Intel Developing Next PowerMac for Apple?

[hyperpasta]

Did not expect this.

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431

EDIT: That was a mad dash to get this into MR before everyone else. After reading the article, it seems that Intel is simply designing the internals. <sigh of releif>

[Blue Velvet]

iMacs as well in the first 4 months? Interesting, particularly for a close friend of mine who wants to get a new iMac in Feb.

Thanks for the mad dash. All that hyperpasta gave you the necessary carb-boost. :)

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Appleinsider claims (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431) that according to "reliable sources", Apple has contracted out the motherboard design for the next-generation PowerMac to Intel.

According to the rumor site, Apple has its current resources so far across the planned Intel iMacs (http://guides.macrumors.com/Intel_iMac_%28Rumored%29), PowerBooks (http://guides.macrumors.com/Intel_PowerBook_%28Rumored%29), iBooks (http://guides.macrumors.com/Intel_iBook_%28Rumored%29) and Mac minis (http://guides.macrumors.com/Intel_Mac_mini_%28Rumored%29) and that outsourcing the PowerMac motherboard design may help them keep a targeted ship date of the 3rd quarter of 2006 for the next-generation PowerMac.

The design is expected to take place within the Intel Apple-Group (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/11/20051122092351.shtml) which was quietly formed in November.

Outsourcing PowerMac motherboard design to Intel may have some interesting consequences regarding control and exclusivity of the design. As well, it exposes the PowerMac designs outside of Apple, which could be a source of future leaks.

Appleinsider notes, of course, that the PowerMac case/industrial design will remain under Apple's control.

[miloblithe]

"13" iBooks and 15" PowerBooks?" No other sizes?

But Intel designing the boards makes a lot of sense, considering the number of Intel chips that are likely to be in there anyway.

[Tastannin]

I think it's a smart move by Apple. The PowerMacIntel will be pretty much the same as the new dual core G5's. DDR2, PCIe, etc. - other than the Intel chip and any TPM/custom modules. Don't you think Apple's evaluated the situation and is well aware of the higher "leak-potential" of contracting the PowerMacIntel mobo design out? The MacIntel hype will be pretty much past its peak by the time the PowerMacIntel is out. Like the article says, we'll be seeing Intel iBooks, iMacs, Mac minis, and PowerBooks before the PowerMac. I'm assuming that it'd be easy to estimate the PowerMacIntel's specs based on the specs of the other MacIntel introductions.

So it's a good move by Apple - no need to spread themselves thin. It may also have been in the original contract too, who knows? It's a win for Apple, and a win for us users - it should translate into lower costs for us. :D

[narco]

Is it really considered outsourcing if it's the Intel/Apple group?

Fishes,
narco.

[slu]

So much for "Designed by Apple in California".

But, I suppose if it makes PowerMacs cheaper for us, then good.

But if the quality suffers or innovation slows, then bad.

Does Apple design all thier own motherboards now?

I don't want to lose features or be locked into Intel only tech though.

And this article implies that the Intel transition will be complete by 3rd quarter this year. That seems awfully optimistic to me, especially since we still don't know what is going to shake out in MWSF.

[Object-X]

No BIOS please. And don't change the boot tone either. Other than that, as long as the boot process is similar to what we currently have it doesn't matter who designs the motherboard.

[thejadedmonkey]

plus, it's not like we don't know what it's going to look like. Remember, the iMac was just revised a little while ago, so there's not really anything secret about it anyway.

[thejadedmonkey]

So much for "Designed by Apple in California".

not true. All that think secret reports could mean is that intel is being told "this is what we need, build it" and they can put the resistors and transmitters whereever they please, but in the end it's an apple computer, designed by apple, in california.

[atari1356]

I just hope that silent/quiet computing remains a goal through all of this... I'm sure Apple will have at least some say in the shape/design of the motherboard, in order to ensure that the overall case design works well with regards to air flow.

Some of those beefy PC boxes are just too dang noisy...

[dashiel]

this is no different to the ipod. the majority of which was not designed by apple... OS by portal player, main interaction by synaptics, chips by multiple vendors, reference design by an independent contractor (since hired by apple).

as long as intel can design what apple specs out it allows apple to focus on those things that only apple can do.

[Silencio]

No BIOS please.

I'm sure Intel will be glad to accomodate your request:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Firmware_Interface

[inkhead]

This is excellent news. A motherboard designed by Intel means a motherboard without all the usual Apple quirks and little bugs that always end up in the shipping products. Intel motherboards are an example of the finest designs that billions of dollars of R&D come up with. This is a smart move on Apple's part.

For anyone who might be confused, don't confuse Intel's motherboards with your bargin basement PC computer that has a generic or cheep motherboard. Intel makes the best motherboards on earth, and they are extremely picky about design and every little feature of the board is obsessed over. It's a good fit for Apple to choose to let Intel make the motherboards.

[inkhead]

Well to start off, the IBM 970 processor is extremely hot. The Intel chipset runs at about 1/3 the watts of this processor and won't require such a crazy array of fans, and cooling that the 970 and other "g5" processors did.

The machines will remain very quiet.

I just hope that silent/quiet computing remains a goal through all of this... I'm sure Apple will have at least some say in the shape/design of the motherboard, in order to ensure that the overall case design works well with regards to air flow.

Some of those beefy PC boxes are just too dang noisy...

[Randall]

No BIOS please. And don't change the boot tone either. Other than that, as long as the boot process is similar to what we currently have it doesn't matter who designs the motherboard.Don't worry, they'll be using EFI for sure. So will Windows Vista. BIOS is finally dead. :cool:

[Randall]

Intel makes the best motherboards on earth.Thanks, I needed a good laugh. :D

[SiliconAddict]

I kinda expected this. I think the first generation of just about everything is going to come with Intel mobos and chipsets. Once Apple has everything up and running and they have their feet wet with Intel hardware designs then I expect them to move most if not all of their deisgns inhouse.

[animefan_1]

Did not expect this.

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431

EDIT: That was a mad dash to get this into MR before everyone else. After reading the article, it seems that Intel is simply designing the internals. <sigh of releif>

That's because AI (and now MR) are using misleading headlines The headline should read: "Intel Developing Next PowerMac Motherboard for Apple?"

[d.perel]

So much for "Designed by Apple in California".

But, I suppose if it makes PowerMacs cheaper for us, then good.

But if the quality suffers or innovation slows, then bad.

Does Apple design all thier own motherboards now?

I don't want to lose features or be locked into Intel only tech though.

And this article implies that the Intel transition will be complete by 3rd quarter this year. That seems awfully optimistic to me, especially since we still don't know what is going to shake out in MWSF.
As long as my Mac is fast, I don't really mind who owns the design for the chips. Frankly, a PowerMac at a regular Power'less'-Mac price would be pretty cool

[Randall]

That's because AI (and now MR) are using misleading headlines The headline should read: "Intel Developing Next PowerMac Motherboard for Apple?"LOL maybe it should really read: "Apple retains case design on new PowerMacs, guts outsourced to Intel." :D

[Marx55]

This is great news because Mactels could be sold at the same price as PCs out there and not twice as expensive.

Besides, it would be great if Apple would include dual DVD drives and more VRAM, as standard even on ultra-cheap PCs half the price of current Macs.

And frontal connectors, please.

And modular design: we do not want to trow away a gorgeosus 20-inch TFT iMac monitor three years after purchase.

Do not take me wrong. Apple makes a great Mac OS X and great hardware, but sometimes PCs have also good features. Apple should get the best of both worlds.

And finally, imagine a Mactel booting natively as Mac OS X, Windows or Linux. Even better: switch from one OS to other using the new Intel virtualization chips. That would be awesome for many people. That alone would sell millions of Mactels and expand market share from 3% to 20% or more worldwide. That is exactly what Apple needs.

[Cinch]

This is great news because Mactels could be sold at the same price as PCs out there and not twice as expensive.

Besides, it would be great if Apple would include dual DVD drives and more VRAM, as standard even on ultra-cheap PCs half the price of current Macs.

And frontal connectors, please.

And modular design: we do not want to trow away a gorgeosus 20-inch TFT iMac monitor three years after purchase.

Do not take me wrong. Apple makes a great Mac OS X and great hardware, but sometimes PCs have also good features. Apple should get the best of both worlds.

And finally, imagine a Mactel booting natively as Mac OS X, Windows or Linux. Even better: switch from one OS to other using the new Intel virtualization chips. That would be awesome for many people. That alone would sell millions of Mactels and expand market share from 3% to 20% or more worldwide. That is exactly what Apple needs.

try going to Dell and price out a similar PC. I had to about a week ago for work, and it is not any cheaper! If you factor the benefit of using OSX, Apple computer is much better value without question.

Cinch,

[Marx55]

try going to Dell and price out a similar PC. I had to about a week ago for work, and it is not any cheaper! If you factor the benefit of using OSX, Apple computer is much better value without question.

Cinch,

Dell is expensive crappy stuff!

[runninmac]

This is good and all... but I want to hear what there inside sources are saying is coming up for MWSF!

[SiliconAddict]

Thanks, I needed a good laugh. :D


You obviously weren't around when Intel released the 430FX chipset and its offspring. It was one of the most used, most clockable chipsets at the time. Intel makes some DAMN good hardware. The problem is that Windows wasn't designed around it and as such things like standby and the like tends to fail from time to time in the OS. As an example I found that with the PCMCIA WIFI card Windows HATED coming back from standby. But I popped in a Intel Mini-PCI card into my IBM Thinkpad (To make it a Centrino laptop.) Things became MUCH more stable. Standby came back in 2-3 seconds instead of the typical 30 seconds.
Again Intel does make some damn fine hardware. Its just Microsoft releases an OS update once every half a decade (If you are lucky.) and by and large they don't support what Intel is offering out of the box. Doubtless this pisses off Intel something fierce and is prob one of the driving forces behind Intel's complete support of Apple.

[Booga]

I don't understand why so many people have voted "negative" on this article.

Apple's motherboards, with some notable exceptions, are generally at least a generation behind the rest of the industry in features and performance. The notable exceptions are generally in the area of slots, where the old 9x00, being the first computer sold to offer more than 3-4 PCI slots, and the new PCIe Macs with their 8x PCIe slots, are industry leaders. The other exception is in weird form factors, which don't apply to PowerMacs anyway. In all other respects the Mac motherboards have tended to support the latest features later and slower than their Intel counterparts.

I see this as a great move on Apple's part. They'll likely get the motherboard way cheaper, have it perform better, and get it released sooner than doing it in-house. Since, except for slots that go mostly unusued, Apple hasn't been much of an innovator here, it makes a huge amount of sense.

[EricNau]

This makes sense, I just hope Apple still has some control over things, but I'm sure they do.

[Booga]

Intel makes the best motherboards on earth.
Thanks, I needed a good laugh. :D

What's funny? Maybe VIA does a few designs better. And AMD's built-in memory controller makes some of the motherboard designs based on the Athlon top-notch. But I hope you're not implying that Apple motherboards are competitive to Intels, because I don't think that's been true for ages.

[woolfgang]

You obviously weren't around when Intel released the 430FX chipset and its offspring. It was one of the most used, most clockable chipsets at the time. Intel makes some DAMN good hardware. The problem is that Windows wasn't designed around it and as such things like standby and the like tends to fail from time to time in the OS. As an example I found that with the PCMCIA WIFI card Windows HATED coming back from standby. But I popped in a Intel Mini-PCI card into my IBM Thinkpad (To make it a Centrino laptop.) Things became MUCH more stable. Standby came back in 2-3 seconds instead of the typical 30 seconds.
Again Intel does make some damn fine hardware. Its just Microsoft releases an OS update once every half a decade (If you are lucky.) and by and large they don't support what Intel is offering out of the box. Doubtless this pisses off Intel something fierce and is prob one of the driving forces behind Intel's complete support of Apple.

I agree with some, and disagree with others. Most PC's still don't have Firewire and use Serial connections. That's Old.

[Peace]

Intel does make a "good" motherboard but Asustek makes the best.

[RBR2]

Surely part of the decision to go with Intel as a "partner" rather than just a supplier (along with AMD) was the overall package of services that Intel could provide. The Intel-Apple division is obviously a part of that package and, if done well, will free up Apple resources to work on "more important things". It should also bring Apple's costs more in line with those of PC "manufacturers".

One of the good things for Intel is that the Intel-Apple division is the equivilent of a car manufacturer (such as Honda) sending their engineers off to a racing team to learn and explore new things. It both trains the engineers and frequently has implications for the technology of their retail products. In this case Intel has long chaffed at the restrictions that Microsoft's OS has imposed and the reluctance of the PC "manufacturers" to move along with technology. This is the opportunity that Intel has dreamed of...the chance to show what they can accomplish and lead their other customers along the path of change.

Intel has always been ahead of AMD when it comes to manufacturing capability. Their yields are higher, the Fabs are newer technology or are implemented sooner. Still AMD has taken the lead in the actual chip design of late...pressing Intel to catch up. The memory controller, in particular, is an area that Intel is having to revamp.

If Intel can pull off quad cores in '07 and eight cores in '08 Apple should be able to put together some smokin' work stations and servers.

:cool:

[SiliconAddict]

Dell is expensive crappy stuff!

Their consumer products yes. (Read: Dimension series) Their corp desktops? Not in the least. Their Optiplex lines are probably one of the most reliable desktops I've ever run across. This coming from someone who has deployed around 80 of these in the last 5 years at the site I work at and another 60 downtown.
The GX110's, GX240's, and the GX280's and the GX520’s are all rock solid. I would say out of those 80 systems we have had 2 die on us. One was a NIC problem. The other was a motherboard problem. Everything else: Flawless.
Their laptops are another matter. 4 years ago I would have made the same comparison saying the Inspiron (consumer.) laptops sucked and the Latitude (Buisness.) laptops rocked. I have a 5 year old Latitude that is still running XP at home. No problems at all and this thing has been thrown around, beaten and borderline abused. That was then. Today? You couldn’t give me a Latitude. The quality is for crap on Dell’s laptop line.

PS- For those who say you can't find Dell systems cheaper then Apple hardware. You just aren't looking hard enough. Most consumers aren't looking for a new monitor. That alone drops a few hundred off the price. Then you have coupons and the like. Or the referb site where you can find systems for under $500 with the normal 1-year warrantee. I got my Dell Optiplex GX280 off of Dell's referb site for $400 and change. Over the last year I've been upgrading the components. So instead of being hit with a $1000+ charge all of a sudden I simply add a GB of RAM there (2Gb total.), a DVD burner there, a GeForce 6800 GT there, a SATA 100Gb drive there. At the end of the day and with the help of pricegrabber.com the price I've paid is considerably less then what I would pay with an iMac along with a bigger screen - Dell 24" widescreen that can stay with me when I upgrade in a couple years. Most people don't give a crap about the whole TCO on a desktop. They care about price. At the end of the day what they can afford is X amount. They don't care if Y amount comes with all these wonderful features and such.

[sw1tcher]

Thanks, I needed a good laugh. :D

What's so funny about that? It is well known in the PC world that Intel motherboards are rock solid. Sure, they might not be as feature-rich as those from ASUS, Abit, MSI, et al., but they are solid and stable.

Intel's expertise in mobo designs would be a big plus for Apple.

[sw1tcher]

I agree with some, and disagree with others. Most PC's still don't have Firewire and use Serial connections. That's Old.

Not sure which PCs you've been looking at lately, but of the ones I've seen within the past year or so in retail stores, almost all (if not all) of them have Firewire ports already.

[maya]

All this means is that, Apple hardware will drop in price. By a lot. :eek: ;) :D

I like it, and since Intel is supplying the processors and motherboard might mean that when a product is announced it will be shipped in a weeks timeframe.

I hope they do not stick some crappy GPU in there from Intel. :(

[Mr.Hey]

Found this on digg.
http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/5761/intellogos8lg.th.png (http://img412.imageshack.us/my.php?image=intellogos8lg.png)

[shamino]

Don't worry, they'll be using EFI for sure. So will Windows Vista. BIOS is finally dead. :cool:
So you believe Vista will require all customers to upgrade their ROMs from BIOS to EFI? I wonder how many copies will be sold when everybody is told they need a whole-system upgrade.

I don't think you realize what you wrote.

[Mr.Hey]

All this means is that, Apple hardware will drop in price. By a lot. :eek: ;) :D

I like it, and since Intel is supplying the processors and motherboard might mean that when a product is announced it will be shipped in a weeks timeframe.

I hope they do not stick some crappy GPU in there from Intel. :(

They'll always give you the option. They're not going to start replacing ATI and Nvidia for Intel GPUs.

[shamino]

That's because AI (and now MR) are using misleading headlines The headline should read: "Intel Developing Next PowerMac Motherboard for Apple?"
And what's the difference? The motherboard is the computer, unless you believe the color it's painted is more important.

[rhashem]

This is excellent news. A motherboard designed by Intel means a motherboard without all the usual Apple quirks and little bugs that always end up in the shipping products. Intel motherboards are an example of the finest designs that billions of dollars of R&D come up with. This is a smart move on Apple's part.

Absolutely. I have an old Intel Seattle PII motherboard in my Dell D300 (slightly customized for Dell, as I presume Apple's will be for Apple), and the machine has been working perfectly for the last eight years. Intel's boards (and chipsets) are probably the best you can find in consumer space.

[SiliconAddict]

Intel does make a "good" motherboard but Asustek makes the best.


I <3 Asus mobos. I put an Asus in my home server. Rock of Gibraltar type solid. The thing stays up for seasons without reboots. The last time I had to fiddle with that system was this summer when we had a major thunderstorm with a power outage. :(

[kcmac]

I go along with RBR2 and SiliconAddict on Intel pushing technology and MS and other PC vendors holding them back. I think I remember threads and articles mentioning this very thought right after the Intel/Apple deal was made public. And I thought it came from Intel.

Apple has and displays the ability to push the edge. It appears to me that even though the other PC vendors will or may have the same access to the Intel goodies and hardware, that Apple will steam ahead with it all because they push their software and hardware design so effectively and swiftly. I gotta believe that Apple will set the parameters for the box size, shape, etc and Intel will design something to make that work and in a way that takes advantage of their processor.

I also believe that a lot of PC folks will purchase Apple hardware for this very reason, try to run Windows on it, and ever so slowly start to use OS X from that same box. Of course, once they get a good taste, I believe they will stay heavily on the OS X side.

[generik]

not true. All that think secret reports could mean is that intel is being told "this is what we need, build it" and they can put the resistors and transmitters whereever they please, but in the end it's an apple computer, designed by apple, in california.

Please no.. at the end of the day I will gladly take a designed by INTEL board over TEN designed by Apple boards *anyday*

Rev A issues? NEVER happens for stuff like Intel boards. Intel is used to making real server boards, not toy computers like Apple.

[shamino]

This is great news because Mactels could be sold at the same price as PCs out there and not twice as expensive.
Why? Macs are sold with very high profit margins. Do you think Apple will change this policy? Do you think an Intel-designed MB with an Intel chip will cost that much less?

Re: dual DVD, VRAM, front-panel connectors, and modular design:

Apple could do all of this right now if they wanted to. They choose not to. The choice of motherboard supplier isn't going to change this.
And finally, imagine a Mactel booting natively as Mac OS X, Windows or Linux. Even better: switch from one OS to other using the new Intel virtualization chips. That would be awesome for many people. That alone would sell millions of Mactels and expand market share from 3% to 20% or more worldwide. That is exactly what Apple needs.
You (and a lot of people) seem to think Apple will be able to take over the world if they'd simply jump on the bandwagon and sell the same PC's that everybody else has been selling for the past 20 years.

