You do realize Mac OS X 10.0 was released in March 2001. I still use Apple and love it, but the hardware and software hasn’t yet moved away very far from what it started out as after the switch to OS X. By that that time, I can see development limited to a few approved vendors with deep pockets for expensive licensing, but the bulk of it coming from Apple. But I can also see the end of that in my lifetime, perhaps in the next 15-20 years. We see it in their push to develop ever.more expensive hardware that doesn’t have commensurate increases in functionality. We see it their push to create an all-encompassing media empire, like Disney, but with a watch and handhelds. We see it in their overtaking of and reported indifference to independent developers. Jobs did not want iOS devices to create content, only to consume it, and with Apple’s focus shifting to services, I worry that they will continue this push for ever more consumption, to the detriment of all else. The thing that worries me, and this is possibly unnecessary, is that Catalina is paving the way for the appification of OS X, turning into a version of iOS on the desktop, complete with sandboxes and silo’d apps more like an iPad with built-in keyboard than a general-purpose laptop. WSL will basically give me all of the command-line tools that I need, Hyper-V can meet my virtualization needs (though I won't require it like I do on the Mac), and all of my other tools are available on Windows. On the flip side, Windows 10 seems to be getting really good, so switching actually wouldn't be that bad. This is somewhat cheating and it's unlikely that work would be willing to pay for two machines. * I keep an Intel machine under my desk and use RDP. I'm not sure what the ARM virtualization story is, so this may not even be a thing, * VMware runs but gives me a virtual ARM CPU which runs an ARM version of Windows which emulates an Intel CPU. And doesn't kill it in the next version like they did the PowerPC emulation after the Intel switch. * MacOS emulates enough of the Intel instruction set that VMware still runs. There are three ways I see this tool working on an ARM-based Mac: The likelihood of it getting ported to MacOS is zero, so it's always going to require me to run Windows in some capacity in order to use it. It's a closed-source commercial application. One of the tools that I require to do my job, a development environment for an ERP system, is a Windows application. I really enjoy working with the Mac and am very productive with it, but this would most likely represent the end of the road for me to use it in a professional capacity. But that's not holding computing back so much as a matter of corruption/morality. Worth pointing out that exploits will often target the dominant marketshare holder of any given industry/segment (eg, Windows for OS, Android for mobile OS, Intel for x86 CPU's), but that doesn't discount the flaws that intel had implemented and their handling of said flaws/exploits.

> That doesn't even touch on all the security issues. Sure, it's technically better, but it's gains aren't worth it's costs and largely lost on most consumer buyers anyway, so why bother. That's like suggesting you should make the entire frame of a car out of Titanium. Clock speed gains were realized as well but pushing much passed 4Ghz starts pushing into limits of physics/thermodynamics given current fabrication tech/science.ĮCC gives no benefit to most consumer applications, and actually would more likely be a detriment in most implementations, as it increases costs and limits performance while it's two primary benefits would largely go unnoticed if not entirely unused (error correction and improved total capacity). Instead they delivered gains in performance per watt, lithography, IPC, idle performance, and instruction set/acceleration gains (AES-NI, AVX, QuickSync, etc), to say nothing of pushing the market forward in Memory and Storage as well. If it were, the AMD Phenom's likely would have been more successful given their multithreading performance advantage over their consumer intel contemporaries. It's taken till recently for most consumer software or usecases to really leverage more than 8 threads as well, so the demand on the consumer side wasn't really there. They were making 8c/16t Xeons back in 2010, and core counts there have continued to improve on the high end, and increment and propogate across their stack. There's a lot of valid reasons to be critical of Intel (largely stemming from general malicious business practices and greed), but suggesting they haven't been pushing computing forward and being market leaders and innovators is just plain untrue.

the number of ways they have held back computers over the decades.

Ios arm emulator for mac