Apple will switch to ARM processors: what does it mean for plugin developers?

[Kumal]

Gotta love Apple for creating problems where there aren't, offering solution where not needed and still make lots of profit from it. I wonder what impact all of this has at all for the audio industry, especially plugin devs (besides getting mails or being publicly shamed for maybe not support yet another Apple move). I read from devs the percentage of macos users is constantly going down for years now.

[Markus Krause]

Noooo actually it will be like this. Pretty much.

User: Why don't you port your plugins to new Mac? Why are you so slow, you are greedy lazy developer aren't you?

Developer: We are having a hard time to adapt to new environment. Porting our code to a new hardware processor isn't exactly one click of a button.

User: You are a liar! Busted! Here is what Apple is saying. "According to Apple, the vast majority of apps will only take a few days of work to get them running natively. In some cases, it will just take recompiling them in Xcode."

Developer: sigh...

User: i need to go to KVR to tell the truth!! This developer is greedy incompetent bastard! Lame developer. Know shit about coding. People should be saved!!! Here i commmeeee

Thanks! You made my day!

[Markus Krause]

By the way: will they run the ARM with little or big endiean? The CPU can do both an it would be smart if we devs wouldn't have to switch again like we had to do with Motorola to Intel

[FigBug]

By the way: will they run the ARM with little or big endiean? The CPU can do both an it would be smart if we devs wouldn't have to switch again like we had to do with Motorola to Intel

All their current ARM processors are little endian.

[FarleyCZ]

I just love KVR. Honestly. This thread is the reason why. You get realtime reactions from devs to the news like this. I don't think you can get it so fast in video editting or graphical worlds.

[2DaT]

Unless there's some hand-coded assembler in there, a recompile is all that is needed.

Its not that simple. The concern is the memory model.

If ARM has the same guarantees as x86 then all good. But from what I have heard, ARM has a much weaker memory model ('weaker' meaning less guarantees in read/write ordering).

As I understand it, ARM is more permissive in what may be reordered and when compared to what Intel CPUs do. While you can hint the compiler not to do any reordering, the CPU is still going to do its thing. I think my original statement still stands. Unless you're bit-twiddling or hand-coding large swaths in assembly, a recompile is all that is really needed. In general, the compiler and CPU can handle reordering instructions far better than us mere mortals.

Memory ordering is not a problem since c++11. If you use proper c++11 atomics and mutexes you don't have to worry about anything. Compiler will use appropriate barriers when needed to guarantee correct execution.

By default, std::atomic will use sequential consistency model which does have some barrier overhead on arm and x86, but this is not an issue most of the time, because any kind of intercore synchronization will cost a lot of cycles, barrier or not, due to cache line bouncing and pipeline flushes. Synchronization should be rare enough to not matter.

[syntonica]

By the way: will they run the ARM with little or big endiean? The CPU can do both an it would be smart if we devs wouldn't have to switch again like we had to do with Motorola to Intel

I didn't realize that ARM does both. The fact this ability was omitted from the G5 (and the very poor clock speed increases) put the final nails in the PPC coffin. Considering switching to little-endian was necessary for QuickTime, I'm surprised Apple even bothered with that chip at all. It all but killed VirtualPC.

[IncarnateX]

What it means for developers is that all potential trouble will be taken out on them while Apple will kiss my user-arse and make sure that I hardly will notice any changes until my macbook Air gets too old to run the latest OS, and I eventually will have to buy a new one.

[Urs]

I've been on our dev account @ Apple today... looks like anyone can block the iOS Apps from running on Macs, but they have to take action.

User: Hey developer, I've got your plugin on my iPad and I love it. My computer now supports iOS apps but I can't find the plugin in the App Store or on your web site. Please Help!

Developer: We have blocked the plugin on your current device because we are greedy. To enable the functionality you've already paid for on your computer you'll have to invest five times the original price.

User: Sounds great! Please take my money!

You can turn that around.

User: Why's your iOS app 5 bucks while your desktop app is 50 bucks?

Dev: Because you thought the iOS versions was a toy, didn't you? You'd never have paid 50 bucks for it, so we had no choice other than dumping it on to you. Now if you want to run it on a pro platform, it's 50. Suck it up.

(I'm kind of glad we never ran the mobile mass sell out scheme)

[midi_transmission]

User: Luckily macOS is no pro platform any longer, so it will stay at 5 bucks, right?

[IncarnateX]

I wouldn't mind knowing what is the gain of this mac thing for devs, anyway. Lately I bought my first mac ever. A brand new older model, paradoxally, a macbook air late 2017. I mainly bought it because my working place clusterfcked my PC with security and network stuff to the extent that it became slow. Oh wow, I get the macbook: It is fancy, immediately integrates with my iPhone and iPad. Super user interface. Slim and delicious looking. Though at the end of the day, a full screened Reason 11 is a full screened Reason 11. However, I thought a mac would be a nice personal computer for my oldest daughter on which she among other could play Sims 4. So, I bought a secondhand mac that unfortunately was only able to run High Sierra and not Catalina. Sims 4 was all a mess despite its minimum specs promising otherwise, and all other programs, such as Logic Pro X, Pages etc. could only be loaded in older and anbandoned versions. However, since I did not know whether the Sims mess was due to High Sierra or the old components, I ordered a new one with High Sierra. Now I could not even start Sims 4 though it was not as old as the first one. Eventually I bought a brand new PC for my daughter instead. So, basically, it seems that I have been confirmed in the shared dictum that macs become obsolete at a much higher rate than windows computers. And why shouldn't they? Apple needs to grow and sell stuff like every other company and has reasons enough to help the aging process come to a conclusion. From this experience alone, it seems to me that devs have to throw themselves into this game, knowing that none of their efforts may pay off for but a period, and then, once they have accepted the deal, put themselves at risk for at lot of users to stress them with demands of upgrades every time Apple takes its mandatory turns. For example, I wonder if FL Studio was eventually ported to mac because IM wanted a bite of the Apple or because fans were driving them nuts requesting it.
Any insights to share from the devs or others?

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Gotta love Apple for creating problems where there aren't, offering solution where not needed

A huge issue, especially for mobile computing, is how to handle the thermal implications of ever-more powerful processors. They didn't create this issue; they aren't even the first manufacturer to try it. But it is a potential solution for a definite problem

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

So, basically, it seems that I have been confirmed in the shared dictum that macs become obsolete at a much higher rate than windows computers.

Apple definitely does put stuff on the bench by a certain age, but the 'planned obsolescence' accusation is over-exaggerated. I know you weren't making that exact argument, but it's all too common.

My 2012 Macbook is compatible with Catalina as well as the current iteration of Logic. The upcoming OS (Bug Sur) has just been announced, and my 'puter doesn't make the grade. I really don't think that eight years falls under the definition of planned obsolescence
Besides, the previous years' patterns of Logic releases/compatibility mean that I'll probably be current for that for another couple of years, and then another couple of years before 3rd-party software developers place the minimum compatibility threshold at OS BS

Hardware-permitting, I could still be using this computer for making music into it's 13th year. Not bad for a computer I picked up second-hand for 100 quid, that can still be sold for $800-1000 on ebay, and whose main DAW has been update for free for a 200 quid outlay, in 2014

[IncarnateX]

There is difference between crippling aged computers on purpose and just leave them without upgrades at a certain point. I am not into to first variation here, but rather the latter.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

There is difference between crippling aged computers on purpose and just leave them without upgrades at a certain point. I am not into to first variation here, but rather the latter.

Perhaps I misunderstood. What was crippled?