I'm sorry but the logic makes absolutely no sense. Nobody is going to pay extra for an Apple computer, just to be able to run Windows on it.

[SiliconAddict]

Found this on digg.
http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/5761/intellogos8lg.th.png (http://img412.imageshack.us/my.php?image=intellogos8lg.png)


Yep old news. Now if there was an Apple logo in there. :eek:

[rhashem]

Don't worry, they'll be using EFI for sure. So will Windows Vista. BIOS is finally dead. :cool:

Vista won't use EFI, because then it wouldn't work on existing machines. Apple has already said that the new Macs won't use EFI. Since Apple has said you can install Windows on the new Macs, it's almost certain that it will use a PC BIOS.

Of course, who cares? The BIOS is just a bit of code that's never called after startup on a modern OS!

[shamino]

They'll always give you the option. They're not going to start replacing ATI and Nvidia for Intel GPUs.
I don't know about that.

If it's a motherboard with an AGP or PCIe slot, like those used in the PowerMac, then you'll have options.

If it's a board with video soldered-on (like on the mini, iMac, iBook, and PowerBook), Intel may refuse to solder-on anything from a third party.

[EricNau]

All this means is that, Apple hardware will drop in price. By a lot. :eek: ;) :D

I won't complain. :)

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

This is a very good move from Apples side, except for the part that Macintosh is one step less from being so special.

People who has voted negative for this, really dont have a clue about what this is all about.

[shamino]

Vista won't use EFI, because then it wouldn't work on existing machines. Apple has already said that the new Macs won't use EFI. Since Apple has said you can install Windows on the new Macs, it's almost certain that it will use a PC BIOS.
Wrong on all counts.

Windows won't be dependent on any particular ROM, unless MS becomes incredibly stupid in the near future. Like all prior releases, ROM-dependent features (usually just power management things) will be used via device drivers. Motherboard and firmware makers will design drivers for their chipsets (which may use BIOS or EFI or anything else), and Microsoft will bundle drivers for the most popular chipsets, just like they do now.

As for Apple using EFI, where did you get the idea they said this? Those sources that claim to have any knowledge are saying that it won't be OpenFirmware or BIOS. The only official word is that developers shouldn't make any assumptions. before the new systems ship.

And Apple did not say you'll be able to boot Windows. They said they are not going to attempt to take extraordinary measures to prevent you from trying to install it.
Of course, who cares? The BIOS is just a bit of code that's never called after startup on a modern OS!
This is also untrue. The BIOS is used for power management on modern systems. Whenever you put a Windows PC to sleep, or monitor laptop battery usage, or switch the CPU into a power-saving mode, that's using the motherboard's ROM code.

[SiliconAddict]

This is a very good move from Apples side, except for the part that Macintosh is one step less from being so special.

People who has voted negative for this, really dont have a clue about what this is all about.


Their hardware isn't special anymore :p Well at least the guts of the machine aren't. You will never mistake a Dell for an Apple. :)

[shamino]

Their hardware isn't special anymore :p Well at least the guts of the machine aren't. You will never mistake a Dell for an Apple. :)
I don't know. If this rumor turns out to be true, what will be the difference? If you buy one of these Intel Macs and transplant the motherboard into a generic case, will there be anything at all different from a generic PC?

The way things are looking, I'm not at all pleased with what I see. If this rumor ends up being true, then the nay-sayers are correct and Apple will be selling nothing more than generic PC's with generic PC motherboards. And at massively inflated prices (since they're not about to give up their 50% margins.)

Removing PS/2 ports and adding FireWire is not much of a distinction. And the TPM chip (apparently, the only thing prevening Mac OS from running on existing PCs) will be bypassed pretty quickly (it's already been bypassed on all the existing developer-releases of Mac OS.)

I sure hope Jobs knows what he's doing, because from over here, it looks like Apple is about to lose the entire Mac hardware platform to the PC makers. I don't think they're going to survive selling nothing but iPods and software.

[rhashem]

I agree with some, and disagree with others. Most PC's still don't have Firewire and use Serial connections. That's Old.

I've bought 3 PC motherboards in the last year, and all have had Firewire on board. You don't find it in the cheapo PCs, but all the midrange PowerMac level stuff has Firewire these days.

As for serial connections --- what harm does it do if its there and you don't use it? Lots of people need serial ports for certain hardware that doesn't have USB ports (I'm thinking stuff like PIC controllers, etc). Certainly, its better to have it and not need it, then need it and not have it. I wish my new PowerMac had PCI slots, but Apple apparently thought that they were "obsolete", and should be gotten rid of, just like serial ports!

[nagromme]

Is there any reliable information that tells us the next PowerMacs will be any less amazing because Intel worked on the motherboard? Do we know that this will stop Apple from doing cool things for us that they would have liked to do? Will this allow other PC makers to steal Mac OS X?

No to all of the above. So it doesn't worry me. If Intel delivers the best quality product in the least time and lowest cost, then that works for me.

Plus, if Intel's designing a mobo for the PowerMac, that suggests that Apple's NOT using some of-the-shelf PC motherboard that wouldn't even NEED to be designed. Not that I ever considered that likely.

[rhashem]

Windows won't be dependent on any particular ROM, unless MS becomes incredibly stupid in the near future. Like all prior releases, ROM-dependent features (usually just power management things) will be used via device drivers.

The kernel cannot be completely ROM-dependent. The ROM defines certain things that the computer needs to boot properly (memory maps, etc). You cannot boot XP on an EFI machine, and while Microsoft might make an EFI version of Vista, there will be a regular BIOS version as well.

As for Apple using EFI, where did you get the idea they said this?

It's the rumors on the internets. In any case, if Apple was going to use EFI, it would have been in the Intel developer machines. Hardware developers need to know what kind of firmware is in the machine, and unless there is a very secret set of EFI-based Intel Macs at NVIDIA and ATI, you can bet that at least the first wave of Macs next year will use a regular-old BIOS.

And Apple did not say you'll be able to boot Windows. They said they are not going to attempt to take extraordinary measures to prevent you from trying to install it.

Using EFI would certainly be an extarordinary measure preventing you from installing Windows! If the Macs used EFI, Windows just wouldn't install on it, any more than it would install on a G5 PowerMac. If that was the case, saying "we won't stop you from installing Windows" would be a meaningless statement. They wouldn't have said it then.

This is also untrue. The BIOS is used for power management on modern systems. Whenever you put a Windows PC to sleep, or monitor laptop battery usage, or switch the CPU into a power-saving mode, that's using the motherboard's ROM code.

True. Forgot about power management.

[topgunn]

Dell is expensive crappy stuff!
I just bought a Dell for work that included a Dell mini tower, 17" flat panel display, keyboard, mouse, etc for $475 after taxes and shipping. Mind you it was a 2.53GHz Celeron, 256MB RAM, 40GB HD but I thought that was a great deal.

Dell may be crappy but they can be very inexpensive.

[rhashem]

I don't know. If this rumor turns out to be true, what will be the difference? If you buy one of these Intel Macs and transplant the motherboard into a generic case, will there be anything at all different from a generic PC?

Are the PowerMacs so different as it is? Aside from the Apple motherboard and chipset, its more or less the same as my Athlon64 machine. PCI-E, Firewire, SATA, etc. All open standards, all OEM parts, not much different then what you find in a Dell. I'm sure Apple's case design will continue to be pretty spiffy, but I'm sure its not the hardware that made you buy a Mac?

[SiliconAddict]

I don't know. If this rumor turns out to be true, what will be the difference? If you buy one of these Intel Macs and transplant the motherboard into a generic case, will there be anything at all different from a generic PC?

The way things are looking, I'm not at all pleased with what I see. If this rumor ends up being true, then the nay-sayers are correct and Apple will be selling nothing more than generic PC's with generic PC motherboards. And at massively inflated prices (since they're not about to give up their 50% margins.)

Removing PS/2 ports and adding FireWire is not much of a distinction. And the TPM chip (apparently, the only thing prevening Mac OS from running on existing PCs) will be bypassed pretty quickly (it's already been bypassed on all the existing developer-releases of Mac OS.)

I sure hope Jobs knows what he's doing, because from over here, it looks like Apple is about to lose the entire Mac hardware platform to the PC makers. I don't think they're going to survive selling nothing but iPods and software.

Keep in mind that its very possible the first couple generations of Macs may very well be just generic PC hardware. Apple needs to get a foothold in the x86 market. Once things stabilize and they start to put of the numerous fires that are burning at the moment they may very well turn to developing their own wares. Remember that there is a fairly intensive learning curve for Apple here. They are use to designing around PPC architectures. This migration isn't going to be done with the transition of hardware and software. It’s going to be done once Apple is over the learning curve as well. Something that I'm sure Intel is helping Apple with.

As for OS X being tied to the hardware. I’m not worried at all. Why? Because we haven’t see the final release of TPM-ized OS X. I would not be at all surprised if Apple isn’t showing its hand yet. TPM consists of several technologies. My guess is that Apple has only released some of the updates to software developers. Remember by and large TPM’s should be ubiquitous to applications and such. They very well could implement something much more robust when the first x86 Macs are released. Who know the word of the day at Apple could be kernel level encryption or something.
Heck they could very well place an update for the TPM with every patch they release, every app they release, everything they release. Making it a complete and total PITA for pirates every time they come out with a new [insert something here.]
At the end of the day It’s not about keeping everyone from loading OS X on their generic x86 hardware its about keeping everyone but the geeks of the world from loading it. I highly doubt ma and pa bumpkin are going to go out on Bittorrent, download an ISO, burn it to DVD, backup their data, and install OS X. Apple has so much room to grown right now they aren't, or I hope they aren’t, going to be concerned with 2% of Windows\Unix users who want to be the rebel.
They are interested in that 90% of the user market who are pissed with adware, viruses, etc and want something new. *dawns his corn hat and white suit* Hi. Let me tell you about OS X. :cool:

[Randall]

What's so funny about that? It is well known in the PC world that Intel motherboards are rock solid. Sure, they might not be as feature-rich as those from ASUS, Abit, MSI, et al., but they are solid and stable.

Intel's expertise in mobo designs would be a big plus for Apple.Sorry, we were talking about the best mobos on earth, not the most rock-solid. I could think of several other mobo companies that could be in the running for "best mobo on earth" but none of them are intel.

[Marx55]

You (and a lot of people) seem to think Apple will be able to take over the world if they'd simply jump on the bandwagon and sell the same PC's that everybody else has been selling for the past 20 years.

I'm sorry but the logic makes absolutely no sense. Nobody is going to pay extra for an Apple computer, just to be able to run Windows on it.

To start with, our University is just waiting for such multi-OS Mactel to buy several hundreds of them to replace Windoze stuff that does not run Mac and Mac stuff that does not run Windows. Then start multiplying...

[ozone]

I'm sorry but the logic makes absolutely no sense. Nobody is going to pay extra for an Apple computer, just to be able to run Windows on it.

What??? I completely disagree with your logic. I would, in fact, be willing to pay some extra for an Apple machine that can capably run Windows. I don't know if Apple is going to take over the world - let's face it, people are cheap and a Windows machine is 'good enough' for most things. But for me, I would love to have the elegance and stability of a Mac OS X machine, coupled with the ability to run effectively some of the scientific and engineering applications that are only available on a Windows machine.

[Randall]

So you believe Vista will require all customers to upgrade their ROMs from BIOS to EFI? I wonder how many copies will be sold when everybody is told they need a whole-system upgrade.

I don't think you realize what you wrote.Yeah I do. EFI is required for 64-bit intel itanium processors, and will be used in Vista. I didn't say that EFI will be required exclusively per se, but it will be used. BIOS will be slowly grandfathered out, most likely non-existant by the next version of Windows after Vista :p http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/firmware/default.mspx

Also I would like to point all the people who claimed I was incorrect to this (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1872067,00.asp) article.
Microsoft has also changed the boot manager in build 5231, providing a new layer of abstraction that supports both traditional BIOS ROMs (Basic Input/Output System ROMs) and the NVRAM/EFI (non-volatile RAM / Extensible Firmware Interface) boot configuration mechanism used, for example, by systems with 64-bit Intel Itanium processors.

[Mitch1984]

I thought one of the reasons mac's are so good and efficient is because both the Hardware & OS are made by the same company (Apple).

So now isn't this going to be a bad thing.

[Blue Velvet]

To start with, our University is just waiting for such multi-OS Mactel to buy several hundreds of them to replace Windoze stuff that does not run Mac and Mac stuff that does not run Windows. Then start multiplying...

Which university do you work for?

[kenaustus]

The indication that the demands on Apple's resources is the reason to let Intel develop the PM MBs is interesting. It shows that Apple is ready to work closer with Intel than originally thought. I have no doubt that Intel is going to put a lot of effort into the project so they can get more business down the road.

Pricing? I think Apple will stay around their 28% gross margin on all Macs. this margin does not include the R&D for OS X or the apps included, like iLife, and it is what investors look for. If prices can be cut while maintaining that margin then everyone would be happy.

Since all the Macs in our family are 1 - 2 years old I'm not in the market for a Mactel, but I am very interested in what is going to be delivered. Especially the design. Don't you know the S Jobs and J Ive have something special in mind for us!

[SiliconAddict]

I'm sorry but the logic makes absolutely no sense. Nobody is going to pay extra for an Apple computer, just to be able to run Windows on it.

Umm yes they are. :rolleyes: Why do you think there are companies like Alienware, Voodoo PC, Falcon Northwest, etc. All of these companies make high end PC's and all are targets for Apple's x86 hardware. If you think that Windows XP and Vista aren't going to be dual booted within days you would be, will be wrong. I've had more people who are geeks who are seriously interested in an Apple laptop. Not because of OS X but because of the design. Trust me when I say these people will wipe OS X off the system within a half an hour. They simply are not interested in the OS right now. What? You think the iPod's hardware is superior to everything else? Its not. Its the design of the thing is what sells the iPod and what will sell i/PowerBooks to Windows users.

[Randall]

I thought one of the reasons mac's are so good and efficient is because both the Hardware & OS are made by the same company (Apple).

So now isn't this going to be a bad thing.Apple and Intel will be working close together to insure seemless integration. Relax. They won't need to support a million different hardware configurations, just the usual Mac handful. :p

[SiliconAddict]

I thought one of the reasons mac's are so good and efficient is because both the Hardware & OS are made by the same company (Apple).

So now isn't this going to be a bad thing.


There isn't anything keeping them from working hand in hand with Intel and crafting the hardware to meet the OS needs and vis versa. (sp?) Apple is prob going to ask for a series of design specifications, after some back and forth Intel will come back with a few sample boards, Apple will take them to their labs and start playing around, Apple will say we need this or that tweaked, Intel will come back after a few weeks with something new, and so on. (Total WAG on my part.)

[Randall]

There isn't anything keeping them from working hand in hand with Intel and crafting the hardware to meet the OS needs and vis versa. (sp?)vice versa :p

[SiliconAddict]

vice versa :p
eh. whatever. :p Didn't think it was spelled how it sounded.

[RichP]

Is there any reliable information that tells us the next PowerMacs will be any less amazing because Intel worked on the motherboard? Do we know that this will stop Apple from doing cool things for us that they would have liked to do? Will this allow other PC makers to steal Mac OS X?

No to all of the above. So it doesn't worry me. If Intel delivers the best quality product in the least time and lowest cost, then that works for me.

Plus, if Intel's designing a mobo for the PowerMac, that suggests that Apple's NOT using some of-the-shelf PC motherboard that wouldn't even NEED to be designed. Not that I ever considered that likely.

Finally, a bit of sense around here! I have no idea why everyone thinks that Apple has suddenly forgotten and discarded over 20 years of computer history and is going to take a role as another box-maker.

Intels new thrust is in Platforms. Moore's Law cant continue with simply faster processors; it is going to be the platform as a whole that will deliver a better, faster experience. Centrino and VIIV are going to be the cores of great new Apple products at the PPC path simply could not provide.

[Bonte]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=28562

No intel inside for apple and the rest it seems. :eek:
new logo January 3, just in time for the Macintel :D

[JoeG4]

Make no mistake, the new machine will be just as Apple as the soon to be replaced Power Mac are.

I know some of you are hoping such, and some of you are really hoping not, but that's the way it is, and that's the way it'll be.

:cool:

[Peace]

Well it's starting to look like Intel and Apple are really confusing the public leading up to MWSF :D

[heisetax]

So much for "Designed by Apple in California".

But, I suppose if it makes PowerMacs cheaper for us, then good.

But if the quality suffers or innovation slows, then bad.

Does Apple design all thier own motherboards now?

I don't want to lose features or be locked into Intel only tech though.

And this article implies that the Intel transition will be complete by 3rd quarter this year. That seems awfully optimistic to me, especially since we still don't know what is going to shake out in MWSF.


The only part that Apple does any more is the designing. Everything else is made in China by contract manufacturers. Just buy an iPod or PowerBook from the Online Apple Store & you can track the package from manufacture in China, to Alaska & on to your home or business. I have not checked to see if the G5 PowerMac is made in an Apple owned & run factory. At one time all of the Macs were actually made by Apple in an Apple factory. Now Apple is just a designer & erverything else is contracted out. Even my copy of Aperture was made in Canada. I used to think that they at least produced their own software. But I guess I have been proven wrong again.

Apple at the present time only seems to be a designer, not a manufacturer. But they still consider themselves as a computer hardware manufacturer. Having Intel design the Intel PowerMac logic board seems to not make a lot of sense. The only way Apple gets the wanted features into their computer logic board designs is to do the designing themselves. The PowerMac is where the most inovation needs to be done. I would think that they will work very close with the Intel/Mac group like they once did with IBM & Motorola in the design of the PPC. Apple contracts out the manufacturing of most all of their hardware, so they would probably not show a clear difference between design & manufacturing.

The change from the present PPC Mac to the Intel Mac was said to not be finished until sometime in 2007. This will allow Apple to use a generation later Intel cpu in the PowerMac. That is what was first indicated by Apple & what I think will still happen. Many PowerMac User's need to use software that runs natively on the computer processor. For that additional reason Apple will want to stay with their original stated plans.

I could easily be wrong as I thought that Apple would stay with a FW interface for the iPod. But they want to milk the iPod for every last dollar. So my new 60 GB black iPod suffers because of it. I'm also left with a lot a FW cables for the iPod that will only work as a means to chage the battery. If they told us a story about FW being better than USB like they have told us in the past that the PPC is now was better than the Intel/AMD line of processors. The only thing they have left is that your new Mac is Apple designed. They always told us they designed better computers than anyone else. BAut maybe they were only telling us a story about that also. We have to remember that Steve Jobs is a saleman, maybe a great salesman, not a computer engineer.

Bill the TaxMan

[rockthecasbah]

Finally, an interesting COMPUTER rumor...:) My take on the situation is this: It really doesn't matter who makes what part, as long as it is still a Mac, and a better one at that. I am not buying a Mac because Apple designed the Motherboard, i'm buying it for OSX's benefits, the beauty/styling, and computer function (not in any particular order, just sayng...;) ). If it is still the same type of Mac I love, I am fine with other companies developing elements, including Intel.

[gnasher729]

What??? I completely disagree with your logic. I would, in fact, be willing to pay some extra for an Apple machine that can capably run Windows. I don't know if Apple is going to take over the world - let's face it, people are cheap and a Windows machine is 'good enough' for most things. But for me, I would love to have the elegance and stability of a Mac OS X machine, coupled with the ability to run effectively some of the scientific and engineering applications that are only available on a Windows machine.

