e.g. Adobe and the likes, while making their apps compile and run on ARM, may decide to whip up Windows ARM - compatibility on the side as well. They have to do like 90% of the work to get the apps to run natively on Apple Silicon anyways, so the added 10% to get Windows - compatibility as well isn't going to be that big of a stretch.

That's fair.

 

Compatibility isn't my major concern though, performance is. Sticking the the Adobe example, would they want CC running on Windows Arm if it performs worse than every other version?

 

16 minutes ago, mahyar said:

well if devs dont community will! and as i said because of linux kernel open source whatever sauce is on top of big sur can be replicated

Again fair, Looking at existing examples though, this process takes a VERY long time and is rarely as good as the native solution.

 

WINE development began in 1993, it didn't reach 1.0 until 2008.

Quote

and adobe will eventually make a linux port

If Adobe wanted a Linux port then they'd have done it by now. Porting CC to Linux isn't trivial, remember Linux has entirely different graphics and sound subsystems.

[mahyar]

1 minute ago, Master Disaster said:

Again fair, Looking at existing examples though, this process takes a VERY long time and is rarely as good as the native solution.

that isnt relevant anymore because linux community is way larger than back then and getting bigger by minute AND linux on arm has better software an hardware support

[WereCatf]

4 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Compatibility isn't my major concern though, performance is. Sticking the the Adobe example, would they want CC running on Windows Arm if it performs worse than every other version?

Because it'd still run better than through Microsoft's x86-on-ARM translator, rather obviously. Windows on ARM is slowly gaining traction, so, as I said, it wouldn't be that much of a stretch to add support for it while they're going for ARM anyways.

20 minutes ago, mahyar said:

and adobe will eventually make a linux port

May I sell you a bridge?

[Master Disaster]

15 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

Because it'd still run better than through Microsoft's ARM-on-x86 translator, rather obviously. Windows on ARM is slowly gaining traction, so, as I said, it wouldn't be that much of a stretch to add support for it while they're going for ARM anyways.

I would say that the final product still has to be usable for them to bother with it. Its no good to anyone if it runs so slow that its not useful.

 

I wouldn't be surprised to see some of their more 'average consumer' oriented products being ported, maybe even their full image suite but I just don't see traditional ARM SOCs being powerful to edit videos any time soon. Imagine trying to render a video on a Ras Pi, the thing can only just play back videos without stuttering. They'd have to remove support for anything 4K or above, x265 would be flaky and forget about RAW video.

Quote

May I sell you a bridge?

How much you asking?

[pythonmegapixel]

14 minutes ago, mahyar said:

linux on arm has better software an hardware support

Than what?

 

34 minutes ago, mahyar said:

well if devs dont community will! and as i said because of linux kernel open source whatever sauce is on top of big sur can be replicated

Wasn't that what Wine was supposed to do for Windows? And as we all know, Wine was a resounding success, there is now complete parity between applications on Linux and Windows and the experience in almost every piece of software is the same across both operating systems. /s

 

Nope! Wine is still a buggy, unstable mess, and it's almost 30 years old at this point.

 

Now is probably a good time to point out that macOS doesn't use the Linux kernel either, so that probably presents another obstacle.

 

 

Quote

and adobe will eventually make a linux port

Oh come on. Now we're just in cloud cuckoo land.

 

Adobe won't even port Digital Editions to Linux - a piece of software which has the sole purpose of connecting to your Adobe account, downloading eBooks from the internet, and copying them to another device over USB. That's it.

 

To suggest that they would do anything of the sort for the whole Creative Cloud suite - which is huge, relies on all kinds of complex platform-specific graphics, audio and other drivers, and presumably already makes them a tidy profit without Linux support, is nothing more than wishful thinking.

 

Even Microsoft - the people who actually f*cking develop Linux's direct competitor - do Linux support better than Adobe.

 

Sure, in some kind of Utopian future, where some distribution of Linux overtakes Windows to become the primary operating system, it might happen. But not any time in the near future.

