Apple Should Stop Selling Four-Year-Old Computers

[ChadD]

I don't see them wanting to write code for 2 different OS's. I'd see it more likely the whole lineup jumps ship off Intel and go pure Arm, than they would run Arm and Intel. That's if they were to do something like that, which I can't see.

They already have 2 OS to support. The recent renaming seems to suggest they may be wanting to get that down to one.

Having said that... they have been filing patents the last year or so that seem to suggest a few things about what they have running in house to me.

They have been granted a handful of patents regarding SOC GPUs setup in such away as to take some specific load from the CPU with no software input. (the patents describe a system that detects specific type of math requests and starts shunting them for calculation on free GPU threads.) The patent in question claims its intended use is for debugging. It seems more likely to me it is describing a SOC with a built in GPU capable of doing some float point when needed. In another patent it describes almost the same thing in reverse... with a second GPU and or CPU taking work loads from an external GPU. Neither of these seem likely to have been cooked up for debugging of games as suggested by the patents. More likely they are being used for some in house special project... which may or may not be ARM based SOC running desktops. 9,390,461 B1 9,292,340 B2
This 9,280,471 B2 is about SOC cache systems... and may not be related to the others in anyway, however it seems to me it could possibly solve L2 cache issues involved with splitting instructions with a GPU out of order. In my mind this patent seems to add to the idea of them looking to use the SOC GPU cores as co processors.

I don't have the patent number for the one patent I was really looking for. It was granted early this year but I couldn't find it doing a quick look. If I find it later I'll edit. That patent describes a system that sounded very much like "code morphing" that was used by Transmeta to run x86 code on the crusoe chips. If apple does have a "hardware" code solution much like transmeta used... and a solution for CPU/GPU load sharing baked into their new SOC. I believe they could replace Intel in all there machines with out having to touch one line of code in the OS or third party software. The only question would be performance. I am not sure unloading work to a SOC GPU would allow them to equal the performance in the highest end Intel parts... I'm pretty sure however they could easily equal Intels mid range and down. We'll see what happens I would imagine pretty soon. Apple is long overdue in their refreshing of their line, if ARM does become the word for Apple.. it will make for a very interesting 2017-2018 for the industry if the performance is there. (and I couldn't imagine they would really go that way if it wasn't)

 

[rat]

I'd second this. I have a Dell XPS 13 that I run with Debian on it. Works well. Only recommendation is to stay far far away from the high dpi touchscreen. Ubuntu and Linux in general do not play well.

Ironically... Ubuntu nailed high DPI with thr newest version of the Unity desktop. Works better than windows 10's scaling.

I bought a cheap bay trail based netbook to throw Linux onto. Installed xUbuntu onto it and everything worked out of the box. It's easily my most preferred machine.

 

[MavericK]

Here you go guys, new MacBook Pro is going to have an amazing new feature... fingerprint sensor in the power button!

New MacBook Pro may pack Touch ID power button


...Oh wait, my LG G5 already has that.

 

[rat]

Here you go guys, new MacBook Pro is going to have an amazing new feature... fingerprint sensor in the power button!
...Oh wait, my LG G5 already has that.

HP Envy 13. You can wake the system by using the fingerprint sensor. Oh sorry, I meant... HOW MAGICAL AND INNOVATIVE.

 

[Deleted whining member 223597]

Here you go guys, new MacBook Pro is going to have an amazing new feature... fingerprint sensor in the power button!

New MacBook Pro may pack Touch ID power button


...Oh wait, my LG G5 already has that.

I didn't realize your G5 is a laptop..oh wait. That's also pretty funny considering the iPhone 5s had the first "successful", as in it wasn't a piece of shit like previous attempts, fingerprint scanner and everyone else started implementing them afterwards.

Honestly, unless Apple puts an OLED screen in the new MacBooks I don't think I'll even be slightly tempted with them. My 2013 13" MBPr gets the job done and actually runs better than when it launched.