My estimate is that Apple could easily get between 0.5% and 1.0% of the Windows PC market if they sold Macintosh computers with Windows installed instead of MacOS X as a build-to-order option. Especially the MacMini and the iMacs would sell very well; there is nothing comparable in the PC market at the moment.

[satty]

I am less and less convinced of the Intel move.

First, the news about the Intel CPU move, now the message about the mother boards designed by Intel. It looks the next one will be the case design will be outsourced to Dell and to save some more costs we will get cheap plastic instead of our nice titanium, aluminium cases. Who knows what other news come up?

I have the feeling that even then some people here try to convince themselves, what a great decision by Steve Jobs and Apple it is, and swallow whatever pill offered.

Looks more and more like a PC with the Apple logo on it.

I know... I also prefer OS X to Windows or whatever they call it in the future, but the hardware, specially the quality of it, is very important to me.
If there is no distinction between a Mac and a Dell anymore, why should we not prefer Mac OS X being able to run on whatever hardware on the market?


Looks like "Intel inside" would be more appropriate than an Apple logo on it

[amateurmacfreak]

Ok. If Intel iMacs come out in January I am going to be more pissed than I ever have been in my whole life. I just got a new one for Christmas (which I am in total love with, by the way). That would be the worst thing ever if new ones came about 20 days after. :( But that's still fairly unlikely, right?
I also really hope that Intel iBooks come out at MWSF. If they don't, I'm screwed there also. I have someone waiting to get their husband an iBook because of that rumor. And their 15 year-old son (the computer nerd of the family) is already annoyed because I decided to get an iMac instead of having him build me a computer. :( Anyways, what does everyone think is going to happen in January?
And will it be a good month for me? No new iMac and new iBook (or Powerbook would be fine)?:confused:

[amateurmacfreak]

Well it's starting to look like Intel and Apple are really confusing the public leading up to MWSF :D
Hana, you can say that again. Like the signature and the avatar by the way.

[RBR2]

I don't understand why so many people have voted "negative" on this article.

Apple's motherboards, with some notable exceptions, are generally at least a generation behind the rest of the industry in features and performance. The notable exceptions are generally in the area of slots, where the old 9x00, being the first computer sold to offer more than 3-4 PCI slots, and the new PCIe Macs with their 8x PCIe slots, are industry leaders. The other exception is in weird form factors, which don't apply to PowerMacs anyway. In all other respects the Mac motherboards have tended to support the latest features later and slower than their Intel counterparts.

I see this as a great move on Apple's part. They'll likely get the motherboard way cheaper, have it perform better, and get it released sooner than doing it in-house. Since, except for slots that go mostly unusued, Apple hasn't been much of an innovator here, it makes a huge amount of sense.

Boy are you kind to Apple! Apple is almost always dead last in adopting new industry standards and frequently bastardizes them anyway. For example the not quite PCI slots in Blue & Whites that have terrible throughput or the wacked out Firewire in the B&W and some others as well as continuing Firewire problems. Then there is the example of the Airport cards which changed the pin out from the industry standard PCMCIA cards and then crippled the port so that it would not support the throughput of a wireless G connection anyway. Oh, did I forget Apple being dead last or close to it in adopting AGP graphics cards or USB 2 or...well, yea, most things.

Sometimes Apple has actually paid more for old hardware than the going price for current stuff. Part of the problem is the arcane management structure and, yes, occasionally, Steve who gets in the way of some of the technical stuff.

Some of the hardware design is "half baked", such as the temperature sensors for G5s that were placed in the cool spots which lead to the machines overheating.

Does anyone wonder why Apple needs to devote more resources to getting the job right the first time? How many people have "Rev A" horror stories or machines that have continuing logic board problems?

[amateurmacfreak]

The only part that Apple does any more is the designing. Everything else is made in China by contract manufacturers. Just buy an iPod or PowerBook from the Online Apple Store & you can track the package from manufacture in China, to Alaska & on to your home or business. I have not checked to see if the G5 PowerMac is made in an Apple owned & run factory. At one time all of the Macs were actually made by Apple in an Apple factory. Now Apple is just a designer & erverything else is contracted out. Even my copy of Aperture was made in Canada. I used to think that they at least produced their own software. But I guess I have been proven wrong again.

Apple at the present time only seems to be a designer, not a manufacturer. But they still consider themselves as a computer hardware manufacturer. Having Intel design the Intel PowerMac logic board seems to not make a lot of sense. The only way Apple gets the wanted features into their computer logic board designs is to do the designing themselves. The PowerMac is where the most inovation needs to be done. I would think that they will work very close with the Intel/Mac group like they once did with IBM & Motorola in the design of the PPC. Apple contracts out the manufacturing of most all of their hardware, so they would probably not show a clear difference between design & manufacturing.

The change from the present PPC Mac to the Intel Mac was said to not be finished until sometime in 2007. This will allow Apple to use a generation later Intel cpu in the PowerMac. That is what was first indicated by Apple & what I think will still happen. Many PowerMac User's need to use software that runs natively on the computer processor. For that additional reason Apple will want to stay with their original stated plans.

I could easily be wrong as I thought that Apple would stay with a FW interface for the iPod. But they want to milk the iPod for every last dollar. So my new 60 GB black iPod suffers because of it. I'm also left with a lot a FW cables for the iPod that will only work as a means to chage the battery. If they told us a story about FW being better than USB like they have told us in the past that the PPC is now was better than the Intel/AMD line of processors. The only thing they have left is that your new Mac is Apple designed. They always told us they designed better computers than anyone else. BAut maybe they were only telling us a story about that also. We have to remember that Steve Jobs is a saleman, maybe a great salesman, not a computer engineer.

Bill the TaxMan
Yeah, Apple's starting to bother me more and more because of the huge focus on design. Don't get me wrong: I think it is wonderful that Apple computers are beautiful. But after a while, if Apple becomes more and more about sales and design and loses touch with having cutting edge technology that they design themselves, it's going to be tough, and very sad. I have always had great admiration for Steve Jobs, but this Intel move has started to seem to feel a little rocky to me, and perhaps seems a lose of too much of Apple's control over their own product. Maybe I'm just stressed about MWSF coming. But this is starting to be less exciting and about innovation, and more about buisness moves and profits it seems.

[amateurmacfreak]

I think it's a smart move by Apple. The PowerMacIntel will be pretty much the same as the new dual core G5's. DDR2, PCIe, etc. - other than the Intel chip and any TPM/custom modules. Don't you think Apple's evaluated the situation and is well aware of the higher "leak-potential" of contracting the PowerMacIntel mobo design out? The MacIntel hype will be pretty much past its peak by the time the PowerMacIntel is out. Like the article says, we'll be seeing Intel iBooks, iMacs, Mac minis, and PowerBooks before the PowerMac. I'm assuming that it'd be easy to estimate the PowerMacIntel's specs based on the specs of the other MacIntel introductions.

So it's a good move by Apple - no need to spread themselves thin. It may also have been in the original contract too, who knows? It's a win for Apple, and a win for us users - it should translate into lower costs for us. :D

Oh no. I'm starting to feel nauseous if my new, beautiful iMac is going to be outdated in the matter of a few months. Sorry I'm posting so much but... soooo stressed.

[steve_hill4]

Found this on digg.
http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/5761/intellogos8lg.th.png (http://img412.imageshack.us/my.php?image=intellogos8lg.png)
As already stated, old news. Interestingly though, I hadn't seen quite the array of P4 stickers. They are going to look very messy and confuse consumers more. Previously, look for a P4 and see the little HT in the top corner, now it's all text and less easy to spot if it's HT or not.

Also, one thing that has bugged me for a while now is the usage of Pentium D. Previously we had effectively Pentium 4 D and Celeron D, (along with their M equivalents), but now we have a Pentium D which isn't just a desktop processor, but Dual Core. I have already asked me what the D stands for, (as they see it as a substitute for where the 4 normally is), and I explain it's dual core. They then look at a Celeron D and ask whether that's just a cheaper dual core and I have to point out it means desktop. Intel are going to confuse the consumers who are techies more and more if they carry on like this.

[liquidh2o]

Sounds like good news to me.

1. eliminates Apples R&D costs to design and develop a motherboard.

2. sourcing intel for motherboards might lower the cost to buy cpus.

3. having a reputable company that has already established itself in the x86 motherboard market might go a long ways to speed up Apples rollout of Mactels.

All in all, hopefully this helps to keep the cost of prices for Mactels in the same price range, or if we're lucky, lowers the price.

[steve_hill4]

Finally, an interesting COMPUTER rumor...:) My take on the situation is this: It really doesn't matter who makes what part, as long as it is still a Mac, and a better one at that. I am not buying a Mac because Apple designed the Motherboard, i'm buying it for OSX's benefits, the beauty/styling, and computer function (not in any particular order, just sayng...;) ). If it is still the same type of Mac I love, I am fine with other companies developing elements, including Intel.
It will obviously still be a Mac, but I think more people here are concerned that the Mac is becoming too close to a biege box PC for comfort. It would degrade the whole OSX experience if we knew that that intel designed motherboard would be easily and cheaply obtainable, fit into any old case and run OSX, in much the same way as running it on a PC without the hardware we will apparently need. Many will feel that they are then buying a Mac merely on looks, and are less willing to buy something that can be anything up to twice the price as a same spec PC, (however many disadvantages it will still have), just because it looks good.

It's just a good job it's intel. They should be the company most wanting OSX to run on Macs exclusively, (behind Apple of course), otherwise this intel switch would turn out to be a flop and both companies would have wasted billions, just to kill off the Mac. If they develop a motherboard which ensures no others will successfully run the OS, it will be mutually beneficial for the pair, and of course us.

[rxden]

intel is known for rock solid motherboards but cutting edge with features such as abit and asus supply they will not deliver. could be advantagous if apple uses intel to supply cpu and boards for cost - that is if apple chooses to pass the savings on to customers or decide to pad there margins. not sure if this makes sense.

[ja0912]

x

[shamino]

Yeah I do. EFI is required for 64-bit intel itanium processors, and will be used in Vista. I didn't say that EFI will be required exclusively per se, but it will be used. BIOS will be slowly grandfathered out, most likely non-existant by the next version of Windows after Vista :p http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/firmware/default.mspx
Nice knee-jerk reply that ignores context.

The post I was replying to was claiming that Vista will require EFI, meaning incompatible with everything else.

Any OS that is unable to function without a specific kind of boot-loader is broken by design. And even you just said that Vista is not broken in that way.

[Tupring]

iMacs as well in the first 4 months? Interesting, particularly for a close friend of mine who wants to get a new iMac in Feb.

Thanks for the mad dash. All that hyperpasta gave you the necessary carb-boost. :)Tell them to hurry before its too late.

[Randall]

Nice knee-jerk reply that ignores context.

The post I was replying to was claiming that Vista will require EFI, meaning incompatible with everything else.

Any OS that is unable to function without a specific kind of boot-loader is broken by design. And even you just said that Vista is not broken in that way.The only context that has been ignored is my own original comment by you. I made no such claim, if you look back you can see that I don't. You can, however, be sure that BIOS will slowly be phased out.

[riversky]

A few points.

1. Apple is devoting so much development time to the iPod and software that it makes sense to move to Intel based development. And it would be far easier then to license the designs to Dell and others if that time comes about and Mac OS X is released for all Intel system by anyone.

2. I really hope the days of opening and closing the PowerBook and having every thing just work are not gone but I fear some of the reliability in the boot and sleep process will be lost.

3. If this really is the debut schedule, iMac, iBooks, PowerBooks, and mini all in the next four months I feel for those that got Macs in the last few months (especially the holiday) because you can bet on much higer performance in the CPU (dual core) and the latest graphics GPU's even if all other components remain the same (ie drives etc)

[shamino]

The kernel cannot be completely ROM-dependent.
I assume you mean ROM-independent. And it's simply not true.

ROM code is software like anything else. Anything it does, a disk-loaded piece of code can also do.

As for booting XP, the ROM code only is responsible for getting the boot-loader up and running. Microsoft would clearly need to rewrite the OS Loader code, but that's a tiny miniscule part of the OS. The remaining parts of the firmware (like power management) can be ignored, or can be used with a new device driver.
It's the rumors on the internets. In any case, if Apple was going to use EFI, it would have been in the Intel developer machines. Hardware developers need to know what kind of firmware is in the machine, and unless there is a very secret set of EFI-based Intel Macs at NVIDIA and ATI, you can bet that at least the first wave of Macs next year will use a regular-old BIOS.
Please post a link to one of those rumors. Every rumor I've seen posted here is saying the exact opposite.

As for the developer machines, Apple has said that developers should not make any assumptions about the ROM code. They have explicitly said that with regard to firmware, gestalt codes and disk partitions, developers should assume that nothing in the developer boxes will be present in the shipping boxes.
Using EFI would certainly be an extarordinary measure preventing you from installing Windows! If the Macs used EFI, Windows just wouldn't install on it, any more than it would install on a G5 PowerMac.
You have a very low opinion of what software developers are capable of. Writing an OS loader that uses EFI calls to bootstrap the Windows kernel is something that can probably be done in a week or two. It might even be possible using existing code (from various open source OS projects.)
If that was the case, saying "we won't stop you from installing Windows" would be a meaningless statement. They wouldn't have said it then.
You still seem to think that "we won't stop you from installing Windows" is exactly the same as "we are going to guarantee Windows compatibility".

If you seriously think that those two sentences mean the same thing, then you need to take some classes in basic English and logic.

[DavidCar]

I read where Conroe is now expected in July 06, which may mean we could see a Intel PowerMac announcement at WWDC.

[GregA2]

Trust me when I say these people will wipe OS X off the system within a half an hour.

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

[shamino]

I've had more people who are geeks who are seriously interested in an Apple laptop. Not because of OS X but because of the design. Trust me when I say these people will wipe OS X off the system within a half an hour. They simply are not interested in the OS right now. What? You think the iPod's hardware is superior to everything else? Its not. Its the design of the thing is what sells the iPod and what will sell i/PowerBooks to Windows users.
You've got a lot of friends that are pretty stupid if they're going spend over $1000 extra just to get a fancy case and undersized power supply.

The problems with Windows PC's isn't with the hardware, it's with Windows. Anybody who installs Windows on a Mac will have all the same problems as they would on any other hardware platform. Possibly more, since Apple won't be shipping any Windows device drivers for it.

[Peace]

Boy are you kind to Apple! Apple is almost always dead last in adopting new industry standards and frequently bastardizes them anyway. For example the not quite PCI slots in Blue & Whites that have terrible throughput or the wacked out Firewire in the B&W and some others as well as continuing Firewire problems. Then there is the example of the Airport cards which changed the pin out from the industry standard PCMCIA cards and then crippled the port so that it would not support the throughput of a wireless G connection anyway. Oh, did I forget Apple being dead last or close to it in adopting AGP graphics cards or USB 2 or...well, yea, most things.

Sometimes Apple has actually paid more for old hardware than the going price for current stuff. Part of the problem is the arcane management structure and, yes, occasionally, Steve who gets in the way of some of the technical stuff.

Some of the hardware design is "half baked", such as the temperature sensors for G5s that were placed in the cool spots which lead to the machines overheating.

Does anyone wonder why Apple needs to devote more resources to getting the job right the first time? How many people have "Rev A" horror stories or machines that have continuing logic board problems?

HUH?

I believe Apple invented Firewire and USB..

[bigandy]

methinks this is a good idea for apple because otherwise they'd be stretched a little too far with redesigns for the intel platform. now if they just make sure that intel aren't allowed to do anything other than the motherboard and processor, and slap them until an EFI goes in there instead of a BIOS.

if they produce all MacIntels from the word go with EFIs, there'll be pretty much no chance of people grabbing OSX and running it on their crappy dells :D

[Peace]

I for one wouldn't mind if people grabbed OSX and installed it on crappy Dells or any other "PeeCee"..But there are going to be folks trying to do it anyway.

If people installed it on some generic PeeCee they might decide it's time to buy a REAL Apple!

[bigandy]

HUH?

I believe Apple invented Firewire and USB..


apple only developed FireWire. Sony created i.Link, an unpowered version, to avoid paying royalties to Apple when putting it in PCs and Video Cameras (hence the 4 pin version in all video cameras).

USB was developed by Intel, but first adopted by Apple.

[bbyrdhouse]

try going to Dell and price out a similar PC. I had to about a week ago for work, and it is not any cheaper! If you factor the benefit of using OSX, Apple computer is much better value without question.

Cinch,

True!
I did the same thing about 2 weeks ago. The Dell actually came out to about $500.00 more.

[AidenShaw]

I am less and less convinced of the Intel move.
...
Looks more and more like a PC with the Apple logo on it.
Nothing new here - Intel mobos are in a lot of systems, from corner white-box builders to systems from the bigger boys.

I bought a dozen eMachines for a project - they have a standard Intel 845 mobo with a 2.66 GHz Celeron.

Really nice price, though!

[Peace]

apple only developed FireWire. Sony created i.Link, an unpowered version, to avoid paying royalties to Apple when putting it in PCs and Video Cameras (hence the 4 pin version in all video cameras).

USB was developed by Intel, but first adopted by Apple.

RightO! :)

My point stands tho..Apple did USB and Firewire first..

[reyesmac]

I think Intel designing the first Powermac could be the best thing for it. If Intel makes the Mac run better than any other Intel PC on the market (due to Apples high quality standards/parts) then they can use it to thumb their nose at Microsoft and show off their hardware as being the fastest on the planet. Everyone else will have to raise their standards or buy from Intel.

[RBR2]

HUH?

I believe Apple invented Firewire and USB..

Obviously you missed some of the road apples. You do know road apples, don't you?

Apple did not invent USB, though it was an early adopter, the one instance I can think of that Apple led the pack. But then Apple was way behind in adopting USB2.

Apple was a prime mover in getting Firewire through the standards group (IEEE 1394) and owns the name, but that is another matter. The Firewire that was in the B&W simply did not work for the most part. Ditto the native ATA controller, certainly with most any replacement drive.

When the B&W came out the standard for AGP 2.0 had been out for some time and Apple used the 66 MHz "PCI" slot for the graphics card.

[Peace]

Obviously you missed some of the road apples. You do know road apples, don't you?



I know Roadies if that helps ;)

[joelypolly]

It feels like most people are over reacting to the whole intel is designing/building the motherboard. For the most part it feels like people here don't really know what actually goes on when a motherboard is designed. It is usually the chipset maker that design a motherboard in this case intel and then individual mb makers e.g. ASUS might customise it to some degree but usually its based of the reference design.

The only reason Apple was designing mbs was coz there was no reference mb design for PPC. Getting intel to do the work is a good idea as most of Apples mb designs have something or another lacking or even bugs that would need to be fixed.

[Norse Son]

Meaning the ingredients are flying every which direction, and half the time you can't understand a word he says... Still, it was a blast to watch him.

Alright, in the AppleInsider article, where it lists the iMac, PowerBook, iBook and mini, it links to two previous articles. Together they talk about the iMac and PowerBook switching to Intel at MWSF, and the iBook and mini later in the Spring. This timetable fits the "rollout-schedule" of the Yonah dual-core ("Centrino Core Duo") from January into February, and of the single-core ("Centrino Core Solo") around late March to early May.