[WereCatf]

7 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

I wouldn't be surprised to see some of their more 'average consumer' oriented products being ported, maybe even their full image suite but I just don't see traditional ARM CPUs being powerful to edit videos any time soon. Imagine trying to render a video on a Ras Pi, the thing can only just play back videos without stuttering. They'd have to remove support for anything 4K or above, x265 would be flaky and forget about RAW video.

For one, why do you think there'd be an equivalent of an RPi SoC there? The RPi SoC is meant for set-top boxes, it was never designed to be high-performance or go into laptops or similar devices. Secondly, the reason playback of video on the RPi stutters so much is because the playback is happening in software, unless you're using software that supports its HW-acceleration. That wouldn't be an issue with Windows-on-ARM - laptops, since apps would just be using standard Windows APIs.

[Arika]

I personally hope that Apples move to ARM, will make it more appealing to other manufacturers and Microsoft to create ARM based laptops.

 

I don't forsee ARM desktop for a very very long time to where it can compete with x86.

 

ARM on any mobile device, be it a phone, laptop, tablet etc, should be a no brainer, they are emensly power efficient so battery runtime will be much longer. MS should get their shit together and make ARM windows much better, or push harder for Windows 10X to be ARM based and for lower spec devices so we can finally get rid of the shit-tier celeron laptops that have no business being sold in today's market

[WereCatf]

1 minute ago, Arika S said:

MS should get their shit together and make ARM windows much better

Like what? What's wrong with ARM-version of Windows?

[mahyar]

11 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

Like what? What's wrong with ARM-version of Windows?

really bad software and hardware support

[Master Disaster]

18 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

For one, why do you think there'd be an equivalent of an RPi SoC there? The RPi SoC is meant for set-top boxes, it was never designed to be high-performance or go into laptops or similar devices.

Oh I know, that was just the easiest example I could think of.

18 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

Secondly, the reason playback of video on the RPi stutters so much is because the playback is happening in software, unless you're using software that supports its HW-acceleration. That wouldn't be an issue with Windows-on-ARM - laptops, since apps would just be using standard Windows APIs.

Still wouldn't stop people from trying it then complaining to and about Adobe when it doesn't work.

 

I guess the question is simply "is it worth it"? Is it going to do more damage to our reputation and cause us more work than the money we would get from it justifies?

[mahyar]

31 minutes ago, pythonmegapixel said:

 

 

Wasn't that what Wine was supposed to do for Windows? And as we all know, Wine was a resounding success, there is now complete parity between applications on Linux and Windows and the experience in almost every piece of software is the same across both operating systems. /s

 

well more software works then it doesnt i switched to linux full time a few weeks ago and wine is very good

31 minutes ago, pythonmegapixel said:

Now is probably a good time to point out that macOS doesn't use the Linux kernel either, so that probably presents another obstacle.

true but linux kernal can implement mac os kernal feathers

 

31 minutes ago, pythonmegapixel said:

Adobe won't even port Digital Editions to Linux - a piece of software which has the sole purpose of connecting to your Adobe account, downloading eBooks from the internet, and copying them to another device over USB. That's it.

 

To suggest that they would do anything of the sort for the whole Creative Cloud suite - which is huge, relies on all kinds of complex platform-specific graphics, audio and other drivers, and presumably already makes them a tidy profit without Linux support, is nothing more than wishful thinking.

 

Even Microsoft - the people who actually f*cking develop Linux's direct competitor - do Linux support better than Adobe.

 

Sure, in some kind of Utopian future, where some distribution of Linux overtakes Windows to become the primary operating system, it might happen. But not any time in the near future.

well i a few years they be forced to do so

[Master Disaster]

2 minutes ago, mahyar said:

really bad software and hardware support

That is to be expected since the project is still in its infancy.

 

Microsoft leave hardware support up to manufacturers to work out, if a hardware manufacturer wants their device to run on Windows they have to write a driver for it.

 

Saying it has bad software supports means nothing. Microsoft don't write other peoples software for them.