 

[heatlesssun]

I didn't realize your G5 is a laptop..oh wait. That's also pretty funny considering the iPhone 5s had the first "successful", as in it wasn't a piece of shit like previous attempts, fingerprint scanner and everyone else started implementing them afterwards.

But good fingerprint scanners have been in Windows laptops for some time and now they've moved to very good facial recognition. Apple just hasn't pushed the envelope in laptops for a number of years now and there many, even in traditionally very pro-Apple media, that see the same thing. Which is kind of duh when lines have been updated in years.

 

[natos]

Yes, their sales are down as of the most recent quarter. Their sales are still well above other OEMs, and have been for years.

You're an idiot. Apple has less than 10% market share in computers. Dell, HP, acer, all have much higher volume.

 

[heatlesssun]

You're an idiot. Apple has less than 10% market share in computers. Dell, HP, acer, all have much higher volume.

He is referring to profitability and that's a fair argument. Apple never got into the race to the bottom with pricing and that's helped it with its premium reputation, at least outside of places like this. But then it also goes to matter of Apple selling pretty dated stuff by PC standards at a price premium that wouldn't stand in PC world. In effect what we've seen in the last few years from Apple in the Mac line is PC competitors having to setup up their games from smaller PC volumes and increasing completion of the shrinking market share and Apple not really having to respond to any of that and being able to do what it's always done. But I think the shrinking of Mac sales the last two quarters on the scale of PC sales overall means Apple has probably coasted a bit too long.

 

[rudy]

I don't follow mac hardware but with laptops especially I think the rules are simple. You can keep the same form factor for multiple years if its thin enough or stylish enough or whatever. However the internal CPU needs to be updated as often as Intel releases chips. Especially because updates increase efficiency and therefore battery life in laptops. But one should consider that apple keeps selling these things so why bother if their customers are stupid? IMO this has always been apples business model, sell old stuff but just have it re-branded or different enough its not easy for the consumer to compare.

It also could be that apples envisions the demise of the PC space and hopes they can turn all their laptop buyers into ipad pro buyers. I notice their commercials really try to pitch that thing as a laptop replacement. Which would increase their profit margins to astronomical levels if they could shift all their laptops buyers into cheapo arm chip buyers.

 

[cageymaru]

Dolphins like the IPad. Why so much hate here?

Imgur GIF

 

[krotch]

They already have 2 OS to support. The recent renaming seems to suggest they may be wanting to get that down to one.

That'd turn to 3 OS's, unless they just build a different GUI for their iOS and attempt to run that on their laptop/desktops. I just don't see that happening. I'd see them keeping iOS, OSX, and if they come out with an Arm based laptop/desktops, a new OS for that.

Having said that... they have been filing patents the last year or so that seem to suggest a few things about what they have running in house to me.

They have been granted a handful of patents regarding SOC GPUs setup in such away as to take some specific load from the CPU with no software input. (the patents describe a system that detects specific type of math requests and starts shunting them for calculation on free GPU threads.) The patent in question claims its intended use is for debugging. It seems more likely to me it is describing a SOC with a built in GPU capable of doing some float point when needed. In another patent it describes almost the same thing in reverse... with a second GPU and or CPU taking work loads from an external GPU. Neither of these seem likely to have been cooked up for debugging of games as suggested by the patents. More likely they are being used for some in house special project... which may or may not be ARM based SOC running desktops. 9,390,461 B1 9,292,340 B2
This 9,280,471 B2 is about SOC cache systems... and may not be related to the others in anyway, however it seems to me it could possibly solve L2 cache issues involved with splitting instructions with a GPU out of order. In my mind this patent seems to add to the idea of them looking to use the SOC GPU cores as co processors.

Just sounds like CUDA and reverse CUDA (I guess) to me. Although, I have no idea how it'd do it without software input. Definitely have to be built into the SOC.

