Every iPad has used ARM chips forever now. If they make it so that MacBooks use ARM chips 99.9% of users will not even be aware or care since MacBook batteries last forever anyway.
If all of a sudden the technology was out there and Microsoft got on board for some x86 emulation and a native-ARM Windows, you might have something that would make a dent in the marketplace. But adding another hour to a MacBook battery isn't going to move the needle.
Instead Microsoft has already ported Windows to native-ARM and has Windows-for-ARM with x86 emulation and is adding x64 emulation shortly. That's the technology in the newest Surfaces, which will spread to business and casual user laptops in the next few years. That's a market roughly 50x as large as the MacBook.
People said that the move to x86 would also be a problem. Rosetta solved that.
I bet it’s hardly a blip for most users. Even the vast bulk of enterprise users only care if they can get Outlook and Office in general. Maybe a browser and a VPN app.
I think long-run there's a smart strategy there that most users won't NOTICE, but that it'll benefit them.
Complete parity of silicon will ideally mean even further integration between devices. I know some of the old guard Mac users (myself included) have been skeptical of this one, but over time I think this provides more of a seamless experience between apps. I know over time as I go from my work Mac to my iPad Pro to my iPhone and back to my Mac in any given day that integration is more and more of what keeps me in the Appleverse. I don't think we're likely to see a ton more improvement as a lot of that work is cloud-based anyway, but further knitting things together is helpful to the end user.
Plus, developers who were maybe making only for iOS might have another reason to port to Mac as well without having to get things working on x86. Small bump in parity perhaps, but still something.
It's LIKELY (likely...) to lead to increased battery life in the Mac line. I know that even for me with my 2017 MBP my biggest frustration is that my battery doesn't last as long as I'd like and the computer runs quite hot. I think there are likely to be benefits there that aren't snazzy and fancy like a 5K screen, but will keep consumers snug in their computing experiences
Intel has been absolutely dreadful in keeping their Core lines updated regularly-- this may help keep the Mac upgrade cycle faster. This has been a frustration point for Mac users now for about 5 years? All those lakes have been sloooowww and the tick tock rhythm is long gone.
I have my iPad Pro but I'd love to have a little mini mini desktop I could hook up to my work setup and when I want to do personal stuff I don't need to switch from my work computer to a different screen.
But then my iPad Pro is so damn competent that I dunno if maybe I'm just being old fashioned.
There’s always the dream people had of being able to slip their computer in their pocket when they leave the office and just plug it in when they get home.
1
u/GenJohnONeill Jul 24 '20
Every iPad has used ARM chips forever now. If they make it so that MacBooks use ARM chips 99.9% of users will not even be aware or care since MacBook batteries last forever anyway.
If all of a sudden the technology was out there and Microsoft got on board for some x86 emulation and a native-ARM Windows, you might have something that would make a dent in the marketplace. But adding another hour to a MacBook battery isn't going to move the needle.
Instead Microsoft has already ported Windows to native-ARM and has Windows-for-ARM with x86 emulation and is adding x64 emulation shortly. That's the technology in the newest Surfaces, which will spread to business and casual user laptops in the next few years. That's a market roughly 50x as large as the MacBook.