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1431
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1368
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1359

The hints for the timing are right there. And the cost of Yonah's dual-core chips lend credence to it not going in to the mini (as it's marketed now) or the iBook. The single-core will be cheaper, and fit in to those product lines.

And the idea of sticking a dual-core Yonah (which starts around $240 for the 1.6GHz version - before any "humungo-volume" discounts) into the "sub-$500" mini and then bolting on all kinds of "DVR-wishlist" bells & whistles... Well, you've just priced & sized the mini out of its target market and purpose for existing.

I wonder if a dual-core/32bit Yonah, with its 667MHz bus, "might" be slightly faster than the single-core/64bit G5 in the present iMac (2.1GHz on 700MHz bus). It would be interesting to see if Apple would put it in the iMac at MWSF - your average iMac buyer doesn't know the difference between bits, and most of the software they will use doesn't give a rip, either... If Apple thinks that 32-vs-64bit distinction will matter, than the iMac will wait for Merom around September.

Conroe, the desktop design-derivative of Yonah/Merom is expected Fall of 2006, and fits into the PowerMac transition schedule. As for Intel designing and/or building the mobo - more power to 'em. They know x86 inside-out, but will work closely with Apple on the type and placement of components. Apple will design the case, and decide on things like FrWr, BluRay, S-ATA 150, which GPU, WiFi or WiMax, etc.

That's what distinguishes Apple from the pc world. In fact, the closest "mimic" to Apple's attention-to-detail comes from Liebermann www.go-l.com/home/index.htm.webloc... It's downright spooky at times to see how much they... hmmm... "follow" Apple's lead.

In many respects Apple has been a pioneer, even of technology Intel invented. It was the first to embrace USB and PCI while most "beige box builders" were (are, in some cases) still playing with Serial, Paralel, PS/2, 3.5" FDHDs, EISA, etc. Look at WiFi and Apple's leap from 802.11b to 802.11g - will WiMax be on the new PowerBooks? It was slow on the AGP-bandwagon, then "went left" to PCI-X when most of the world was "going right" to PCI-Express. FireWire is another success, and the likely reason it's missing on the new iPods is because of cost savings - we should be seeing FrWr 1600 by 2007, not just "more" acceptance of FrWr 800... Here's one more: Pioneer -depending on final licensing terms - will announce their first BluRay product(s) at CES in January - it will appear first in Japan, but how soon after that will it be in an Apple?

Relax, people... 2006 looks very bright - unless you're a beta tester of Vista. Or, as the Swedish Chef might say, "Yea, borgi-sbord-ne-durningk-hahm!"

[Norse Son]

One more thing to think about: as Apple's market share increases and MacOS X begins besting Windows' scores for app benchmarks...

The x86 architecture is loaded down with legacy instructions and code "bolted" on top of one another. How hard would it be for Intel to strip away those ugly bits and leave a multi-core (2,4,8...) cpu that is optimized for MacOS X (no Classic support either, thank god)...

Not in 2006, or in 2007, but I could see it happening in 2008... right around the time Apple commands 10% of the market.

The only wrinkle would be if Apple had been forced (by hackers, the courts or "Redmond's Omni-Impotence") to license the MacOS X to "beige box builders".

[mtscott]

What about Intel soldering the processor down to the board before it even leaves the factory for Apple's assembly plants?

USB was developed by Intel, but first adopted by Apple.

This shows the great opportunity that both companies have here. Intel wants to design and implement new hardware, but Microsoft has held them back. Apple pushes new hardware and can easier than Microsoft, since they write the OS for their "own" hardware. By their "own" I simply mean they order it to spec and package it up.

As for BIOS, seriously people. Go from OpenFirmware to BIOS, then eventually to EFI? If Intel is the developer of EFI, they'd want to sell it. They can and already do with boards they sell.

I'm sorry but the logic makes absolutely no sense. Nobody is going to pay extra for an Apple computer, just to be able to run Windows on it.

Why not?

In many respects Apple has been a pioneer, even of technology Intel invented. It was the first to embrace USB and PCI while most "beige box builders" were (are, in some cases) still playing with Serial, Paralel, PS/2, 3.5" FDHDs, EISA, etc.

My GOD, thank you Norse Son. Having all those extra connections means they still use resources. Therefore, do I want a PS/2 or Serial or Paralel on my machine anymore, especially if there is hardware out there that does the same but better? Not really. And even if it doesn't perform better or faster, if I can have one connection, say USB, instead of a different one each for a mouse & keyboard, printer, external modem, I'll take the USB.

The x86 architecture is loaded down with legacy instructions and code "bolted" on top of one another. How hard would it be for Intel to strip away those ugly bits and leave a multi-core (2,4,8...) cpu that is optimized for MacOS X (no Classic support either, thank god)...

Wouldn't that be great?

[macmax77]

Thanks, I needed a good laugh. :D


+1:D

[maya]

Yeah, Apple's starting to bother me more and more because of the huge focus on design. Don't get me wrong: I think it is wonderful that Apple computers are beautiful. But after a while, if Apple becomes more and more about sales and design and loses touch with having cutting edge technology that they design themselves, it's going to be tough, and very sad. I have always had great admiration for Steve Jobs, but this Intel move has started to seem to feel a little rocky to me, and perhaps seems a lose of too much of Apple's control over their own product. Maybe I'm just stressed about MWSF coming. But this is starting to be less exciting and about innovation, and more about buisness moves and profits it seems.

No one can trust Steve Jobs, for the very reason that he is in the business to make money and lots of it for himself and Apple Computers. As Apple and Steve Jobs have learnt a hard painful lesson in the past and they do not plan on making the same mistake again.

Steve Jobs said many things and then the turn on his own word(s). He also says that he does not care about market share, how wrong you all are who believe that he doesn't care. He cares a lot for the Macintosh market share.

For reference in Steve Jobs statements in the past:

1. PPC is better than x86 (true, to a point and depending on usage).
2. Optical and HDD drives performance degrade when placed in a vertical housing.
3. 3GHz G5 PowerMac by next summer. ;) <-- had to throw that in there.
4. PowerBook G5 should follow shortly. ;) <-- that to throw that one also.
5. iPod will never see Picture and Video support.
etc, etc, etc.....


You get the point, in the end he puts on a show and the audience watches on like eager children to see what new trick he has up his sleeve(s).

He also wear a black turtleneck to symbolize a magician. ;) :D

[AidenShaw]

My GOD, thank you Norse Son. Having all those extra connections means they still use resources.

Therefore, do I want a PS/2 or Serial or Paralel on my machine anymore, especially if there is hardware out there that does the same but better?
When a "resource" is a couple of bytes in physical (real) address space and an overloaded interrupt line - does it really matter? (ps. for computer scientists, the term "overloaded" is a good thing, not a bad thing ;-) - we're not electrical engineers, after all)

You may take USB - but if my mobo has PS/2 ports I'll plug the keyboard and mouse into those and use the USB ports for something that actually benefits from USB. What on earth is the benefit of using USB over PS/2 for the keyboard/mouse of a desktop? (Although, the new Intel mobos usually have 6 or 8 USB2 ports from the get-go.)

And, for the fanbois claiming that "Apple designed USB" - LOL, that's why I have fun in these fora!

Apple's "innovation" wasn't to add USB, it was to remove all the other ports. PCs had USB a year before the iMac - but since they also had serial and parallel nobody was forced to jump to the new technology.

[EricNau]

No one can trust Steve Jobs, for the very reason that he is in the business to make money and lots of it for himself and Apple Computers. As Apple and Steve Jobs have learnt a hard painful lesson in the past and they do not plan on making the same mistake again.

Steve Jobs said many things and then the turn on his own word(s). He also says that he does not care about market share, how wrong you all are who believe that he doesn't care. He cares a lot for the Macintosh market share.

For reference in Steve Jobs statements in the past:

1. PPC is better than x86 (true, to a point and depending on usage).
2. Optical and HDD drives performance degrade when placed in a vertical housing.
3. 3GHz G5 PowerMac by next summer. ;) <-- had to throw that in there.
4. PowerBook G5 should follow shortly. ;) <-- that to throw that one also.
5. iPod will never see Pictures and VIdeo support.
etc, etc, etc.....


You get the point, in the end he puts on a show and the audience watches on like eager children to see what new trick he has up his sleeve(s).

He also wear a black turtleneck to symbolize a magician. ;) :D
I don't ever recall him saying "Never."

[maya]

I don't ever recall him saying "Never."

I believe he mentioned something along those lines, "that people do not want to view pictures and video on they iPods." He mentioned this during an interview with CNET some time last year. :)

[mtscott]

What on earth is the benefit of using USB over PS/2 for the keyboard/mouse of a desktop? (Although, the new Intel mobos usually have 6 or 8 USB2 ports from the get-go.)

None. Aside from having a single type of connection for external devices. I never said it was better for the user, although I believe it is. However, for a manufacturer to design a motherboard to incorporate only USB connections instead of PS/2, serial, parallel, & USB must be easier and more cost effective.

I know that the resources used by having the ports is not that significant. However, I'm sure as a computer scientist you can appreciate that the more complicated something is, the harder it becomes to manage. Having USB along with serial, parallel, and PS/2 at the same time becomes redundant.

[Eric5h5]

Well to start off, the IBM 970 processor is extremely hot. The Intel chipset runs at about 1/3 the watts of this processor

What "Intel chipset"? There are lots. Some of them are quite hotter than the 970. And also, which 970? There are several. Some of them are cool enough that they run in iMacs without lots of fans just fine. Since Apple hasn't said diddly-squat about which chips are going in Intel Power Macs, there's no way to know what they're going to use to cool them. But you aren't going to get dual-core 970-beating chips that run at 1/3 the watts, that's for sure. Not this year or next year, anyway.

--Eric

[animefan_1]

The only wrinkle would be if Apple had been forced (by hackers, the courts or "Redmond's Omni-Impotence") to license the MacOS X to "beige box builders".

I doubt Apple would be forced to do that. There's no legal standing and I don't think the OS X hacking community would grow large enough to truly worry them.

[TheMasin9]

i had been looking forward to the intel release, but this is the first thing that has me somewhat worried. I dont like the fact that apple might be outsourcing for the fact that it loses total control of design, the thing taht separates apple from everyone else. But i also see this as a transition for apple, the more work they can outsource the more work they can do in house on innovation.

[Eric5h5]

Ok. If Intel iMacs come out in January I am going to be more pissed than I ever have been in my whole life. I just got a new one for Christmas (which I am in total love with, by the way). That would be the worst thing ever if new ones came about 20 days after. :(

Why? What's going to run natively on Intel Macs, aside from (probably) iLife and a couple of new game ports? For quite a while, 90% or more of everything you run will probably have to go through Rosetta, which means it will run slowly or not at all. Unless you like having new things just for the sake of having new things, sticking with a PPC Mac for now would be a good idea.

--Eric

[AidenShaw]

But i also see this as a transition for apple, the more work they can outsource the more work they can do in house on innovation.
But, if the guts of the computer are exactly the same as the Dell, HP, Lenovo and Gateway - what is there to innovate other than new color plastics for the box, or perhaps stunning the industry with an anodized aluminum box?

Of course, "fashion" in a PC merely means that it will be "unfashionable" next season - even before its performance it no longer acceptable. (Wouldn't you be embarrassed to have a flower power iMac today?)

It looks like Macs will be commodity PCs, with maybe a prettier case to match the prettier price tag.

[~Shard~]

Hmm, what an interesting article. I wouldn't have thought Apple would outsource the PM mobo design in this manner, but all we can do is assume they know what they're doing, and that it will be a benefit to the product in the long run.

The whole mention of Intel PMs in late 2006 is interesting as well. Due to the current Conroe/Woodcrest timelines, I am not sure how this would be possible - or, if Apple will not be adopting these chipsets right away for the PMs (which makes little sense to me) I am curious as to what chipset would be implemented. Well, I guess we'll find out sooner or later - most likely at WWDC would be my guess. :cool:

[mccoma]

Even my copy of Aperture was made in Canada. I used to think that they at least produced their own software. But I guess I have been proven wrong again.

Uhm, yeah, the software was printed / pressed in Canada. A lot of printing and pressing goes on there. It is really, really inefficient for company to do its own printing / pressing (can't keep the place busy 100% of the time).

So, let's look at this rumor........

Apple is asking Intel to design its motherboard for the PowerMac. Apple needs to get a design out there, and has asked one of the larger motherboard makers who also happens to create chipsets and motherboards to do it. This is probably the biggest reason they went with Intel over AMD. Intel does this for PC companies and can do this for Apple.

Like Dell, Apple will ask them to meet certain specs. I would imagine that all the legacy ports (Parallel, Serial, Floppy, PS/2, PATA) and control chips will be removed. Apple will want firewire (like many other buyers of Intel motherboards) and maybe add an external SATA connector. BIOS will be gone, probably replaced by Intel's new EFI. For the PowerMac, I would bet on no onboard video card.

Just because it is an Intel-designed motherboard, doesn't make it bad. I really believe Intel really wants to show the world how cool there stuff could be and is now going to get the chance.

[excalibur313]

But, if the guts of the computer are exactly the same as the Dell, HP, Lenovo and Gateway - what is there to innovate other than new color plastics for the box, or perhaps stunning the industry with an anodized aluminum box?

Of course, "fashion" in a PC merely means that it will be "unfashionable" next season - even before its performance it no longer acceptable. (Wouldn't you be embarrassed to have a flower power iMac today?)

It looks like Macs will be commodity PCs, with maybe a prettier case to match the prettier price tag.

You are missing the point. What makes a mac truly a mac is the os that runs on top of it. Who cares what processor you are using as long as your mac can run really fast. As mentioned before the G4 although a very good processor pales in comparison against the Yonah processor that will be coming out in a few weeks in terms of performance and the amount of watts that it uses. Besides windows it's the quality of hardware that also contributes to dell's poor performance. It just isn't up to snuff with something that asus, msi, or gigabyte would put out. There are plenty of pcs that have nicer hardware than apples but just lack os x. It doesn't make sense for apple to use hardware of the same calibur as bottom of the barrel dell's because they already have proven that people will pay for quality as evidenced by price tags 50% more than a comparable dell. All this switch means is that you will be able to get apples cheaper, faster, and running cooler. And that should make your pocketbook and your lap happy. (Oh and regarding the flower power macs, although not too powerful by today's standards they definitely whip my head around when I see them in a book store...I still think they have a certain amount of charm.)

[EricNau]

But, if the guts of the computer are exactly the same as the Dell, HP, Lenovo and Gateway - what is there to innovate other than new color plastics for the box, or perhaps stunning the industry with an anodized aluminum box?

Of course, "fashion" in a PC merely means that it will be "unfashionable" next season - even before its performance it no longer acceptable. (Wouldn't you be embarrassed to have a flower power iMac today?)

It looks like Macs will be commodity PCs, with maybe a prettier case to match the prettier price tag.
Just because Apple is no longer making the insides directly, it doesn't mean they don't have any say in what it looks like.
This doesn't mean that when you open up an intel Powermac that it is going to look like a PC (tons of wires, etc.). It just means it was made by another company with a bigger factory for a cheaper price.

[millarj]

Umm yes they are. :rolleyes: Why do you think there are companies like Alienware, Voodoo PC, Falcon Northwest, etc. All of these companies make high end PC's and all are targets for Apple's x86 hardware. If you think that Windows XP and Vista aren't going to be dual booted within days you would be, will be wrong. I've had more people who are geeks who are seriously interested in an Apple laptop. Not because of OS X but because of the design. Trust me when I say these people will wipe OS X off the system within a half an hour. They simply are not interested in the OS right now. What? You think the iPod's hardware is superior to everything else? Its not. Its the design of the thing is what sells the iPod and what will sell i/PowerBooks to Windows users.


So. let me get this straight... Your "Geek" friends want to buy an Apple laptop, wipe the OS and put Windows on it? Sorry, I just can't say "Geek" and "Windows" in the same sentence, at least not with a straight face...

[Mr. MacPhisto]

For one, I seriously doubt that geeks will pay for the Mac just to load Windows. While Apple will not take measure to prevent people from installing Windows, there's no telling how reliable Windows would be on the machine or if drivers will be out there to run some of the stuff on the machine. Apple doesn't use Soundblaster, etc and I don't think there's a Mac audio driver available in Windows. While you might find something that works, you might not. I'm sure someone will eventually solve these problems, but not out of the gate. While Apple's design is killer, OS X is the real prize here. People who have been on the edge may now jump over wholesale if they can dual-boot on a Mac.

Second, I see no reason to be concerned about Intel developing the new PM. They likely have heavy Apple oversight and will make custom MoBos for Apple that probably will be proprietary. My guess is that Intel has a confidentiality agreement concerning Mac parts as part of Apple moving over to Intel. In short, these Intel board will be for Apple only and not available elsewhere. They will be heavily monitored and Intel will not publish the specs. I'm not concerned.

I'm also not all that concerned about OS X being hacked onto normal PCs. Some will do it, but it won't be easy and likely won't be as stable - many things might not even run.

This move was well thought out and planned, outside of Intel running ahead of schedule - something Apple hasn't seen in a long time. Intel will work to protect Apple, especially because I think they see Apple as their most crucial partner right now.

[jaw04005]

The hardware to me is just as important as the software. If Apple ships the same Intel motherboard just in a fancy chassis that say Dell or Gateway also ships for 35% higher, I'm not going to buy it. That just doesn't make good consumer sense. The O/S is large part of why I use a Mac, however Mac OS X is not worth the premium price alone. It's the combination of OS X and Apple's specialized hardware that makes me a Mac user.

[RBR2]

The hardware to me is just as important as the software. If Apple ships the same Intel motherboard just in a fancy chassis that say Dell or Gateway also ships for 35% higher, I'm not going to buy it. That just doesn't make good consumer sense. The O/S is large part of why I use a Mac, however Mac OS X is not worth the premium price alone. It's the combination of OS X and Apple's specialized hardware that makes me a Mac user.

What's so special about Apple's hardware?

Besides, hardware, anyone's hardware, is just there to run the software.

As far as it being the same as Dell's MB goes, I rather doubt that the MB that Apple ships will have much in common with what the current crop of MBs are like. One of the things that Intel is excited about is getting a clean start on a MB and related hardware that is not tied to a bunch of legacy restrictions.

On the other hand, who would really care if the end result is a Mac that runs better?

[Bonte]

Yeah, Apple's starting to bother me more and more because of the huge focus on design. Don't get me wrong: I think it is wonderful that Apple computers are beautiful. But after a while, if Apple becomes more and more about sales and design and loses touch with having cutting edge technology that they design themselves.

Designing cutting edge technology isn't cutting it anymore, the PC world takes 5 years to make the switch or just moves on to the next level in tech making Apple's technique obsolete and expensive. Technologically speaking Apple needs to be on pair with the PC world, not behind but also not to far upfront. The difference needs to be in the design, the user experience and the price just as the iPod is now.

[FFTT]

I can't see anyone wiping OS X from their machine in order to run Windows alone.

What I do see is a near future trend to dual and tripple boot systems
that will run ANY OS natively.

This triple threat ability will turn a lot of heads and bank accounts in Apple's
direction.

[wnurse]

Sorry, we were talking about the best mobos on earth, not the most rock-solid. I could think of several other mobo companies that could be in the running for "best mobo on earth" but none of them are intel.

