Consumer tech giant decides to run it solo, what does this mean for the next line of products?
During WWDC 2005, Steve Jobs walked out onto stage and told the world that Apple would be parting ways with then partner PowerPC (IBM) and joining forces with Intel to build the next line of Macintoshes. This marked the second time that Apple shifted from one instruction set to another.
So how were they going to enable that shift? A software, named after the world’s most famous linguist, Rosetta. Rosetta would translate the instruction set from the PowerPC’s instruction set to that of the Intel processors during the application’s runtime. Obviously this wasn’t very smooth and led to one of the most tumultuous periods in the history of macintosh.
Now, in 2020, Apple unveils Rosetta 2. A framework that aims to transition intel processors to their own inhouse silicon. Rosetta 2, however, differs from its predecessor in one key aspect. It translates instructions at install time rather than runtime. Theoretically this should prevent any throttling from the translation of instructions but will it work? I guess we’ll have to wait and see.
Okay that sounds cool and all but how would this shift affect me, a common Mac user?
Let’s start with the advantages of this shift. Recent Mac models have all been plagued with one major issue. The same issue that team blue’s (Intel’s) processors have taken along with them everywhere. The infamous ability of the intel line of processors to double as an induction stove.
Intel processors have been burning hands and legs around the world over the past few years and this becomes a major issue, not only because of the possible bodily harm but also because of the performance implications it comes bundled with. When a processor goes beyond a particular temperature it starts to throttle it’s performance. 3Ghz drops to 2, or even lower. And more importantly from Apple’s perspective, a cooling system capable of handling that heat would seriously compromise the thickness of their laptops, destroying one of their main marketing points, sleek, beautiful devices. And what does that cause? This madness ->
How else would this alter the next line of Macs? Interestingly enough the answer comes to us from another line of devices that apple markets. The Iphone.
Iphones have been the sole benefactors of Apple’s in-house silicon design for a while now and this has enabled them to build cheaper (for them of course), more efficient devices. An iPhone with 4 to 8 Gbs of RAM provides snappier experiences than that of an android device with 16 Gb (overkill) of RAM. A smaller battery provides more to the Iphone than any amount of beefy batteries can provide to an android device.
This stems from a core principle that Apple’s operations follow. A larger investment in R&D initially allows for a better experience down the line. Other producers either unwilling or incapable of making that investment outsource it to third party providers like qualcomm, and then compensate for the sloppiness of those processors with more memory and more batteries. In the long run not only does Apple’s behaviour make devices function better but also saves them a significant amount in production, boosting their overall revenue even higher.
Now let’s talk about the pain we’re in for (possibly). Apple claims that Rosetta can translate an application to run on their new ARM architecture and hence enable more apps to run on the new silicon than one would expect. Eventually all applications will have to be ARM only. What implications does this bring on us consumers?
First things first this will enable Apple’s target of a connected environment. iPadOS and iOS apps will run directly on Macs post this transition, no tweaks required. Blurring lines between Mac’s and other apple devices even further for developers.
On the other hand, we can see a clearly growing emphasis on app store over external installations, and that is really concerning for developers who use external monetization methods instead of monetizing through the app store. One example would be the well publicized ongoing story of Basecamp, the developers of “Hey e-mail”.
(read more here https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/22/21298552/apple-hey-email-app-approval-rules-basecamp-launch).
Developers would be forced to replace existing methods with Apple’s methods and cutting off alternatives. Seems a bit monopolistic to me.
And looking at the primary demographic of Mac users, content creators, there is another major issue that pops up. Can adobe move all their features to the ARM version of adobe creative cloud? Will Rosetta 2 prevent some apps from running under it the same way Rosetta prevented final cut pro from running on early intel Macs? How long will it take for all of this to settle into a new environment? Will we have the same tools available? Only time can tell as we watch this new era of computing unfold.
One thing can be safely said however, we are going to see a major change in computing based on the failure or success of this rather momentous plan Apple has unveiled in front of developers at WWDC 2020. And casual consumers and computing enthusiasts alike are in for a wild ride.
Comments