News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why Apple ditched PowerPC, and what it says about Apple d... by mschuster91 on Saturday June 20, 2020 @01:47PM (#23585302)
What I don't get: what, other than politics, keeps Apple from going AMD?

Apple is already working with AMD when it comes to dedicated graphics chips, and people have done Hackintoshes with AMD parts for ages... so why go the (risky) ARM route instead?

Re:Why Apple ditched PowerPC, and what it says about Apple d... by Jenya_ on Saturday June 20, 2020 @03:09PM (#23586112)
Apple spends a lot of money at TSMC (about 75% of TSMC 7nm production was for Apple chips in 2018, according to a link below). AMD also makes its chips at TSMC and TSMC fab is a limited resource. Instead of paying AMD to make chips at TSMC, Apple can just make them itself.

https://www.eetimes.com/tsmc-to-keep-supplying-chips-to-huaw...

Re:Why Apple ditched PowerPC, and what it says about Apple d... by mbreese on Saturday June 20, 2020 @03:17PM (#23586225)
Why does Apple do anything? I think one factor that is always a concern for them is control. They switched to Intel for more control over their product lines.

Same issue here - they’ll switch to ARM for more control. AMD has some good hardware, but they’d just end up switching one outside chip vendor for another. So while a move to AMD would be “safer”, it still wouldn’t offer any more control over their products.

That’s my guess.

Re:Why Apple ditched PowerPC, and what it says about Apple d... by SllX on Saturday June 20, 2020 @10:17PM (#23589184)
It's a fair question.

It's ultimately an intermediary step. Apple already has the tech for making multi-arch software, it's already a part of the toolkit, and they already design and sell ARM chips in their other product lines. It's not a no-risk scenario, but it's a low risk transition from a company that's managed two architecture migrations before.

The Mach-O object file format supports fat binaries and has run working executables on ARM, SPARC, PA-RISC, PowerPC 32-bit, PowerPC 64-bit, x86 and x86_64 first under NeXT and eventually under Apple. It's what every implementation of Mac OS X, iOS and its derivatives use today and there's nothing stopping Apple from support other architectures down the line other than they probably don't want to or need to. If they decided they wanted to revitalize Mac OS X server and ship them with POWER9 or RISC-V CPUs, they could do that. Not sure why they want to, but it's an option.

If they're going to end a working business relationship with a supplier anyway and they have CPUs that outclass their current supplier in CPU performance (an A13 in a $400 iPhone SE outclasses the Xeons in their $6K Mac Pros in single threaded performance), they might as well go the whole hog, skip the intermediary step of switching suppliers (which might mean signing some kind of multi-year deal during which Intel might start outclassing AMD, so that's not without risk either) and run their own designs through TSMC fabs.

Apple has always been that company that likes to own the whole widget, or as much of it as possible. If they didn't, they might have switched to Windows NT in the late 90s rather than buying NeXT. They don't make everything that goes into a Mac or iPhone, they don't even fab the CPUs in their iPhones, just design them, but they figured out which parts they can control the designs for and which they can source from others and made it work by progressively integrating more of the design work in-house.

Re:Why Apple ditched PowerPC, and what it says about Apple d... by Narishma on Saturday June 20, 2020 @03:09PM (#23586106)
Does AMD have the necessary volume to supply Apple? (Assuming they switch all their various models at once, and not just one or two).
Re:Why Apple ditched PowerPC, and what it says about Apple d... by perryizgr8 on Saturday June 20, 2020 @11:28PM (#23589512)
I think Apple computer volume is not that much. Won't be surprised if AMD is already supplying more chips to other manufacturers.
Re:Why Apple ditched PowerPC, and what it says about Apple d... by cable2600 on Sunday June 21, 2020 @12:41AM (#23589811)
Apple could license the VIA processors that are X86-X64 and Intel compatible.
Re:Why Apple ditched PowerPC, and what it says about Apple d... by Narishma on Sunday June 21, 2020 @06:42AM (#23591230)
I don't think they can. Only Intel can license it to them.
Re:Why Apple ditched PowerPC, and what it says about Apple d... by SahAssar on Sunday June 21, 2020 @11:53AM (#23592692)
But VIA already has a license, why couldn't apple acquire them or just the license? x86 licenses have been transferred before via acquisitions.