Randall, what are examples of several mobo companies who are the "best mobo on earth?". I read through the entire discussion and never saw a post where you mentioned them?. Also i presume you meant these companies motherboards were more advanced than intel cause to me, rock solid is a component of any "best" category. Example, BMW are one of the best cars cause they are rock solid (you know, the fenders don't fall off, etc).. there are sure to be other stuff that makes BMW best in their class.. but i think rock-solid is one criteria.. So going with assumption that you were referencing technology , who are these mobo companies?.. just wanna check them out.

[Don.Key]

Randall, what are examples of several mobo companies who are the "best mobo on earth?".

For professional (Workstation / Server) usage: Nothing beats TYAN

[heisetax]

Not sure which PCs you've been looking at lately, but of the ones I've seen within the past year or so in retail stores, almost all (if not all) of them have Firewire ports already.


Have you seen any FW800 ports?

I did a little repair work on a brand new HP unit that cost about $500 that had FW400 ports front & rear.

Bill the TaxMan

[Henri Gaudier]

It's got an Intel processor.
It's motherboard is designed by Intel.
It's made in China.
What is it?
It's an Apple designed in California! Ha.

It's a snazzy cased PC with OSX. If you half the price then that's okay. Apple is changed forever but what can you do? But, if prices stay the same or are reduced only a fraction then..... it's a right royal let down/rip.

[eXan]

According to the rumor site, Apple has its current resources so far across the planned Intel iMacs (http://guides.macrumors.com/Intel_iMac_%28Rumored%29), PowerBooks (http://guides.macrumors.com/Intel_PowerBook_%28Rumored%29), iBooks (http://guides.macrumors.com/Intel_iBook_%28Rumored%29) and Mac minis (http://guides.macrumors.com/Intel_Mac_mini_%28Rumored%29) and that outsourcing the PowerMac motherboard design may help them keep a targeted ship date of the 3rd quarter of 2006 for the next-generation PowerMac.

The design is expected to take place within the Intel Apple-Group (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/11/20051122092351.shtml) which was quietly formed in November.

Outsourcing PowerMac motherboard design to Intel may have some interesting consequences regarding control and exclusivity of the design. As well, it exposes the PowerMac designs outside of Apple, which could be a source of future leaks.

I dont think tis is a good idea... PC manufacturer to design Mac internals??

[Machead III]

iMacs as well in the first 4 months? Interesting, particularly for a close friend of mine who wants to get a new iMac in Feb.


I lso wants an Intel iMac as soon as possible. The thought of being able to boot into Windows for games and into OS X for everything else is just... geeky euphoria.

[heisetax]

HUH?

I believe Apple invented Firewire and USB..


Firewire started with Apple & USB started with Intel.

Bill the TaxMan

[Evangelion]

I just hope that silent/quiet computing remains a goal through all of this

What does the noise of the computer have to do with the design of the motherboard? True crappy MoBo-design can make cooling more difficultt, but I think Intel know what they are doing.

I'm sure Apple will have at least some say in the shape/design of the motherboard

Huh? Apple wanted a circular motherboard, but Intel insists on rectangular Mobo?

Some of those beefy PC boxes are just too dang noisy...

Yeah, and that's due to the fact that their MoBo's were designed by Intel.... Or maybe not.

I find the comments on this story to be really weird. You people are getting your panties in a bunch because Intel design the MoBo on the PowerBook... Uhhhh, so? The system won't magically become noisier. The system wont magically look like Dell. It wont use BIOS.

Or is this a case of "not being so different anymore"? Well, that shouldn't be an issue. Apple doesn't make the PowerBook as it is today. It's made by the very same subcontractors that make PC-laptops as well.

Or is this about quality? Yeah, it's not like PowerBooks have never suffered from logic-board failuers or anything of the sort. No sirree!

Seriously: you guys need to take a chill-pill. So what if Intel designs the Mobo? I heard that Apple isn't designing the hard-drives, vid-cards, RAM-chips or the screen either. Oh the humanity!

[mdavey]

The problems with Windows PC's isn't with the hardware, it's with Windows.

Not true, at least for me. The average PC is:

* Hot
* Noisy
* Power-hungry
* Big

Taking them in order, okay the G5s are hot, too. I have three network appliances, one with a G3 and two with Arm processors. None of them have a heatsink and only one of them has a fan (which is very quiet). It is possible to make computers that run cool (see the recent offerings from IBM, Sun and some of the niche players) - I'd like to see Apple and Intel move further in this direction.

Noisy. Apple has traditionally been very successful in this area. Lets hope they can be again.

Power-hungry. Apple has been very successful in this area. Most PCs have a 350W or 400W PSU. One of my network appliances has a 25W PSU, my Mac mini has a 70W PSU. Of course, one has to measure the actual consumption for a true comparisson. I hope the next-gen PowerMac has a lower power consumption than offerings from Dell.

Big. Okay, big has its place sometimes but the PC manufacturers seem to just chuck parts into mini towers because that is what they have always done. I am surprised that there hasn't been an explosion in small form-factor computers so far.

[Evangelion]

I dont think tis is a good idea... PC manufacturer to design Mac internals??

Intel is a PC manufacturer? And I thought that Intel made CPU's, MoBo's and chipsets, whereas companies like Dell and HP were the PC manufacturers....

[Evangelion]

I can't see anyone wiping OS X from their machine in order to run Windows alone.

Why not? There are people out there who are interested in Apple-hardware, ut are not that interested in OS X.

[Evangelion]

So. let me get this straight... Your "Geek" friends want to buy an Apple laptop, wipe the OS and put Windows on it? Sorry, I just can't say "Geek" and "Windows" in the same sentence, at least not with a straight face...

You want some wine with that elitism?

[gnasher729]

I wonder if a dual-core/32bit Yonah, with its 667MHz bus, "might" be slightly faster than the single-core/64bit G5 in the present iMac (2.1GHz on 700MHz bus). It would be interesting to see if Apple would put it in the iMac at MWSF - your average iMac buyer doesn't know the difference between bits, and most of the software they will use doesn't give a rip, either... If Apple thinks that 32-vs-64bit distinction will matter, than the iMac will wait for Merom around September.

I would think that the slowest dual-core Yonah at 1.6 GHz should beat a 2.1 GHz G5 in many tasks when running native code, and it should equal it on many tasks when running code using Rosetta.

The only exception is code that got a large speed boost from using Altivec code; that kind of code will run much slower under Rosetta, a bit slower if it is ported to native Intel without vector optimisation, and Intel's SSE is not as good as Altivec, so Intel code with vector optimisation will only draw even on a dual-core Intel processor that should be more powerful than a single G5.

[gnasher729]

Why not? There are people out there who are interested in Apple-hardware, ut are not that interested in OS X.

Compare a Macintosh to a Dull box. A Macintosh is something that you can put into a living room in a nice home without being ashamed; a Dell is just one huge pile of ugly black plastic.

If your only two choices were to run Windows XP on a huge pile of ugly black plastic, or to run Windows XP on an iMac or a Mac Mini, which one would you choose?

[Kris Kelvin]

For one, I seriously doubt that geeks will pay for the Mac just to load Windows.

Indeed so, because using windows contradicts with beeing a geek! ;)
But I really think there's a VERY good market for some solid (and nice looking) hardware that runs windows. For example there are still lots of situations where you need some specialized software that only runs on Windows. Yes, there's a Maya version for Mac, but it's still a joke compared to the windows version. XSI doesn't even have a Mac version. Yes, at some point Darwine might work good enough to not require Windows anymore for that stuff, but a native version - specifically built for one OS - is just better most of the time.
Don't get me wrong. I hate Windows; I really do. But there's still some good things over there, be it software, games or even a very modern development framework.

Also, we've got a customer that we're trying to convince to switch to Macs for quite a while. But he just can't afford to replace all the machines at once. Intel-based Macs would be exactly what's needed to do that transition.

I believe that Apple still thinks they're getting the most when selling hardware (and they're probably right). So switching to the platform almost everybody uses is the best thing they can do. The possibility to keep Microsoft from crushing them by having an OS that would run on basically every PC out there is just a nice side effect. :)

As for the performance, I really don't think it will be any kind of a problem. Except that some people will be peeved seeing that some apps perform better on the same box running Linux... But hey, we can still do what we all did in the last few years: Close our eyes and pretend the G4 still beats them all. ;)

For professional (Workstation / Server) usage: Nothing beats TYAN

Yeah, about that...we're using a dual Opteron here as Workstation. All the nice stuff, from Hypertransport busses to PCI-X slots to onboard Raid Controllers and registered ECC Memory, powered by a Chipset built by AMD. Nothing but problems, I tell you. And we're not the only ones, according to several forums.
Yes, Tyan is usually known to make good boards, but that PC DID get a beating from almost every other box in our studio (and the mainboard was to blame).

So let's move on to all the ASUS fans, shall we. :) Did you ever take a look at the chipsets those boards use? Lots of ASUS' boards (especially the more expensive ones) are built with Intel chips, maybe even based on Intel reference designs. That's what makes Intel strong. They're not just developing CPUs, they're creating complete systems and reference designs. Did you know that the (great) BladeCenter that IBM is selling was a co-production between IBM and Intel?

Summary: Intel can make really great hardware, and they have lots of resources. IMHO it's the best thing that could happen to Apple, because now our favourite company can concentrate on what they're doing best.

[gnasher729]

The x86 architecture is loaded down with legacy instructions and code "bolted" on top of one another. How hard would it be for Intel to strip away those ugly bits and leave a multi-core (2,4,8...) cpu that is optimized for MacOS X (no Classic support either, thank god)...

It would be very expensive for Intel to do that. No problem if they could switch _all_ x86 processors to a more sane instruction set, but they can't do that. So they would have to have two different versions of the chip. The cost to have two different versions is much higher than any savings that could be had in a sanitised version. And the work would have to be repeated each time a new chip is developed, and that chip would always be 3 to 6 months behind.

Legacy instructions don't actually take very much space in the chip. Most space is L2 cache, L1 cache, execution units, all the logic and resources for out-of-order execution, branch prediction, and so on and so on. All things that you would have to keep; you need them on _any_ chip to make it run fast. You would only save a little bit in the instruction decoder, that's all.

[ScubaDuc]

I've bought 3 PC motherboards in the last year, and all have had Firewire on board. You don't find it in the cheapo PCs, but all the midrange PowerMac level stuff has Firewire these days.

As for serial connections --- what harm does it do if its there and you don't use it? Lots of people need serial ports for certain hardware that doesn't have USB ports (I'm thinking stuff like PIC controllers, etc). Certainly, its better to have it and not need it, then need it and not have it. I wish my new PowerMac had PCI slots, but Apple apparently thought that they were "obsolete", and should be gotten rid of, just like serial ports!


How true...my dive computer syncs only via COM port on Windows....Bleah

Anybody knows of a Mac-Friendly NOX dive computer that can handle at least 2 NOX concentrations? I need to change my Aladin :rolleyes:

[gnasher729]

You've got a lot of friends that are pretty stupid if they're going spend over $1000 extra just to get a fancy case and undersized power supply.

If his friends are going to buy Mac Minis, then it will be very difficult for them to spend "over $1000 extra just to get a fancy case and undersized power supply", considering that I can buy a Mac Mini for $499. Now try to get a Windows PC at that size, and you will find that buying a Mac Mini will actually save you a lot of money.

Apple can completely wipe out the whole existing market for small case PCs with the MacMini.

[BenRoethig]

Not true, at least for me. The average PC is:

* Hot
* Noisy
* Power-hungry
* Big

Taking them in order, okay the G5s are hot, too. I have three network appliances, one with a G3 and two with Arm processors. None of them have a heatsink and only one of them has a fan (which is very quiet). It is possible to make computers that run cool (see the recent offerings from IBM, Sun and some of the niche players) - I'd like to see Apple and Intel move further in this direction.

Noisy. Apple has traditionally been very successful in this area. Lets hope they can be again.

Power-hungry. Apple has been very successful in this area. Most PCs have a 350W or 400W PSU. One of my network appliances has a 25W PSU, my Mac mini has a 70W PSU. Of course, one has to measure the actual consumption for a true comparisson. I hope the next-gen PowerMac has a lower power consumption than offerings from Dell.

Big. Okay, big has its place sometimes but the PC manufacturers seem to just chuck parts into mini towers because that is what they have always done. I am surprised that there hasn't been an explosion in small form-factor computers so far.

SFF machines are impractical and expensive. Unlike the Mac crowd, most of the industry cares more about what a computer can do than what it look like.

[rayz]

We've been through this before, and I still have no idea why you don't get it .... :confused:

Why is it important where the damn motherboard comes from??!

Why? Macs are sold with very high profit margins. Do you think Apple will change this policy? Do you think an Intel-designed MB with an Intel chip will cost that much less?

I believe that this is correct. Intel chips apprently have a higher unit costs than PPCs, so if folk think that Macs are going to suddenly become as cheap as PCs, then I think they're in for a rude surprise come next year. Apple will try its damn hardest to maintain its above average margins on each unit sold. They may even hike the price initially to make a bit off the early adopters.

You (and a lot of people) seem to think Apple will be able to take over the world if they'd simply jump on the bandwagon and sell the same PC's that everybody else has been selling for the past 20 years.

Yes, and they've made such a HUGE dent in the market selling proprietary machines haven't they?

Now who better to design a motherboard for an Intel chip, than Intel themselves? Apple? I don't think so. One of the other reasons that Macs have lagged behind Windows boxes in terms of performance, is that Apple's motherboards aren't that much.

Apple is pretty much a form factor design house and not much else; farming out the motherboard to Intel is not a surprise, or a bad decision.


I'm sorry but the logic makes absolutely no sense. Nobody is going to pay extra for an Apple computer, just to be able to run Windows on it.

Yeah, but as Jobs may have realised, no-one will buy a Mac at all, unless they can run run their existing Windows apps on it. So which is the lesser of the two evils?

The only real advantage that the Mac has, is the OS (and even that is a matter of opinion). without IBM's support, the hardware battle has already been lost. Apple is now preparing the Mac community for the day when MacOSX will run on any Intel machine.

The UI
QuickTime
Cocoa
A framework to connect to Apple's future iPod type devices

What runs underneath it is not really that important any more. If Jobs continues with the NeXTStep/OpenStep plan, then a few years down the line, the MacOSX may be a shell running on top of MS Vista, as well/instead of Unix.

If his friends are going to buy Mac Minis, then it will be very difficult for them to spend "over $1000 extra just to get a fancy case and undersized power supply", considering that I can buy a Mac Mini for $499. Now try to get a Windows PC at that size, and you will find that buying a Mac Mini will actually save you a lot of money.

Apple can completely wipe out the whole existing market for small case PCs with the MacMini.

Indeed. And once the sale is made, what folk do with it is their business really.

[AidenShaw]

How true...my dive computer syncs only via COM port on Windows....Bleah

Anybody knows of a Mac-Friendly NOX dive computer that can handle at least 2 NOX concentrations? I need to change my Aladin :rolleyes:
http://us.uwatec.com/software/software_jtrak.asp

Software requirements:
Operating system: Mac OS X Version 10.2 or higher

Supported dive computers:

Smart Pro, Smart Com, Smart Tec, Smart Z, Aladin Prime and Aladin Tec

(Scubapro-Uwatec makes the Aladin)

[Randall]

Randall, what are examples of several mobo companies who are the "best mobo on earth?". I read through the entire discussion and never saw a post where you mentioned them?. Also i presume you meant these companies motherboards were more advanced than intel cause to me, rock solid is a component of any "best" category. Example, BMW are one of the best cars cause they are rock solid (you know, the fenders don't fall off, etc).. there are sure to be other stuff that makes BMW best in their class.. but i think rock-solid is one criteria.. So going with assumption that you were referencing technology , who are these mobo companies?.. just wanna check them out.Well I didn't want to hijack this thread, but since you're calling me out... when considering the "best motherboards on earth" you have to take into account more things then stability alone. Asus comes to mind as one of the best companies to ever make motherboards. So does Abit, Gigabyte, and DFI. Intel might be in the top 5, but they sure aren't number one. They have stability, but lack in features. These other companies I mentioned all have stability as well as extra features. Asus in particular is probably the best mobo company.

[Passante]

I've bought 3 PC motherboards in the last year, and all have had Firewire on board. You don't find it in the cheapo PCs, but all the midrange PowerMac level stuff has Firewire these days.

snip


A vast majority of PCs are cheapos. You get the same hardware features in mid-level PCs and macs. And the prices are essentially the same.

[Photorun]

People! People! People!

As I've put in other threads, you're all either getting really mad, or really happy, about a RUMOR from the WORST of all rumor sites by track record, AppleInsider. They haven't been right on any acceptable level since 1999, and mind you you're reading a web site that itself is called MacRumors.

Point being doin't get worked up about any of this as considering the source it's in all likelihood incredibly untrue and exquisite crap!

[Photorun]

Yeah, but as Jobs may have realised, no-one will buy a Mac at all, unless they can run run their existing Windows apps on it. So which is the lesser of the two evils?

Ummm, yeah buddy, nobody wants to buy a Mac is why they're actually back up in market share in various polls based on business/consumer models to 5% or even 7% or in Japan where they actually know and give a s*** about computers as the best tool for a job (i.e. NOT a peecee) 30%.

Try again pal, this time with some semblance of what would resemble a clue.

[BornAgainMac]

I just bought a Dell for work that included a Dell mini tower, 17" flat panel display, keyboard, mouse, etc for $475 after taxes and shipping. Mind you it was a 2.53GHz Celeron, 256MB RAM, 40GB HD but I thought that was a great deal.

Dell may be crappy but they can be very inexpensive.

Oh yea, well I purchased a Gateway desktop (without monitor) with a serial 160 GB drive (just like the Powermacs), 3.0 Ghz Pentium 4 HT, 512MB Ram for $450 brand new including keyboard and mouse and taxes (no shipping). Dell is more expensive. My Powermac spanks it but still it wasn't too expensive.

[Randall]

A vast majority of PCs are cheapos. You get the same hardware features in mid-level PCs and macs. And the prices are essentially the same.No way that you get the same hardware for a similar price. You always pay more for a Mac then an equlievent PC. That goes without exception, and it will be proven beyond a doubt once the switch to intel is complete. We will see Macs with the exact same hardware and processors as PCs, except the Macs will be sold at a higher margin. Nothing wrong with that, since Apple is selling a brand name, and I think that the seemless integration between hardware and software is worth the extra money.

[mdavey]

You always pay more for a Mac then an equlievent PC. That goes without exception

I disagree. You usually pay more, but not always and not always a lot more.

For instance, perhaps you can point me to a 64bit quad processor PC or workstation with 250GB SATA HDD, DVD burner, PCI-Express, Firewire 800, GeForce 6600 with 256MB cache (or equivilent) graphics card and dual Gigabit Ethernet for under $3300 from one of the other top-ten computer companies?

[Randall]

I disagree. You usually pay more, but not always and not always a lot more.

For instance, perhaps you can point me to a 64bit quad processor PC or workstation with 250GB SATA HDD, DVD burner, PCI-Express, Firewire 800, GeForce 6600 with 256MB cache (or equivilent) graphics card and dual Gigabit Ethernet for under $3300 from one of the other top-ten computer companies?I don't even think that system exists yet, but if it did, I can guarantee you that it would be cheaper to get the PC. Like I said, it will be easier to compare once the switch to intel is made. Until then, we're still apples and oranges, no pun intended.

[jnasato]

Hopefully Intel will design the internals all high tech with green LEDsx900 and blue LEDs on the fans and a lava lamp with laserz powerz, and then Apple can design the case translucent!

OMG!!!