I don't have the patent number for the one patent I was really looking for. It was granted early this year but I couldn't find it doing a quick look. If I find it later I'll edit. That patent describes a system that sounded very much like "code morphing" that was used by Transmeta to run x86 code on the crusoe chips. If apple does have a "hardware" code solution much like transmeta used... and a solution for CPU/GPU load sharing baked into their new SOC. I believe they could replace Intel in all there machines with out having to touch one line of code in the OS or third party software. The only question would be performance. I am not sure unloading work to a SOC GPU would allow them to equal the performance in the highest end Intel parts... I'm pretty sure however they could easily equal Intels mid range and down. We'll see what happens I would imagine pretty soon. Apple is long overdue in their refreshing of their line, if ARM does become the word for Apple.. it will make for a very interesting 2017-2018 for the industry if the performance is there. (and I couldn't imagine they would really go that way if it wasn't)

Performance would definitely be an issue. I guess they could just run two SOCs and see how that works out. It'd definitely be interesting to see if they go that route. They'd have an in-house designed chip, which would probably save them some money. Although, I have no idea if it's cheaper to source procs from one company or to make your own.

It'd at least keep them from having to be tied down to another company, like when they were still using PowerPC procs. They just have to get the GPU performance up too and they can stop having to deal with Nvidia or AMD.

 

[krotch]

HP Envy 13. You can wake the system by using the fingerprint sensor. Oh sorry, I meant... HOW MAGICAL AND INNOVATIVE.

I actually had a fingerprint sensor in my old HP TM2T from back in like 2005. One of those stupid, "Roll your finger over it" sensors. I didn't use it for anything more than unlocking it, since I'd sometimes have it in tablet mode and didn't want to type my password in the on-screen keyboard.

 

[ChadD]

That'd turn to 3 OS's, unless they just build a different GUI for their iOS and attempt to run that on their laptop/desktops. I just don't see that happening. I'd see them keeping iOS, OSX, and if they come out with an Arm based laptop/desktops, a new OS for that.

No doubt they wouldn't go to 3... I don't think they would have to. They have been through this once before. OSX didn't start its life on Intel hardware, it started on PowerPC. Yes they did recompile their entire OS and eccosystem at that time... although frankly there install base was a lot lower back then. I still think with the nature of the ARM chips they have been making and what they are hinting at in their patents it won't be needed. (even back with their last switch they had software solutions to run the old code... as they slowly phased out the legacy stuff)

Just sounds like CUDA and reverse CUDA (I guess) to me. Although, I have no idea how it'd do it without software input. Definitely have to be built into the SOC.

That is what the patents are for... SOC designs. My thinking is A10 will be an all in one design... in that in their desktops and laptops the GPU won't handle actual Display work and just be used by the ARM core as a co processor. Where as the exact same chip used in a mobile device will use the Display features of the GPU reducing the number of GPU threads on offer to the CPU, the patents do point to that being dynamic though which might be interesting.
Their patents do describe a much lower level solution, think on demand CUDA that the software isn't thinking about. Its in away like the early co processors on Intel chips. Its also possible that those patents are intended only for Mobile use as a way to push iphone performance up with A10.

Performance would definitely be an issue. I guess they could just run two SOCs and see how that works out. It'd definitely be interesting to see if they go that route. They'd have an in-house designed chip, which would probably save them some money. Although, I have no idea if it's cheaper to source procs from one company or to make your own.

It'd at least keep them from having to be tied down to another company, like when they were still using PowerPC procs. They just have to get the GPU performance up too and they can stop having to deal with Nvidia or AMD.