[WereCatf]

1 minute ago, mahyar said:

really bad software and hardware support

It's pointless to blame Microsoft for the missing software, since it's the developers of the software whose job it is to port the software. Microsoft is not responsible for e.g. Adobe's software and you trying to blame it on Microsoft is both idiotic and asinine. Besides that, Microsoft now has a x86-on-ARM translator, similar to Apple's Rosetta 2, so it's not like Microsoft is just sitting on their laurels.

[mahyar]

2 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

That is to be expected since the project is still in its infancy.

 

Microsoft leave hardware support up to manufacturers to work out, if a hardware manufacturer wants their device to run on Windows they have to write a driver for it.

 

Saying it has bad software supports means nothing. Microsoft don't write other peoples software for them.

1 minute ago, WereCatf said:

It's pointless to blame Microsoft for the missing software, since it's the developers of the software whose job it is to port the software. Microsoft is not responsible for e.g. Adobe's software and you trying to blame it on Microsoft is both idiotic and asinine. Besides that, Microsoft now has a x86-on-ARM translator, similar to Apple's Rosetta 2, so it's not like Microsoft is just sitting on their laurels.

well true but they can work on better translation layers and development  kits to encourage devs to code for it

[Laborant]

I am new here! First of all, hello all!

Apple has some track record in making old software obsolete, which is a behavior that is not really accepted within the Windows and Linux PC world. Saying so, the x86 emulation will only be relevant for a number of years. As Software on the Apple Devices are compiled for macOS specifically, even when running on an Intel-CPU, not too much will change in terms of software compatibility, even after Rosetta2 phases out. If a developer is interested in still being relevant, the software will get adapted, otherwise it will get made obsolete.

As an embedded systems engineer working with Nvidia Jetson SoMs (Multi core ARM with Nvidia GPU cores), I am really interested in how the new M1-Chip performs in real life. Seeing how efficient a program can run, when being able to have unified RAM between a (reasonable) GPU and the CPUs (e.g. Cuda ZeroCopy), I am convinced that deeper integration of a GPU and additional accelerator cores (like a Neural Processing Unit, DSP-Cores, FPGA-Fabric...) will lead to further performance gains.
This on the other hand, could nudge the industry again towards more proprietary systems, that could hurt the enthusiast-niche as well as the open source community.

Integration has many key advantages in performance, but also favors closed systems. AMD also already takes on this with its "Smart Access Memory" between Ryzen CPUs and the 6000-series GPUs. Microsoft's  "DirectStorage"-Approach is also not really open source, so games being tailored to use this, might have trouble getting the same performance gains on Linux... The large software companies (Adobe and co) might prefer defined and "locked down" systems, as this narrows the possibility of pirated software as well as it eases the development.

I guess, the big players know this - hence the planned acquisition of Xilinx (by AMD), the acquisition of Altera (now "Intel FPGA"), the planned acquisition of ARM by Nvidia.

Performance wise, I do not see any reason, why a Desktop-PC needs to stick with x86. x86 is relevant, because... it was relevant. Whenever another instruction set manages to bring better performance, legacy software will be the only problem.

Maybe, Qualcomm is the next AMD? (Okay, my crystal ball is probably broken...)

[Lord Vile]

Can see windows for ARM benefiting, just with the software library existing and probably is easier and more worthwhile to port a version from Mac ARM to W10 ARM vs x86 to W10 ARM

[WereCatf]

2 minutes ago, mahyar said:

well true but they can work on better translation layers and development  kits to encourage devs to code for it

The Windows APIs are the same on ARM and x86, so no. As for translation, well, I just said that Microsoft has such now. The porting to ARM still has to happen on the devs' end and there's nothing Microsoft can do about that. You are still barking up the wrong tree.

[mahyar]

 

4 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

Microsoft now has a x86-on-ARM translator, similar to Apple's Rosetta 2, so it's not like Microsoft is just sitting on their laurels.

have a translation layer is not extraordinary even raspberry pi has a x86 emulator (called box86)