No.

Well, I guess this is nothing amazingly special, then. But I hope "internal" means: as internal as can get!

[iMeowbot]

Meh, natural progression. There have been more and more off-the-shelf components in Macs over time, and the one big area Apple continued to do in house -- the system controllers -- was really something they kind of had to do because there were no other mainstream PowerPC desktop vendors.

Really, apart from some kind of odd sentimentality, what would be the advantage to Apple or users in not using commodity components wherever possible? What would a Mac be able to do with custom chips that it couldn't do as well with what's on the open market? It all made a difference 20 years ago when there weren't standard parts to do all that stuff, but things are different now.

[gnasher729]

No way that you get the same hardware for a similar price. You always pay more for a Mac then an equlievent PC. That goes without exception, and it will be proven beyond a doubt once the switch to intel is complete. We will see Macs with the exact same hardware and processors as PCs, except the Macs will be sold at a higher margin. Nothing wrong with that, since Apple is selling a brand name, and I think that the seemless integration between hardware and software is worth the extra money.

Someone else disagreed. I don't disagree, I call it ********.

Take the Mac Mini: Equivalent PCs are bigger, use more power, make more noise,are ugly, and cost _considerably_ more. They cost so much more that their sales will drop to absolute zero once a MacMini with Intel processor capable of running Windows XP ships.

Take the iMac: You can't get any equivalent PC, not for any amount of money that you might be willing to pay!

Price comparisons with Dell have proved time and time again that Apple beats Dell on price when you compare _equivalent_ PCs and not their loss-leader advertisements - which usually means delving deep into Dell's website and adding a dozen items that come for free with the Macintosh. Even then you don't get the same quality, you don't get the same years of working computer, and you will get no resale value at all with the Dell.

[Randall]

Someone else disagreed. I don't disagree, I call it ********.

Take the Mac Mini: Equivalent PCs are bigger, use more power, make more noise,are ugly, and cost _considerably_ more. They cost so much more that their sales will drop to absolute zero once a MacMini with Intel processor capable of running Windows XP ships.

Take the iMac: You can't get any equivalent PC, not for any amount of money that you might be willing to pay!

Price comparisons with Dell have proved time and time again that Apple beats Dell on price when you compare _equivalent_ PCs and not their loss-leader advertisements - which usually means delving deep into Dell's website and adding a dozen items that come for free with the Macintosh. Even then you don't get the same quality, you don't get the same years of working computer, and you will get no resale value at all with the Dell.heh. let's see what happens when the hardware goes x86, that way we can do a real head-to-head comparison. you will be dissappointed I guarantee it.

[kcmac]

heh. let's see what happens when the hardware goes x86, that way we can do a real head-to-head comparison. you will be dissappointed I guarantee it.
I have a feeling this will be remembered by quite a few of us here. For any of us to guarantee what we think will happen concerning anything Apple is just silly. Apple has been using standard parts for quite awhile. Haven't seen any lowering of the bar yet. Don't see why this will suddenly change.

But you are guaranteeing it, so we will all witness your confidence soon.
;)

[Stonecoldcleric]

Price comparisons with Dell have proved time and time again that Apple beats Dell on price when you compare _equivalent_ PCs and not their loss-leader advertisements - which usually means delving deep into Dell's website and adding a dozen items that come for free with the Macintosh. Even then you don't get the same quality, you don't get the same years of working computer, and you will get no resale value at all with the Dell.

Agreed - The administrator where I work insists on buying those $400 Dells with everything. he doesnt understand how inferior those are to the minis (most of them come with 256mb of SHARED memory, large tower, high power consumption, and ususally within a year or two, we are replacing them because they have crashed so much).

To compare apples to pcs is apples to oranges. If you want a bargain computer, easy to upgrade, fix, and add onto, highly unstable, slow, bad or no support - get a cheapo pc (i have one!). but if you wnat something that is fast, quiet, difficult-to-upgrade, great support machine, buy a mac. I enjoy working in both worlds - but the pc requires annual upgrades to keep it running (no just up to date).

[strange days]

Compare a Macintosh to a Dull box. A Macintosh is something that you can put into a living room in a nice home without being ashamed; a Dell is just one huge pile of ugly black plastic.

If your only two choices were to run Windows XP on a huge pile of ugly black plastic, or to run Windows XP on an iMac or a Mac Mini, which one would you choose?

exactly, computers are becoming widespread and prices are down; why do people choose an iPod over another mp3 player with higher quality specs ( check audiophiles forums ) ?

LOOKS and HYPE ( ok, now the iMTS too )

i think computers ( especially laptops ) are going to take the very same road in 2006; you do not want to look ugly because you have a non HYPE or plastic laptop. You do not want to be depressed or give up the extra thrill to boost your creativity when you work on a beautiful machine.

BEAUTY IS EVERYTHING, whether it be good work well done, good marketing well done, belonging to the community ( being hype ) and feeling loved ( beautiful ), inspiration, achievement...

When i put my money where these words are, gratification is the reward ALWAYS. :p

...obviously, none of the above would matter if we where talking about machines that cannot get the work done, but Apples work migthty good, and any PC in the same category ( choose iMacs, Mac Minis... ) gives roughly the same performance nowadays. Windows on Mac will add even more compatibility for those apps still running on XP only, and people will have computers EASY TO WORK WITH ( general population sales = market share = money ) thanks to OSX.

[Eric5h5]

Yes, and they've made such a HUGE dent in the market selling proprietary machines haven't they?

Uh, yes, they have. They're one of the top few computer makers in the world.

Yeah, but as Jobs may have realised, no-one will buy a Mac at all, unless they can run run their existing Windows apps on it. So which is the lesser of the two evils?.

Nobody runs Windows on their Macs now (except maybe, slowly, with VirtualPC), and they sell millions of them. Don't count on Intel Macs booting into Windows...if they use EFI for the firmware, goodbye to XP and everything earlier (unless you use VirtualPC, which will at least be faster, but still won't have hardware acceleration).

--Eric

[Don.Key]

Yeah, about that...we're using a dual Opteron here as Workstation. All the nice stuff, from Hypertransport busses to PCI-X slots to onboard Raid Controllers and registered ECC Memory, powered by a Chipset built by AMD. Nothing but problems, I tell you. And we're not the only ones, according to several forums.
Yes, Tyan is usually known to make good boards, but that PC DID get a beating from almost every other box in our studio (and the mainboard was to blame).

That is wierd. We used tyan boards since years, PIII, Xeon and now Opteron based, never had a problem due to design of the boards. Performance is indeed not on pair with newest "consumer" boards but this is nothing new, those boards are buld for stability, not speed. So is btw performance of intel build server / workstation boards.

We also used many intel server platforms barebones and phased those out slowly in favor of Tyan K8SD based opteron boxes due to very high power consumption and foremost: terrible DB server performance in SMP setup.

Now I do not claim Intel is bad manufacturer I was just answering on question what are examples of several mobo companies who are the "best mobo on earth?".

[ClimbingTheLog]

No BIOS please. And don't change the boot tone either. Other than that, as long as the boot process is similar to what we currently have it doesn't matter who designs the motherboard.

http://lists.apple.com/archives/Darwin-drivers/2005/Jun/msg00020.html

... and the new PCIe Macs with their 8x PCIe slots, are industry leaders.

Released after the Apple/Intel partnership was formed. Coincidence?

[topgunn]

Oh yea, well I purchased a Gateway desktop (without monitor) with a serial 160 GB drive (just like the Powermacs), 3.0 Ghz Pentium 4 HT, 512MB Ram for $450 brand new including keyboard and mouse and taxes (no shipping). Dell is more expensive. My Powermac spanks it but still it wasn't too expensive.
Seems like a wash to me. You got a faster CPU, bigger hard drive and more memory and I got a nice 17" flat panel. I wasn't saying that Gateway wasn't good and inexpensive. I have bought far more Gateway machines at work than Dell's including the 17" 2.13GHz P-M (1GB RAM, 40GB HD, blah blah) laptop I am typing this on (only $1199).

Dells, like cars, are more expensive if you pay sticker price. And what do you call someone who pays sticker price? A sucker. With online coupons, Dells prices will compete with anybody out there. Nice thing about Gateway, you don't need the coupons.

[ClimbingTheLog]

Well it's starting to look like Intel and Apple are really confusing the public leading up to MWSF :D

Because they've both said so much about the new machines? Huh?

The only part that Apple does any more is the designing. Apple at the present time only seems to be a designer, not a manufacturer. But they still consider themselves as a computer hardware manufacturer. Having Intel design the Intel PowerMac logic board seems to not make a lot of sense. The only way Apple gets the wanted features into their computer logic board designs is to do the designing themselves.

What makes you think Apple isn't specifying the design of the motherboards? Intel guys can do the VLSI and make it work well.

Think of it like a building - Apple is the Architect, Intel is the General Contractor. The GC is capable of building any building you tell him to build, and if it's a good GC, really well, without any leaky roofs or cracked ceilings.

Intel is Tommy Silva. Apple is Santiago Calatrava. I'm buying.

[Peace]

Because they've both said so much about the new machines? Huh?

Nope.
Because I believe both companies are putting out false and misleading "inside info" to certain people..
Pretty simple actually..

And speaking of inside info.I hadn't noticed anyone talking about the bottom part of that appleinsider article :

"An analyst told Apple Insider of indications that the two companies may be developing a custom processor that will be made available only to Apple systems."

[ClimbingTheLog]

The Firewire that was in the B&W simply did not work for the most part. Ditto the native ATA controller, certainly with most any replacement drive.

Eh? I've used FW CD-R, hard drives, and video cameras on the B&W without issue. Ditto any number of 3rd-party IDE drives. There was a 128GB limit though.

Until Panther. Then everything went flakey with Firewire. Booting back to Jaguar was fine.

The same stack of gear worked great on a new iBook with the same version of Panther. So if the Firewire PHY was out of spec then the Jaguar engineers knew how to program around it. I'll bet you a donut one of the lead OSX Firewire engineers was eliminated or just hired away with the Zayante acquisition. Or he got a real bad crack habit. I still have gear that works in Jaguar and not in 10.3.9 (prolific chipsets especially).

[gnasher729]

heh. let's see what happens when the hardware goes x86, that way we can do a real head-to-head comparison. you will be dissappointed I guarantee it.

So today Macintosh give more value for money than x86 PCs. What is your rationale for you not only suggesting but guaranteeing that this will change when Macs use an x86 processor? You don't actually give any reasons why that would be so, you just assert it. You seem to be a very irrational person.

[ClimbingTheLog]

What on earth is the benefit of using USB over PS/2 for the keyboard/mouse of a desktop?

I have a keyboard, a trackball, a mouse, a barcode scanner, and a Wacom tablet plugged into my mac. All on USB. It's easy and well-defined how to use multiple input devices on USB and there are no special drivers or shims.

On linux you can share one computer among multiple users, with multiple USB keyboards and mouses and video cards/ports. This would be nearly impossible with PS/2.

So. let me get this straight... Your "Geek" friends want to buy an Apple laptop, wipe the OS and put Windows on it? Sorry, I just can't say "Geek" and "Windows" in the same sentence, at least not with a straight face...

This has happened to Linux users as well. They buy a Powerbook knowing it will run LinuxPPC and get the box, then turn it on to figure out how to wipe the disk, and wind up deciding not to install LinuxPPC.

SFF machines are impractical and expensive. Unlike the Mac crowd, most of the industry cares more about what a computer can do than what it look like.

Yes, unless you consider desk space or noise to be practical cosiderations.

I could get a big Dell, put it in a closet, put ventilation in the closet, run keyboard and video amplifiers back to my desk and be just as happy (ignoring the OS). But then I've just bought two Minis.

[AidenShaw]

I have a keyboard, a trackball, a mouse, a barcode scanner, and a Wacom tablet plugged into my mac. All on USB. It's easy and well-defined how to use multiple input devices on USB and there are no special drivers or shims.

On linux you can share one computer among multiple users, with multiple USB keyboards and mouses and video cards/ports. This would be nearly impossible with PS/2.
And I have a keyboard/mouse/scanner/joystick/mediacardreader/microphone/iPaq/cellphone plugged into mine.

Keyboard and mouse into PS/2, and the other six into the PC mobo slots.

If I used a USB kbd/mouse, I'd need a USB hub.... ;)


But the Linux example is real, although quite a stretch.

[irobot2003]

Their consumer products yes. (Read: Dimension series) Their corp desktops? Not in the least. Their Optiplex lines are probably one of the most reliable desktops I've ever run across. This coming from someone who has deployed around 80 of these in the last 5 years at the site I work at and another 60 downtown.
The GX110's, GX240's, and the GX280's and the GX520’s are all rock solid. I would say out of those 80 systems we have had 2 die on us. One was a NIC problem. The other was a motherboard problem. Everything else: Flawless.
Their laptops are another matter. 4 years ago I would have made the same comparison saying the Inspiron (consumer.) laptops sucked and the Latitude (Buisness.) laptops rocked. I have a 5 year old Latitude that is still running XP at home. No problems at all and this thing has been thrown around, beaten and borderline abused. That was then. Today? You couldn’t give me a Latitude. The quality is for crap on Dell’s laptop line.
[...]

At work we bought three Dell Precision 610s (which are intended for industry) back in '99. After about three years the CD-ROM drives started to fail on all of them. This was somewhat puszzling to me since I know the CD-ROM drive in the one I had saw very minimal use (used only for software installations, or reinstallations of the OS). For two out of the three, the chassis fan began to fail somewhat later. They did have outstanding keyboards though. A couple of years later we bought some more Precisions, the internals seem to be fairly reliable, but the new keyboard was essentially unusable, and there was this really flimsy/cheap plastic door covering the drive bays which was broken on delivery... the replacement was then broken fairly quickly as well when someone (who shall remain nameless) bumped into it when it was open.

High quality is not a term I'd use for Dells these days. Inexpensive and adequate, I'd say.

Conversely I have an old dell Dimension bought in '98 at home which is still going...

[RBR2]

Eh? I've used FW CD-R, hard drives, and video cameras on the B&W without issue. Ditto any number of 3rd-party IDE drives. There was a 128GB limit though.

Until Panther. Then everything went flakey with Firewire. Booting back to Jaguar was fine.

The same stack of gear worked great on a new iBook with the same version of Panther. So if the Firewire PHY was out of spec then the Jaguar engineers knew how to program around it. I'll bet you a donut one of the lead OSX Firewire engineers was eliminated or just hired away with the Zayante acquisition. Or he got a real bad crack habit. I still have gear that works in Jaguar and not in 10.3.9 (prolific chipsets especially).

The Rev A B&W ATA controller is well known for data corruption or just plain not working with a wide variety of drives. The Rev B was a bit better, but was still subject to problems, including being slow. The Firewire modules in the B&Ws also had well known problems transferring any real quantity of data...such as making backups. There is always the chance that Apple messed up and sent you one that worked. this was all documented in the Apple Discussion forums as well as others at the time.

[amateurmacfreak]

So. let me get this straight... Your "Geek" friends want to buy an Apple laptop, wipe the OS and put Windows on it? Sorry, I just can't say "Geek" and "Windows" in the same sentence, at least not with a straight face...
I think it's stupid just to buy an Apple laptop to wipe the OS and run Windows, but I do have to admit, there are plenty of Windows geeks out there (well, actually, I prefer it being Mac geeks and Windows nerds) who use Windows because of the, "better ability about to do customization," and the, "software diversity." (that's out of the mouths of nerds).
I once had this conversation with a Windows nerd (who wants a Mac too though) on AIM:
Me: Overall, do you prefer Mac OS X v10.4.3 or Windows XP? (I had the impression he was on the fence at the time)
Other guy: Friendly, Mac, but as a hardcore computer geek I have to admit I like Windows better.

Oh, and the reason he wants a Mac is for video editing.
I guess having Windows being harder to use and more unfriendly makes them feel that by operating it they're putting together some pieces of a very badly mad puzzle and taming some sort of monster. XD
Also, with the younger crowd "computer geeks," a lot, sadly, prefer Windows solely because of better gaming capabilities. But, if you're only into computers for the games, I think it better not to claim the proud title of computer geek at all. :rolleyes: :)

[ClimbingTheLog]

I don't even think that system exists yet, but if it did, I can guarantee you that it would be cheaper to get the PC.

Sure it does. In fact Dell has one. I'll skip the original poster's unrealistic specs (a quad-cpu workstation with half a gig of RAM and no RAID? Yeah, right) and do an fairly even comparison:

First, Apple:
* 2.5GHz Quad-core PowerPC G5
* 2GB 533 DDR2 ECC SDRAM- 4x512
* 2x500GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
* NVIDIA GeForce 6600 256MB SDRAM
* 16x SuperDrive DL (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
* Apple Keyboard & Mighty Mouse - U.S English
* Mac OS X - U.S. English
* Accessory kit
* AppleCare Protection Plan for Power Mac (w/or w/o Display) - Auto-enroll

Price: $4,923.00

Now let's look at a Dell:

Dell Precision Workstation 670:
Dual-Core Intel® Xeon™ Processor 2.80GHz, 2x2MB L2 cache
2nd Processor Dual-Core Intel® Xeon™ Processor 2.80GHz, 2x2MB L2 cache
Genuine Windows® XP Professional, x64 Edition with Media
2GB, DDR2 SDRAM Memory, 400MHz, ECC (4 DIMMS)
500GB SATA, 7200RPM Hard Drive with 16MB DataBurst Cache™ for RAID
2nd Hard Drive: 500GB SATA, 7200 RPM Hard Drive with 16MB DataBurst Cache™
256MB PCIe x16 nVidia Quadro FX 3450, Dual DVI or Dual VGA or DVI + VGA
16XDVD and 16XDVD+/-RW w/ Sonic DM, Cyberlink PowerDVD
Sound Blaster* Audigy™ 2 (D), w/Dolby Digital 5.1 & IEEE1394
Keyboard: Entry Level, USB, No Hot Keys
Mouse: Dell USB 2-Button Optical Mouse with Scroll
Speakers: Dell™ two piece stereo spkrs
No Floppy Drive
Symantic™ AntiVirus Corporate Edition
Webroot Spy Sweeper
3 Year Business Standard Plan
No Onsite System Setup

Price: $6,767.00

These are both real-world workstations. The Mac probably has a bit better memory controller and the PC is slightly faster on the clock but has a worse crossbar latch and a better video card. All in all they're close for most tasks.

If you feel I've been unfair in the product specifications please submit a rationale and alternative specifications. And yes, I'm sure Dell has some coupons going that will knock a few hundred bucks off that price. If there's a vendor who can come in under Apple for that kind of machine, please post the URL here.

And I have a keyboard/mouse/scanner/joystick/mediacardreader/microphone/iPaq/cellphone plugged into mine.

Keyboard and mouse into PS/2, and the other six into the PC mobo slots.

But the scanner/joystick/mediacardreader/microphone/iPaq/cellphone aren't HID input devices. The example I gave was all HID devices. The trackball generates "mouse" moves. The barcode scanner generates "keyboard" input. To use a barcode reader on a PS/2 you need a "shim" box that plugs in-line with the keyboard and you need a driver to run it. To use a trackball and mouse - umm... you'd probably need a serial trackball. That's where HID shines.

If I used a USB kbd/mouse, I'd need a USB hub.... ;)

Yeah, I had to spend $12 for a USB 1.1 hub for my mess. Fortunately NewEgg sells one with a magnetic back that sticks on my keyboard drawer. I wish USB could be daisy-chained like ADB. OK, it was probably $15 after shipping. Don't fall into the "I'll never need this so noone should be able to do it" trap.