The A line of chips is magnitudes cheaper for them compared to buying Intel chips. A9 would already be able to compete in the low end (A9 would be almost 2x as fast as the best ARM shipping chrome books)... A10 hits this fall, and if they have worked in stuff they are talking about in some of the patents its going to push even the higher end intel parts if they ramp up the voltages and clock speeds for use in non mobile parts. You can also point to statements made by ARM about 2016 being the year we get ps4 level GPU performance from the highest end shipping ARM SOCs. If they go arm I would think they would still go with AMD/NVIDIA but who knows... like you suggest there isn't much stopping them from just putting 2 A10s in a laptop and harnessing both GPUS. (in fact I read another of their patents that did describe something like a SLI for SOC GPUs sharing a CPU cache or some such thing... honestly that one I didn't really grok)

 

[5icko]

It combines an SSD and HDD as single volume (like JBOD). But is controlled at the operating system level so it dynamically moves things back and forth between the two. So size wise you get the capacity of both (1TB HDD + 500GB SSD = 1.5TB volume drive). But OSX writes everything to the SSD first and then moves things over to the HDD as determined by several factors. And it keeps more important things on the SSD regardless. It's not the same as a cache drive like Intel or a "hybrid" drive as sold by Western Digital or Seagate.


It's actually a very elegant system, I'm just surprised no-one else has implemented something similar.

Huh??

No benefit with the affordable cost of SSDs. Why mix hamburger helper in your hamburger when you can have filet mignon?

 

[Darunion]

Huh??

No benefit with the affordable cost of SSDs. Why mix hamburger helper in your hamburger when you can have filet mignon?

I am concerned with the OS overhead and bus bandwidth being used to migrate data back and forth. I might lean toward the keep it simple stupid method of some SSD's for speed, and HDD for mass storage (which I am finding I use only when I have it and just to packrat files). A usb HDD has served me well for non-frequent use files where as SSD for me is OS and current games I am playing. I used to keep every game I owned installed, just in case I wanted to play it which could be once in a 3 year span. Just rambling hoping to spark conversation on do we really still need built in mass storage? And even that is stretching the term, when 1tb ssd is about the price of a 8tb hdd. Maybe now if HDD were still leading in size by a landslide like it used to, maybe if hdd were sitting at a comparable price but holding 512TB.

 

[Mistral]

Dolphins like the IPad. Why so much hate here?

Imgur GIF

Think this demonstrates that they hate 'em

 

[5icko]

I am concerned with the OS overhead and bus bandwidth being used to migrate data back and forth. I might lean toward the keep it simple stupid method of some SSD's for speed, and HDD for mass storage (which I am finding I use only when I have it and just to packrat files). A usb HDD has served me well for non-frequent use files where as SSD for me is OS and current games I am playing. I used to keep every game I owned installed, just in case I wanted to play it which could be once in a 3 year span. Just rambling hoping to spark conversation on do we really still need built in mass storage? And even that is stretching the term, when 1tb ssd is about the price of a 8tb hdd. Maybe now if HDD were still leading in size by a landslide like it used to, maybe if hdd were sitting at a comparable price but holding 512TB.

HDD's have their roles, just not in a bastardized application.

I'm running 3 HGST 4 GB hard drives in raid for redundancy. They make lots of racket in a box that would otherwise be very quiet. When I have the time I'll build a dedicated NAS for them and stick it in a closet as far away from my office as possible.

 

[westrock2000]

Huh??

No benefit with the affordable cost of SSDs. Why mix hamburger helper in your hamburger when you can have filet mignon?

1.5-2TB SSD is affordable compared to that set up?

 

[krotch]

No doubt they wouldn't go to 3... I don't think they would have to. They have been through this once before. OSX didn't start its life on Intel hardware, it started on PowerPC. Yes they did recompile their entire OS and eccosystem at that time... although frankly there install base was a lot lower back then. I still think with the nature of the ARM chips they have been making and what they are hinting at in their patents it won't be needed. (even back with their last switch they had software solutions to run the old code... as they slowly phased out the legacy stuff)

Not sure how well of a switch it'd be, as the Arm is going to be slower and then you're having to have a translator inbetween to make old code work on new OS. I can see them trying to experiment though with putting OSX onto like the iPad Pro.

That is what the patents are for... SOC designs. My thinking is A10 will be an all in one design... in that in their desktops and laptops the GPU won't handle actual Display work and just be used by the ARM core as a co processor. Where as the exact same chip used in a mobile device will use the Display features of the GPU reducing the number of GPU threads on offer to the CPU, the patents do point to that being dynamic though which might be interesting.
Their patents do describe a much lower level solution, think on demand CUDA that the software isn't thinking about. Its in away like the early co processors on Intel chips. Its also possible that those patents are intended only for Mobile use as a way to push iphone performance up with A10.

