Looks like they use the Microsoft SQ1 processor, whatever that is.
Here’s an article that talks about ARM-based Windows, and the x86 emulator they supplied. It’s from two years ago, so as Chris pointed out, Apple is catching up.
The difference this time is that it looks (at least in part, based on the presentation) like it’s a one-time conversion technology rather than an interpreter, so in theory it could possibly be a stand alone utility. Not gonna hold my breath though 
I really hope they see their error and continue to keep the full functioning version of the Network utility. I use it almost every day!
1 Like
1 Like
A number of programs are locked to the (virtual) computers or cannot be reinstalled because the license verification servers no longer exist. In other cases they won’t run on more recent Windows versions. So they cannot be moved to new real machines. Running on an old Mini also means I can run older Mac software (primarily 32-bit) I’d occasionally like to use.
1 Like
They did not promise x86 virtualization. Turns out, after the keynote, that the version of Linux they were running in Parallels was ARM-based.
3 Likes
Yep. That wasn’t clear during the keynote though.
1 Like
Even if Parallels could get something working it would not matter since Microsoft only licenses Windows for ARM to OEMs. They would need to change that policy for VMs to even be a possibility.
2 Likes
I agree. I discussed this a little on another thread.
It’s theoretically possible but only practical if Microsoft permits it, and so far they won’t.
Just watched the WWDC episode of The Talk Show where John Gruber inerviewed Craig Federighi and Greg Joswiak. In this less formal setting Craig does refer to the new Apple Silicon processors a couple of times as “ARM”. Not that this is news, but I think it shows that Apple probably refers to these internally the same way the Apple podcast/blogging world does, as ARM.
6 Likes
All their marketing materials, and everything on their site, refers to Apple Silicon, and in his intro Tim Cook used the term three times in 10 seconds. So either it’s permanent (it would be amusing to be discussing ASMacs) or it will transition to an as-yet unnamed new brand name to be revealed. I have a feeling they’re going to use AS as an umbrella term that will be quickly reduced in use once the series letter/name for the new Macs is released.
I guess the name it’s here to stay. I mean, not as if they already name some of their products Apple-something… oh wait
It was such a great interview with very useful information.
I really appreciated the efforts Craig and Jos went to in underscoring the importance and commitment to the separate identity of the Mac. It was especially nice to hear that they are not forcing all apps to be sold through the MAS, they care about hobbyists, they are not eliminating the ability to disable system integrity protection, the terminal is here to stay, and other like comments. It’s a Mac, but it’s still a personal computer and it seems like Apple is intent to keep it that way.
2 Likes
Checking the Wikipedia page, it hasn’t been called “Mac OS X” since 2012 when it was renamed “OS X” and then in 2016 it changed to “macOS”.
Maybe the 11 is to stop people saying “ecks” or “ten”. It is simply “Mac oh ess” as in the last four years and you only need to include a number if you want to distinguish the version… or… of course… a name (for major versions).
As for the “goes to 11” comment — check out The Talk Show. Joz does use the phrase.
2 Likes
I have to say I never really took on the number thing. I have always thought and refered to my Mac operating system as ‘Mountain Lion’ etc., that was where I came on board as it were. I will say what @Wolfie says about the numbers being arbitary anyway persuasive. I too wait for OS11 Llanelli.
I sometimes looked at the number when using tech advice but never remembered it. I have it written down somewhere too. Same with my phones. Even more so, I never knew what number they were. I don’t know how typical I am. I am in that small demographic it seems who is a power user but not techy really.
I always read OSX as “oh ess ecs” rather than “oh ecs ten”. I don’t know if this is of any interest to anybody? If not, sorry for taking up space.
Same here, like barely west (just across the Missouri river)
Go Blues!
1 Like
I’m in West County so we are close. Perhaps we can grab a cup coffee one day after the virus clears out. 
And, I’m excited to watch the Cardinals play again in July! 
1 Like
No big deal, really. Catalina is macOS version 10.15. Before they dropped the X, there was a redundancy in the name, for instance “Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard” or “OS X 10.9 Mavericks”. Since the “X” is pronounced “ten” and Mac OS X was the successor to Mac OS 9, it was redundant to have “Mac OS X 10.6”. “Mac OS X Version 6” would have made more sense at the time, or maybe “Mac OS X.6”. Anyway, it’s all history now that we have moved beyond ten.
Steve Jobs did say Mac OS X was good for 20 years and he hit that right. But the naming is really just a marketing decision and they wanted to indicate newness by making it 11 rather than 10.16.
Now how many years will 11 last before we move to 12? Or will they make it 15 next year to align with iOS?
1 Like
That translucent menu bar though… I kinda thought Apple had learned their lesson way back when.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.