But the Linux example is real, although quite a stretch.

Universities are scrambling to setup labs like this. Usually at a 4:1 ratio - with less space, cooling costs, system admin effort, etc. Apple should jump on this trend since it sells into education so effectively. Mac OS X has all the underpinnings to do it - though some may need to be dusted off from the NeXT days. What a bitter pill for them to swallow though - sell less hardware to keep the market.

The Rev A B&W ATA controller is well known for data corruption or just plain not working with a wide variety of drives. The Rev B was a bit better, but was still subject to problems, including being slow.

Ah, I have a Rev B - that might explain things. Typically Intel motherboards don't suffer Rev. A syndrome, so this may be good news.

There is always the chance that Apple messed up and sent you one that worked. this was all documented in the Apple Discussion forums as well as others at the time.

I suppose that may be true. I got a refurb so maybe it was tested. Or it could also be that there were a small percentage of bad units that went out and those people tend to report their problems. It would be interesting to find the number of people reporting those problems on the discussion boards and divide that by the number of units shipped to get a feel for the order of magnitude of the problem. Such as it matters today - I just keep mine around for the yearly OS 9 need.

[Randall]

Sure it does. In fact Dell has one. I'll skip the original poster's unrealistic specs (a quad-cpu workstation with half a gig of RAM and no RAID? Yeah, right) and do an fairly even comparison:

First, Apple:
* 2.5GHz Quad-core PowerPC G5
* 2GB 533 DDR2 ECC SDRAM- 4x512
* 2x500GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
* NVIDIA GeForce 6600 256MB SDRAM
* 16x SuperDrive DL (DVD+R DL/DVD&#177;RW/CD-RW)
* Apple Keyboard & Mighty Mouse - U.S English
* Mac OS X - U.S. English
* Accessory kit
* AppleCare Protection Plan for Power Mac (w/or w/o Display) - Auto-enroll

Price: $4,923.00

Now let's look at a Dell:

Dell Precision Workstation 670:
Dual-Core Intel&#174; Xeon™ Processor 2.80GHz, 2x2MB L2 cache
2nd Processor Dual-Core Intel&#174; Xeon™ Processor 2.80GHz, 2x2MB L2 cache
Genuine Windows&#174; XP Professional, x64 Edition with Media
2GB, DDR2 SDRAM Memory, 400MHz, ECC (4 DIMMS)
500GB SATA, 7200RPM Hard Drive with 16MB DataBurst Cache™ for RAID
2nd Hard Drive: 500GB SATA, 7200 RPM Hard Drive with 16MB DataBurst Cache™
256MB PCIe x16 nVidia Quadro FX 3450, Dual DVI or Dual VGA or DVI + VGA
16XDVD and 16XDVD+/-RW w/ Sonic DM, Cyberlink PowerDVD
Sound Blaster* Audigy™ 2 (D), w/Dolby Digital 5.1 & IEEE1394
Keyboard: Entry Level, USB, No Hot Keys
Mouse: Dell USB 2-Button Optical Mouse with Scroll
Speakers: Dell™ two piece stereo spkrs
No Floppy Drive
Symantic™ AntiVirus Corporate Edition
Webroot Spy Sweeper
3 Year Business Standard Plan
No Onsite System Setup

Price: $6,767.00

These are both real-world workstations. The Mac probably has a bit better memory controller and the PC is slightly faster on the clock but has a worse crossbar latch and a better video card. All in all they're close for most tasks.

If you feel I've been unfair in the product specifications please submit a rationale and alternative specifications. And yes, I'm sure Dell has some coupons going that will knock a few hundred bucks off that price. If there's a vendor who can come in under Apple for that kind of machine, please post the URL here.
See this is what I'm talking about. We're compairing G5 to Xeon etc. I want to see this compairison 1 year from now and see a Woodcrest to Woodcrest matchup. It will be fun, and I'm sure that the PC will be cheaper.

BTW I thought that you were talking about quad cores on the same chip... which aren't out yet as far as I know.

[ART5000]

.

[wildmac]

I'm actually looking forward to Intel CPUs and MBs. With all the quirks of Apple MB these days, I'd be happy to see machines that have industry standard components.

I'll really love it when we can buy standard memory and not have it crash our Macs. The G5 towers are a royal pain with this. I've never seen machines so fussy about memory.

The big problem will be when Intel convinces Apple to drop firewire. A lot of people are going to be upset. Firewire may already be gone on the new iBooks in jan.

[SiliconAddict]

You've got a lot of friends that are pretty stupid if they're going spend over $1000 extra just to get a fancy case and undersized power supply.

The problems with Windows PC's isn't with the hardware, it's with Windows. Anybody who installs Windows on a Mac will have all the same problems as they would on any other hardware platform. Possibly more, since Apple won't be shipping any Windows device drivers for it.

:rolleyes: IF its going to be using Intel chipsets it won't have too. If its using ATI or Nvidia cards it won't have to. Hard drive? Optical drive? Generic drivers will work on them. The only X factor is what is the system going to use for the BIOS. If its nothing too exotic the OS will boot without any problems. Audio could be problematic.

And are you trashing Macs on a Mac rumor site?!? :eek: You don't spend $1000 more on a Mac. :rolleyes:

Anyone care to wager a bet on how long it will take people to get Windows running on the first x86 Mac? $50 to http://www.americaresfoundation.org if they don't get it loaded in a week. Anyone care to take that bet?

[ART5000]

Just because Apple has asked or contracted with Intel for Mobo design CONTRIBUTIONS doesn't mean that Apple has handed over the house keys. IT would make sense for apple to do this since they are asserting that Intel create particular locks and keys for technological proprietary reasons, i.e. chips that assist in osx only working with designated hardware, and those highly anticipated chipsets, maybe on an exclusive market scale.

Now if I were Apple, I would ask intel to contribute and place the neccesary components on the MOBO in order to increase the effectiveness of them and deliver quality control tests and measures and minimization of errors going to market. Since they are the creators of the chips who better to test them before hitting the streets.

Further, I could bet my next months rent that Steve Jobs will not include any intel logos on the face of any product (most likely inside or on the back of the product). Yes, intel is a gaint but lets remember who controls portable music players in the world! and who runs a billion plus company as well. They are both industry gaints.

[ClimbingTheLog]

See this is what I'm talking about. We're compairing G5 to Xeon etc. I want to see this compairison 1 year from now and see a Woodcrest to Woodcrest matchup. It will be fun, and I'm sure that the PC will be cheaper.

What do you think is causing the current price disparity that's going to change? Intel isn't getting over $1000 per CPU more for its Paxville than IBM is getting for its G5.

Do you think Woodcrest is going to cause Apple prices to go up?

[Prom1]

Their consumer products yes. (Read: Dimension series) Their corp desktops? Not in the least. Their Optiplex lines are probably one of the most reliable desktops I've ever run across. This coming from someone who has deployed around 80 of these in the last 5 years at the site I work at and another 60 downtown.
The GX110's, GX240's, and the GX280's and the GX520’s are all rock solid. I would say out of those 80 systems we have had 2 die on us. One was a NIC problem. The other was a motherboard problem. Everything else: Flawless.
Sorry man I firmly disagree.

I particularly own an Optiplex GX260, and they collect dust in a small space very quickly, although mine has never failed. The contractor I work for on a daily, has issues with the GX240/260/280's with Power Supply's and with memory issues
(The instruction at "0x77d5c068 reference memory at 0xd9e1010d" The memory could not be written. Click on ok to terminate.") as an example. this with motherboards or transisters near the controller is a serious issue.

or its Light Codes with B/E both amber then with C/D light codes going amber which lead to a MB replacement. when I think of corporate machines I think of nothing but rack mount servers.

Company .... A large railway company in the USA.

[jwdsail]

Ok. If Intel iMacs come out in January I am going to be more pissed than I ever have been in my whole life. I just got a new one for Christmas (which I am in total love with, by the way). That would be the worst thing ever if new ones came about 20 days after. :( But that's still fairly unlikely, right?
I also really hope that Intel iBooks come out at MWSF. If they don't, I'm screwed there also. I have someone waiting to get their husband an iBook because of that rumor. And their 15 year-old son (the computer nerd of the family) is already annoyed because I decided to get an iMac instead of having him build me a computer. :( Anyways, what does everyone think is going to happen in January?
And will it be a good month for me? No new iMac and new iBook (or Powerbook would be fine)?:confused:

lol... Well I think you need to find some IIVX owners to know truley pissed off...

Shrug, I would prob. not be one to buy any rev a MacIntel... Shrug. A MacIntel mini, maybe... but an iMac? PowerMac? PowerBook? Nope.

just my $0.02

[Anonymous Freak]

So much for "Designed by Apple in California".
Why? The computer would still have been designed by Apple in California. Even if the motherboard was designed by Intel in Oregon. (Yes, that's where Intel's motherboard design is done. Although the Intel Apple group is probably in California, and any Apple-specific products would likely be in Cali.)

But if the quality suffers or innovation slows, then bad.
I worked for Intel's (server, then server/workstation, then server/workstation/desktop) motherboard group in 1999-2000. Intel WANTED innovation. Intel didn't want the stagnation that the PC industry promoted. Intel made a Mac Mini-sized motherboard with no legacy ports. No major OEMs wanted it, because it lacked PS/2, serial, and parallel.. Plus it was so small that they'd have to design a new case for it. (Intel abandoned the mini-PC design just before Shuttle made the popular.) Don't blame Intel for lack of computer innovation. Intel co-invented, or at least heavily pushed for the adoption of, many new technologies. PCI, USB, AGP, later PCI Express and DDR2; the latest is EFI, the replacement for the old-fashioned PC BIOS. It wouldn't surprise me if Apple is the first major OEM to use EFI in consumer-level PCs. Yeah, they drop the ball every once in a while (RAMBUS, anyone?) but Intel does innovate, and is willing to adopt others technology, and push it.

And in the PC industry, Intel's designs may not be known for their configurability (i.e. overclocking,) but they are known as the rock-solid standard of reliability. Intel is anal about stability and reliability. They test individual models of memory modules and keep 'memory compatibility lists' for every motherboard. Even Apple isn't that anal.

Does Apple design all thier own motherboards now?
Exactly. I doubt they do. IBM probably was a MAJOR designer of the G5 motherboard.

I don't want to lose features or be locked into Intel only tech though.
Intel ships FireWire on some of their motherboards, even though they have to use a VIA chip to do so. Intel likes to steer the computer industry, but they will follow others if the market demands it. (AMD's 64-bit extensions to the x86 ISA is just one major example, the abandonment of RAMBUS is another.)

[~Shard~]

Ok. If Intel iMacs come out in January I am going to be more pissed than I ever have been in my whole life.

Um, it's a computer. If something like this pisses you off more than anything in your life, you need to get out more and reevaluate your priorities. :p ;)

Nonetheless, you have nothing to worry about - iBooks, PowerBooks maybe, but no Intel iMacs for a while yet. :cool:

[wildmac]

... with memory issues
(The instruction at "0x77d5c068 reference memory at 0xd9e1010d" The memory could not be written. Click on ok to terminate.") as an example. this with motherboards or transisters near the controller is a serious issue...

umm, I'd rather see this than the mysterious crashes, hangups, and other problems the G5's have now with bad memory. In the office where I provide support, 4 out of 10 G5s have had problems with memory bought from quality vendors.

Intel, save us....

[amateurmacfreak]

Um, it's a computer. If something like this pisses you off more than anything in your life, you need to get out more and reevaluate your priorities. :p ;)

Nonetheless, you have nothing to worry about - iBooks, PowerBooks maybe, but no Intel iMacs for a while yet. :cool:
Haha, thanks. You know, come to think of it, George W. Bush can piss me off a lot more than a computer thing... :o ;) :) but I guess we shouldn't get into politics on a computer board...

[RBR2]

Ah, I have a Rev B - that might explain things. Typically Intel motherboards don't suffer Rev. A syndrome, so this may be good news.



I suppose that may be true. I got a refurb so maybe it was tested. Or it could also be that there were a small percentage of bad units that went out and those people tend to report their problems. It would be interesting to find the number of people reporting those problems on the discussion boards and divide that by the number of units shipped to get a feel for the order of magnitude of the problem. Such as it matters today - I just keep mine around for the yearly OS 9 need.

Part of the problem has been Apple's lack of honesty and candor in these matters. They denied the existence of the problems and tried to blame the owners had spent their money on Apple's hardware. You have, not doubt heard the routine somewhere or other that "you're the only one who reported this". It was left up to the users to figure out the solutions, to the extent that solutions were possible. Though I can't quote you numbers, there were a great many people affected. You were fortunate.

Even your Rev B suffers from the limitations of the slow native ATA controller and the limited throughput of the fake PCI slots. If you install a PCI ATA controller in a B&W go ahead and put it in the 66 MHz slot that is normally used for the graphics card (and put the graphics card in one of the other "PCI" slots. It is so slow that you will lose less this way. Most people also put in a PCI Firewire card. I did. I also discovered that the Firewire module from the Yikes! machine was interchangeable with the B&W one and worked OK and so I found one and put it in. Of course I never mentioned that the Firewire implementation in the B&W was intentionally crippled in that you could not boot from a Firewire drive because Apple pinched the penny too hard and used a ROM chip that did not have space for the full Firewire instruction set.

Apple really has a very bad history of Rev A machines not being right. I think part of this is because of their decisions, in the past, to use screwball hardware for which there was no general industry support. The customers were used as beta testers. This is one of the reasons that I look forward to Intel's involvement in the design and manufacture of the new MBs. What Apple does best is come out with a decent OS and software that works reasonably well. In my opinion we will all be better off if they are able to focus their efforts on these strengths in the future.

Cheers!

[RBR2]

umm, I'd rather see this than the mysterious crashes, hangups, and other problems the G5's have now with bad memory. In the office where I provide support, 4 out of 10 G5s have had problems with memory bought from quality vendors.

Intel, save us....

Did you test the RAM with Rember/MemTest when you installed it?

[~Shard~]

Haha, thanks. You know, come to think of it, George W. Bush can piss me off a lot more than a computer thing... :o ;) :) but I guess we shouldn't get into politics on a computer board...

No problems, just having some fun. ;)

And actually there is a place (http://forums.macrumors.com/forumdisplay.php?f=47) for that of discussion if you're interested. :cool:

[Soculese]

Their consumer products yes. (Read: Dimension series) Their corp desktops? Not in the least. Their Optiplex lines are probably one of the most reliable desktops I've ever run across. This coming from someone who has deployed around 80 of these in the last 5 years at the site I work at and another 60 downtown.
The GX110's, GX240's, and the GX280's and the GX520’s are all rock solid. I would say out of those 80 systems we have had 2 die on us. One was a NIC problem. The other was a motherboard problem. Everything else: Flawless.
Their laptops are another matter. 4 years ago I would have made the same comparison saying the Inspiron (consumer.) laptops sucked and the Latitude (Buisness.) laptops rocked. I have a 5 year old Latitude that is still running XP at home. No problems at all and this thing has been thrown around, beaten and borderline abused. That was then. Today? You couldn’t give me a Latitude. The quality is for crap on Dell’s laptop line.

PS- For those who say you can't find Dell systems cheaper then Apple hardware. You just aren't looking hard enough. Most consumers aren't looking for a new monitor. That alone drops a few hundred off the price. Then you have coupons and the like. Or the referb site where you can find systems for under $500 with the normal 1-year warrantee. I got my Dell Optiplex GX280 off of Dell's referb site for $400 and change. Over the last year I've been upgrading the components. So instead of being hit with a $1000+ charge all of a sudden I simply add a GB of RAM there (2Gb total.), a DVD burner there, a GeForce 6800 GT there, a SATA 100Gb drive there. At the end of the day and with the help of pricegrabber.com the price I've paid is considerably less then what I would pay with an iMac along with a bigger screen - Dell 24" widescreen that can stay with me when I upgrade in a couple years. Most people don't give a crap about the whole TCO on a desktop. They care about price. At the end of the day what they can afford is X amount. They don't care if Y amount comes with all these wonderful features and such.

I notice that you skip right over the OptiPlex GX 270, the biggest pile of crap machine that Dell has put out in a while. I deployed 110 of them a year and a half ago, 40 have had their motherboards crap out. Steaming Pile of Crap. How is this for life. I support PC/Windows all day, won't touch one at home, Mac Only at home. Intel best not screw up. I do have faith in them though, they have a HUGE reputation to uphold.

[amateurmacfreak]

No problems, just having some fun. ;)

And actually there is a place (http://forums.macrumors.com/forumdisplay.php?f=47) for that of discussion if you're interested. :cool:
Haha, thanks! :)

[~Shard~]

Haha, thanks! :)

No problem at all - but just remember, you're on your own in those discussions, as they can get quite heated and personal! :cool:

[SiliconAddict]

I notice that you skip right over the OptiPlex GX 270, the biggest pile of crap machine that Dell has put out in a while. I deployed 110 of them a year and a half ago, 40 have had their motherboards crap out. Steaming Pile of Crap. How is this for life. I support PC/Windows all day, won't touch one at home, Mac Only at home. Intel best not screw up. I do have faith in them though, they have a HUGE reputation to uphold.

I didn't skip over it. :rolleyes: We never had them in the office so I have no knowledge of the model. I'm simply telling you guys what I've experienced over the last 5 years: and that is the Optiplex system is a good desktop.

[Randall]

So today Macintosh give more value for money than x86 PCs. What is your rationale for you not only suggesting but guaranteeing that this will change when Macs use an x86 processor? You don't actually give any reasons why that would be so, you just assert it. You seem to be a very irrational person. Apple's margins on hardware are higher then most PC manufacturers margins. You will see it when we have some direct corrilation to compare to. We can even do so this January if x86 Macs will be avialiable then. You will see my point when I can provide you with direct proof. You seem to be a very pompous person.

[Photorun]

I didn't skip over it. :rolleyes: We never had them in the office so I have no knowledge of the model. I'm simply telling you guys what I've experienced over the last 5 years: and that is the Optiplex system is a good desktop.

I'm really not sure why you're even here SiliconAddict, are you a troll with very little time on your hands (clearly by the amount of vacuous posts), a hater, both, an unenlightened PC user (clearly) or what your case is. You don't seem to like Macs, love PCs and defend the crap out of them and diss Macs left and right. Exactly WHY are you here? To whine about how great peecees are? To get people to convert to Windows? Spread disinformation?

You're shtick is really old, go find a "Microsoft Windows/I (Heart) Dell" forum and leave us Mac users to babble about our own inane stuff. Save your prostelityzing to those who may give a flying crap about the droll, off-topic, misinformed and disingenuous high-and-mighty pointless stuff you drivel on and on about.

[Randall]

I'm really not sure why you're even here SiliconAddict, are you a troll with very little time on your hands (clearly by the amount of vacuous posts), a hater, both, an unenlightened PC user (clearly) or what your case is. You don't seem to like Macs, love PCs and defend the crap out of them and diss Macs left and right. Exactly WHY are you here? To whine about how great peecees are? To get people to convert to Windows? Spread disinformation?

You're shtick is really old, go find a "Microsoft Windows/I (Heart) Dell" forum and leave us Mac users to babble about our own inane stuff. Save your prostelityzing to those who may give a flying crap about the droll, off-topic, misinformed and disingenuous high-and-mighty pointless stuff you drivel on and on about.I disagree with this completely. I don't see how you can cast someone off that adds intellectual content to the forum as being a "troll" simply because he has different views then you. We are all Mac enthusiasts here, but clearly there are some people here that simply enjoy bashing Microsoft continuiously. And it is annoying as h3ll.