Guess will have to wait and see. Sometimes Apple might patent something and never make use of it, as consumer usage changes and they have no need to actually implement the patent in anything they make. Although in this case, I could see it being used in some fashion. Be it a mobile device or a desktop device.

The A line of chips is magnitudes cheaper for them compared to buying Intel chips. A9 would already be able to compete in the low end (A9 would be almost 2x as fast as the best ARM shipping chrome books)... A10 hits this fall, and if they have worked in stuff they are talking about in some of the patents its going to push even the higher end intel parts if they ramp up the voltages and clock speeds for use in non mobile parts. You can also point to statements made by ARM about 2016 being the year we get ps4 level GPU performance from the highest end shipping ARM SOCs. If they go arm I would think they would still go with AMD/NVIDIA but who knows... like you suggest there isn't much stopping them from just putting 2 A10s in a laptop and harnessing both GPUS. (in fact I read another of their patents that did describe something like a SLI for SOC GPUs sharing a CPU cache or some such thing... honestly that one I didn't really grok)

The A line is cheaper than Intel chips, that I understand. I mean if it'd be cheaper for them to make a proc more equal to that of the Intel chips. Whether it'd be cheaper to go that route or continue sourcing them from Intel. From something like the iMac lineup, I see the A line easily being able to do the job that normal usage consumers go through. The Pro lineup, they'd have to make a new chip, jam together multiple A chips, or continue on with Intel.

 

[krotch]

I am concerned with the OS overhead and bus bandwidth being used to migrate data back and forth. I might lean toward the keep it simple stupid method of some SSD's for speed, and HDD for mass storage (which I am finding I use only when I have it and just to packrat files). A usb HDD has served me well for non-frequent use files where as SSD for me is OS and current games I am playing. I used to keep every game I owned installed, just in case I wanted to play it which could be once in a 3 year span. Just rambling hoping to spark conversation on do we really still need built in mass storage? And even that is stretching the term, when 1tb ssd is about the price of a 8tb hdd. Maybe now if HDD were still leading in size by a landslide like it used to, maybe if hdd were sitting at a comparable price but holding 512TB.

Depends on ppl's use. Not all of us need high speed storage, we just want lots of storage. I rip all the blu-rays I buy and store them, so I don't have to be walking back and forth swapping out discs. I rip all my music CDs I buy. I download a lot of things from Japan, which comes in .ts files ranging from 500 meg for a few minutes to 40 gig for an hour long show. I can't even fit my music and music videos on 1 TB of storage. That's the stuff I use on a constant basis.

HDDs are still around, cause people still use them and want them. I sure as hell hope they keep producing and increasing HDD storage size. I'd buy all SSDs if they were comparable in size and price, but they simply aren't.

 

[illram]

Who is this poor 4 year old and why is Apple selling him computers??

 

[InorganicMatter]

Apple will stop selling four-year-old computers when people stop buying them.

Pretty simple.

 

[ChadD]

Not sure how well of a switch it'd be, as the Arm is going to be slower and then you're having to have a translator inbetween to make old code work on new OS. I can see them trying to experiment though with putting OSX onto like the iPad Pro.

There patents describe hardware solutions not software. I don't believe there would be translation going on in the same way as a virtual box type solution. What the patents describe is more akin to transmetas embedded Code morphing tech they used for their Crusoe line of "x86" chips.

Guess will have to wait and see. Sometimes Apple might patent something and never make use of it, as consumer usage changes and they have no need to actually implement the patent in anything they make. Although in this case, I could see it being used in some fashion. Be it a mobile device or a desktop device.

