Yes agree, apple is in a much stronger position transitioning to iPhone/iPad X86 using intel products, than staying with ARM apps, realistacally leaving them their only option of futher canibalisation from within their own customer base. Already iMac is behind in spec, why? Because it dosen't have touchscreen! Once apple catches up to Ultrabook touch screen capability, they will need to port over their legacy ARM phone/tab apps to also run on X86. Microsoft/Samsung/Acer/HP/Lenovo have all proven an ARM based notebook is a flop, and for that matter apart from iPad and Galaxy unsucessful ARM based tablets. There will be little desire to have an iPad as well as a macbook touch. Apples saving grace is the adoption of their apps, though this will have little benefit one X86 translaters are fully developed. On the flip side MS's weakness is the failure of it's ARM based apps.
POINT IS: What if someone makes a convertable Laptop/Tablet with full touch interface, which seamlessly communicates with your SmartPhone, and sooner or later both of these devices will fit into a single form factor.
All of the above to run productivity and legacy X86 apps, and further develop and run iApps/Android apps. Intel is near this situation now, and will be in the next 3-6 months.
Ultimately let the market decide, even the loyal Apple follower, will be disappointed if apple stays with ARM design, as it will be so behind the comp, it will be funny, watching apple fans convince us their apple product is better......because Apple says so.
I couldn't agree more with this argument. It's so dumb that these analysts and media keep pounding table about Apple's foundry business going to Intel (or Intel should be begging for that business) but that idea, at best, is stupid and counter-productive for Intel. Why would any company like Intel would want to manufacture and improve the efficiency of it's competitor's chips by providing their enviable foundry platform? why??? I don't think they want prove that ARM chips can run better by throwing their foundry tech. prowess.
It's in the best interest of Apple to switch away from BIG.LITTLE new kid on block on to more proven, more portable, more superior vendor who could match power efficiency of ARM even with their superior/PC processors. Apple should stop thinking about 'I-wanna-be-Intel' idea. It's just not their business. They good at consumer experience. Steve was smart when he switched to Intel from IBM just for those same reasons.
There is certainly a compelling argument for that conclusion. While Microsoft seems to have a talent for stumbling their way to success at least they have a vision to unify their platforms with a single OS kernel from smartphone to server. With Intel's broad processor lineup they also have the means to execute on that strategy. Already there is a company that offers full Windows 8 on a cellphone that fits into a telephone handset docking station and enables the handset to become the person's PC with full W8 when the person is at their desk.
This is an extremely useful glimpse what the future holds for desktop and application portability and together Intel and Microsoft have the inside track. Apple has no path because of the bifurcated processor strategy. Legacy MAC OS apps aren't going to be ported to ARM ISA any more than legacy Windows apps have been ported to ARM. It's the same reason Windows RT is dead or dying.
If Apple intends to have a meaningful place in the future they need to have a single instruction set across all their platforms. There is no absolutely no doubt Intel is capable of delivering processors to serve all of Apple's products, but more importantly, there is no evidence at all to believe that ARM can.