No doubt, these patents may be for osx running arm machines or not. Some of them could still be used in a A10 or A11 chip still intended to be a 100% mobile part. Its not like using free GPU threads to speed normal operation wouldn't be a nice boost for mobile as well. It just seems makes sense to me that it could be used to add performance to the chip in a situation where it doesn't have to use the SOC GPU for anything else.

The A line is cheaper than Intel chips, that I understand. I mean if it'd be cheaper for them to make a proc more equal to that of the Intel chips. Whether it'd be cheaper to go that route or continue sourcing them from Intel. From something like the iMac lineup, I see the A line easily being able to do the job that normal usage consumers go through. The Pro lineup, they'd have to make a new chip, jam together multiple A chips, or continue on with Intel.

The A9x chips are already = to any I3 chips intel is shipping in terms of pure performance and they push most of the mid range i5s. The A10 hits this fall for Iphone7 100% for sure. The only question is how improved it is. A9 was 60-90% faster then A8 depending on the usage. Rumors are A10 is a 6 core part, and supposed pics of the chip have started hitting the web with manufacturing dates of July. I guess we'll see if Apple does anything more with the A10 when the iphone 7 hits in September. I do believe if it really is a 6 core part and they are starting to work in some of the hardware GPU load sharing they have been filing patents for... Intel could be looking at loosing the low for sure and possibly all way up apple lines. Apple could put 2 A10s in a pro level laptop and still have it cost them 1/8 of what they pay for Intel silicon, and they could possibly remove other parts they have to pay for. It would give them a true 100% apple designed machine for the first time ever.

 

[krotch]

There patents describe hardware solutions not software. I don't believe there would be translation going on in the same way as a virtual box type solution. What the patents describe is more akin to transmetas embedded Code morphing tech they used for their Crusoe line of "x86" chips.

That's still a software type solution, it's just embedded in the chip and wouldn't require an OS type software to do the work. I'd still see some kind of performance hit. I'd like to see something along the lines of running iOS natively on an x86 machine. Like if you're on a plane and not doing any heavy workload, get the Mac to run iOS to save on battery and do piddly little things that doesn't need the whole grunt of OSX. Although, I'd assume there's already some aggressive battery saving code in OSX where it wouldn't need to resort to such. I don't know enough about OSX at all, except that it already gets exceptional battery life.

No doubt, these patents may be for osx running arm machines or not. Some of them could still be used in a A10 or A11 chip still intended to be a 100% mobile part. Its not like using free GPU threads to speed normal operation wouldn't be a nice boost for mobile as well. It just seems makes sense to me that it could be used to add performance to the chip in a situation where it doesn't have to use the SOC GPU for anything else.

Ya, make use of an idle GPU to speed other things up. I know with CUDA capable programs, it speeds things up and a massive rate. My video encoding takes 1/2 the time when I'm able to use my GTX 970. Granted the SOC's GPU isn't as powerful, but anything helps.

The A9x chips are already = to any I3 chips intel is shipping in terms of pure performance and they push most of the mid range i5s. The A10 hits this fall for Iphone7 100% for sure. The only question is how improved it is. A9 was 60-90% faster then A8 depending on the usage. Rumors are A10 is a 6 core part, and supposed pics of the chip have started hitting the web with manufacturing dates of July. I guess we'll see if Apple does anything more with the A10 when the iphone 7 hits in September. I do believe if it really is a 6 core part and they are starting to work in some of the hardware GPU load sharing they have been filing patents for... Intel could be looking at loosing the low for sure and possibly all way up apple lines. Apple could put 2 A10s in a pro level laptop and still have it cost them 1/8 of what they pay for Intel silicon, and they could possibly remove other parts they have to pay for. It would give them a true 100% apple designed machine for the first time ever.

I don't know if the A9X are as powerful. Sure, in the benchmarks it might show as such, but the benchmarks are mobile apps. Something those chips are designed for, not so much the I series of chips. They could be as powerful as the i3s. I don't know. Do I think they're comparable, yes. I just wish there was someway to actually show such. It's always this apples to oranges comparison, so a lot of guess work normally.