[firebox]

What makes you think Apple isn't specifying the design of the motherboards? Intel guys can do the VLSI and make it work well.

Think of it like a building - Apple is the Architect, Intel is the General Contractor. The GC is capable of building any building you tell him to build, and if it's a good GC, really well, without any leaky roofs or cracked ceilings.

Intel is Tommy Silva. Apple is Santiago Calatrava. I'm buying.

well..*********..said mon frere!!! some of the 'hardcore' need to chill out a little and start ranting about the more important things - like, why are 90% of the computer using population stll on an inferior OS!?

[rayz]

Ummm, yeah buddy, nobody wants to buy a Mac is why they're actually back up in market share in various polls based on business/consumer models to 5% or even 7% or in Japan where they actually know and give a s*** about computers as the best tool for a job (i.e. NOT a peecee) 30%.

Try again pal, this time with some semblance of what would resemble a clue.

Sorry mate, but 95% of the computer buying public does not want a Mac; this is a decison based on needs, and not an emotional attachment to a machine. Whichever way you rationalise it, that's not a good figure. And it's hardly surprising that the Mac share is up; Microsoft has been struggling to get Windows Vista out the door for a while now, which man WinTel sales are going to be pretty unspectacular until folk have something new to play with.

I guess you also believe that the vast majority of iPod sales go to the massive Mac market share .... :rolleyes:

[rayz]

Uh, yes, they have. They're one of the top few computer makers in the world.

Then how come only 4% of the population uses them, and the other 96% uses Windows?



Nobody runs Windows on their Macs now (except maybe, slowly, with VirtualPC), and they sell millions of them.[/QUOTE

Er ... that's because most folk actually buy a PC and don't run Macs at all ... :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=Eric5h5]Don't count on Intel Macs booting into Windows...if they use EFI for the firmware, goodbye to XP and everything earlier (unless you use VirtualPC, which will at least be faster, but still won't have hardware acceleration).

--Eric

Well, we'll have to wait and see on that one.

[rayz]

an unenlightened PC user (clearly)

'Unenlightened'?

Oh boy ... :rolleyes:

Well, the PC users may be right about one thing, not so much a platform as a religion.

[Randall]

Don't count on Intel Macs booting into Windows...if they use EFI for the firmware, goodbye to XP and everything earlier (unless you use VirtualPC, which will at least be faster, but still won't have hardware acceleration).

--Eric
Well, we'll have to wait and see on that one.I have to agree here. I find it hard to believe that Apple would support an ancient boot ROM in BIOS when EFI will help them protect their software from running on PC's. So don't expect to dual boot your butts off until Vista is delivered (which will support both EFI and BIOS for legacy reasons). Heh, it's not such a bad thing, cause Vista's eye candy should help make OS X users feel more at home in Windows. :p

[Lord Kythe]

Sorry mate, but 95% of the computer buying public does not want a Mac; this is a decison based on needs, and not an emotional attachment to a machine. Whichever way you rationalise it, that's not a good figure. And it's hardly surprising that the Mac share is up; Microsoft has been struggling to get Windows Vista out the door for a while now, which man WinTel sales are going to be pretty unspectacular until folk have something new to play with.

I guess you also believe that the vast majority of iPod sales go to the massive Mac market share .... :rolleyes:

LOL, that's one of the funniest things I've heard. You actually think that "95% of the computer buying public have (Windows-based) PCs" means that 95% of them don't want a mac? They just don't know about it. I worked in several retail environments (internet, educational and retail stores). Man, about 25 customers asked me if their iPod would work on a Mac in the Nov.-Dec. period alone. I'm serious.

I convert about 5-6 times more PC users to the Mac platform these last few years (especially 2004-2005) than ever before, and Apple's marketshare is growing. I won't even start speculating as the "why" the market is growing, but it is, that's a fact.

Windows Vista? Come on, most PC users don't even know about that, whether you refer to LongHorn or Windows Vista, they have absolutely no clue what it is. It has VERY little (if not, absolutely nothing) to do with Apple's marketshare increase.

[rhashem]

When a "resource" is a couple of bytes in physical (real) address space and an overloaded interrupt line - does it really matter? (ps. for computer scientists, the term "overloaded" is a good thing, not a bad thing ;-) - we're not electrical engineers, after all)

Well, not to mention that most modern PCs use I/O APICs with 24-64 interrupt lines. I know on my current PC, my graphics card uses interrupt line 18 or something.

[Lord Kythe]

'Unenlightened'?

Oh boy ... :rolleyes:

Well, the PC users may be right about one thing, not so much a platform as a religion.

Oh, you don't like "big" words? Breaks your "safe" sementical boundaries? Perhaps you'd prefer something like "shallow" pc user? Or is it plain wrong to dare make the statement that Macs are better computers? We are cultists for believing a computer is better than another? I'm sorry, but I firmly believe Macs are better computers, and I think it is a reasonable statement, and if you propose a computer running Windows against one running Mac OS X, I mean it's not even a contest.

The only thing PCs are better at than Macs is gaming, and getting viruses, worms and spyware. And since the XBox arrived, I don't even know what PCs are still around for anymore; oh yeah! Making money by investing billions in advertisement. Macs were simply never advertised as much as Wintels, and now that they are advertising more, Apple's marketshare is rising every month. Looks like when confronted by both computers, most people will choose macs. I've experienced it first hand, at several places (mostly educational, but some retail locations as well).

[rhashem]

But you aren't going to get dual-core 970-beating chips that run at 1/3 the watts, that's for sure. Not this year or next year, anyway.

Sure you are. Yonah will very likely beat a dual-core 2+GHz G5 in most tasks that don't take advantage of AltiVec.

[rhashem]

The hardware to me is just as important as the software. If Apple ships the same Intel motherboard just in a fancy chassis that say Dell or Gateway also ships for 35% higher, I'm not going to buy it. That just doesn't make good consumer sense. The O/S is large part of why I use a Mac, however Mac OS X is not worth the premium price alone. It's the combination of OS X and Apple's specialized hardware that makes me a Mac user.

What specialized hardware? A current-gen PowerMac is basically a Dell with a G5. Same OEM RAM, same Western Digital HDD, same Pioneer DVD burner, etc. The only thing different is the motherboard and the case. The motherboard is basically the same as a PC motherboard (PCI Express, SATA, etc), only with a G5 socket instead of a Pentium 4 socket. The case, well, that'll be in the Intel Macs too.

This change is so insignificant its not even worth worrying about; simply because over the last decades, Macs have become PCs with different CPUs.

[rhashem]

* Hot
* Noisy
* Power-hungry
* Big


Describes my PowerMac dual-core G5 perfectly!

Noisy. Apple has traditionally been very successful in this area. Lets hope they can be again.

In what decade? I've got a PowerMac G4 (Digital Audio), a PowerMac G5 (PCI-E), and a dual-core Athlon64 PC. Guess which one is the most quiet?

Power-hungry. Apple has been very successful in this area.

Again, in what decade? My PowerMac G4 has a 338w power supply. My Dell PII from the same era has a 250w power supply. My PowerMac G5 hsa a 600w (!) power supply. My Athlon64 has a 380W power supply.

[rhashem]

I'm really not sure why you're even here SiliconAddict, are you a troll with very little time on your hands (clearly by the amount of vacuous posts), a hater, both, an unenlightened PC user (clearly) or what your case is. You don't seem to like Macs, love PCs and defend the crap out of them and diss Macs left and right. Exactly WHY are you here? To whine about how great peecees are? To get people to convert to Windows? Spread disinformation?

I don't think this is a productive line of argument. By your logic, I'm an "unelightened PC user", etc, etc. Yet, I've got a PowerMac (actually, two at the moment), and I love the thing. Sure, you'll never hear me say a good thing about the G5, or support Apple's scorched-earth policy regarding "legacy" ports (like PCI...), or believe that Apple doesn't use generic OEM parts in their PCs, just like Dell. You don't need to drink the kool-aid to love your Mac. Macs stand on their own merits --- you don't have to pretend that they don't have weaknesses, or that PCs don't have a leg-up in a lot of respects.

If you love the Mac platform, as opposed to the Mac "image", you'll be happy about this Intel news. It's going to mean cheaper (even if Apple keeps its current margin), more stable, more reliable, and faster PowerMacs. They won't be as "unique", but what's the point of being different just for the sake of being different?

[kcmac]

Calm down people. It's the holiday season and all. :D

[destroyboredom]

For those worried about quality control, I worked for a distribution partner of Intel's for 4 years. There motherboards are great quality, little to no returns.

[mercury26]

I think the real question here is, will Intel make the motherboards accept CPU upgrades? I am all for the ability of ordering new CPUs for my motherboard when I want to upgrade. Even with my PCs, I keep a motherboard for a couple years while I make CPU upgrades. I just hope they do not solder the CPU to the board.

Cheers,

:: Chuck

[generik]

I think the real question here is, will Intel make the motherboards accept CPU upgrades? I am all for the ability of ordering new CPUs for my motherboard when I want to upgrade. Even with my PCs, I keep a motherboard for a couple years while I make CPU upgrades. I just hope they do not solder the CPU to the board.

Cheers,

:: Chuck

I doubt so, Apple will probably want to save that $0.10 per PowerMac.

[Multimedia]

Why? What's going to run natively on Intel Macs, aside from (probably) iLife and a couple of new game ports? For quite a while, 90% or more of everything you run will probably have to go through Rosetta, which means it will run slowly or not at all. Unless you like having new things just for the sake of having new things, sticking with a PPC Mac for now would be a good idea.

--EricFinal Cut Studio, Logic, iLife '06, OS X, All OS X Software Applications. For me that is a lot. I also expect Rosetta to be very efficient. To believe that no third party software will be Universal Binary at MacWorld Expo SF is a very cynical view I do not share.

[mercury26]

Final Cut Studio, Logic, iLife '06, OS X, All OS X Software Applications. For me that is a lot. I also expect Rosetta to be very efficient. To believe that no third party software will be Universal Binary at MacWorld Expo SF is a very cynical view I do not share.

I want to know if AU and VST plugins will work through Rosetta. If not, than it makes Logic pretty unusable for most audio professionals.

Cheers,

:: Chuck

[jhu]

Oh, you don't like "big" words? Breaks your "safe" sementical boundaries? Perhaps you'd prefer something like "shallow" pc user? Or is it plain wrong to dare make the statement that Macs are better computers? We are cultists for believing a computer is better than another? I'm sorry, but I firmly believe Macs are better computers, and I think it is a reasonable statement, and if you propose a computer running Windows against one running Mac OS X, I mean it's not even a contest.

The only thing PCs are better at than Macs is gaming, and getting viruses, worms and spyware. And since the XBox arrived, I don't even know what PCs are still around for anymore; oh yeah! Making money by investing billions in advertisement. Macs were simply never advertised as much as Wintels, and now that they are advertising more, Apple's marketshare is rising every month. Looks like when confronted by both computers, most people will choose macs. I've experienced it first hand, at several places (mostly educational, but some retail locations as well).

1) the darwin kernel is relatively slow (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2436)
2) most people will choose by the price. it's debatable whether the mac is a better value. for some it is, for me, the price to be different isn't worth it.

[Norse Son]

Nope.
Because I believe both companies are putting out false and misleading "inside info" to certain people..
Pretty simple actually..

And speaking of inside info.I hadn't noticed anyone talking about the bottom part of that appleinsider article :

"An analyst told Apple Insider of indications that the two companies may be developing a custom processor that will be made available only to Apple systems."
On the first part; yeah, I have often wondered if Steve sits up there in his corner office on "slow days" and, "finding nothing to do" at either of his 2 companies, he closes the blinds, turns down the lights, sits in the shadows, adjusts his voice-discombobulator, then starts up iChat and does an anonymous video chat with the various rumor sites, telling them he's "a mole deep in Cupertino, and he has the real juicy NDA-kind of info on Apple's 'world-domination plans'"... Then he sits back and has a good laugh while watching the activity at all the rumor sites on his multi-screen PowerMac G9/5THz computer...

Now, about the second part, of Apple & Intel "cooking up" a custom cpu; I made a comment in the thread just yesterday about that idea - I had read the AppleInsider article. However, I've seen the topic mentioned more than once in the past... Here's my take & timeline:
• During 2006 Apple has introduced Intel models of the PowerBook & iMac at MWSF that use the dual-core Yonah.
• At a "one more thing" event in late April, Apple introduces the new iMac 23" HD-DVR system, the vPod (avail. in 5.5" & 7" TFTs, with choice of 80/100/120GB S-ATA drives), and a "major new influx" of "partners" for the iTMS' video section... And, right when people think it's over, Apple announces a worldwide promotion for the 1,000,000,000th iTMS download (a new iMac 23" HD-DVR system, a vPod 7" 120GB, and a 10,000 song iTMS gift card).
• The iBook and mini get the single-core Yonah in May.
• At WWDC - which focuses on MacOS X only - Apple says to expect Leopard "under the tree this 'X'-Mas"... Also, they announce several "big guns" who have made major milestones in porting their apps to x86 (Adobe CS3 will be avail. 4th qtr.).
• Microsoft quietly trims a few more "features" from Vista and announces grandly that it will be released by the end of the year - the story makes the 7th page, next to a story of a turnip truck that overturned in Millsboro Heights, Kansas...
• They split/expand the PowerBook into Yonah & Merom lines in September, as well as the iBook into single- & dual-core Yonah lines.
• The iMac switches to Merom in September - rumors begin of a "marriage" between the iMac-Merom and the 30" ACD-HD, but it will wait 'til MWSF '07.
• In November Apple unleashes the new PowerMacs with dual & quad dual-core Conroes, as well as a new "flagship" 42" ACD-HD - the 17" ACD is replaced with a 19" ACD-HD WS.
• Steve Ballmer hops around the studio in an interview, throwing chairs, when he is asked to pinpoint the exact date Vista is due before the year is over; "We did not specify which year, did we?"
• Apple phases out Classic - it's not present in Leopard (they license MacLink Plus Deluxe technology to open "legacy files").
• In Feb. '07 Apple introduces the new XServe based on Woodcrest - and it is announced that Virginia Tech's "Big Mac" cluster will be replaced by 1500 dual dual-cores "yada-yada-yada".
• By WWDC '07 Apple's marketshare has climed into the double-digits.
• Apple edges towards Microsoft's market value, having passed up Dell a year before.
• Rumors start to circulate of an ultra-top-secret project known only as "Pooka" taking place at Intel's labs in Oregon. "Harvey" is floated about, too, leading analysts to speculate Apple is developing a cloaking device to mask your monitor, keyboard & iPod ear buds from prying eyes and envious hands... They are dead wrong! Apple has buried Classic, and now, working secretly with Intel, they are building a quad-core cpu ("Harvey") on a 45nm process that ditches all the "legacy patches & scaffolding" that the x86 architecture has accrued over the years to maintain support for "paleolithic" DOS applications..."Pooka" is the chipset that has on-board WiMax-IMUM, DDR3, S-ATA 300, PCI-Exp x32, FireWire 1600, "Yada-yada-yada"... When released in mobile, desktop & server versions beginning at MWSF '08, it causes MSFT to tumble 35% on Wallstreet... "Big Mac" is upgraded before the Fall Semester...

Hey,... I just did a "what if"... So sue me!

[Lord Kythe]

1) the darwin kernel is relatively slow (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2436)
2) most people will choose by the price. it's debatable whether the mac is a better value. for some it is, for me, the price to be different isn't worth it.

Well, I don't know what to say about the "relatively slow" since the word relatively is there, but if you are wondering if I think Macs are the absolute best at everything, I certainly don't. I'm saying they're generally better, way better, not really insisting on speed. Sure, the Kernel might not be the fastest (I'm really not versed enough on the subject to assert anything anyway), but who's looking for that? People want real world results, and that's what the Mac has always offered: stable and enjoyable interface for consumers, power and high quality software for Pros. PM G5s are extremely powerful for the price.

Try finding a brand name PC with the Mid and High-end Macs' specs at a better price. Won't happen. Tried with Dell, HP, GateWay, AlienWare and IBM, didn't come close. And they ran Windows :p

The best value for Pro users is Macs, hands down. As for consumers, well, it gets more complicated though, except for laptops where Macs still give the most bang for the buck (especially the Student Price on iBooks). With the Mac Mini in the picture, it's better than it was value-wise. But I'll agree it's debatable for low-end desktops.

[Lord Kythe]

I'm really optimistic regarding Intel's involvement in Macs; sure, the P4 is undeniably a very bad CPU compared to AMDs and PPCs, but we aren't getting P4s in our macs!

I expect an overall better, more affordable machine from the Apple-Intel partnership. The real concerns I have are whether or not we'll see significant price drops (I'm talking 10%+ price drop), will Intel be able to deliver the goods in time and as promised (cool-running, stable and powerful dual-core CPUs in January-February for laptops, June-July for desktops, were those the ETAs?) and will Apple refrain from advertising Intel on the actual casing (that small Intel Inside logo would just kill me... I guess that's why razor blades were invented)

Just my 2 cents.

[mjstew33]

Whatever. As long as I have OS X I'm fine.

[mjstew33]

I think the real question here is, will Intel make the motherboards accept CPU upgrades? I am all for the ability of ordering new CPUs for my motherboard when I want to upgrade. Even with my PCs, I keep a motherboard for a couple years while I make CPU upgrades. I just hope they do not solder the CPU to the board.

Cheers,

:: Chuck
They probably will. You never know, really, with Apple. PowerMacs? Probably not. Everything else? Compared fom other Macs - probably soldered.

EDIT: 1,500th post. Sweet. :D

[Hattig]

Meh, at the worst this will be Apple giving Intel the technical requirements and physical layout and port locations so that it will fit in the case, and Intel placing the components as required.

Far more likely this is merely Intel providing reference designs customised for Apple's requirements to Apple, and thus Apple being able to design their next generation PowerMac's motherboard quite simply with few modifications apart from relocating the ports or whatever.

As for value for money, current PowerMacs are quite good value for money when priced as workstations, which is what they are. Apple merely doesn't cover as many market areas as other PC manufacturers, so in many of them they appear overpriced because something way overspecced is having to cover that area instead of having a dedicated bit of hardware.

[finchna]

I just hope that silent/quiet computing remains a goal through all of this... I'm sure Apple will have at least some say in the shape/design of the motherboard, in order to ensure that the overall case design works well with regards to air flow.

Some of those beefy PC boxes are just too dang noisy...


Several of the G5 dual cores (and earlier duals) are too noisy--especially with the 7800 GT video card.

[~Shard~]

EDIT: 1,500th post. Sweet. :D

Congrats! 1500 seems so long ago for me... :cool:

Several of the G5 dual cores (and earlier duals) are too noisy--especially with the 7800 GT video card.

I have heard this as well. Although I'm a fan of the PowerMac case, it is rather large, and I think now that Apple will be using dual core processors, they could definitely get a way with a case redesign, as there is so much wasted space in those boxes.

[EricNau]

I have heard this as well. Although I'm a fan of the PowerMac case, it is rather large, and I think now that Apple will be using dual core processors, they could definitely get a way with a case redesign, as there is so much wasted space in those boxes.
I would gladly trade a little "wasted space" for the clean, organized insides of the Powermac. When you need to replace something in a PC it seems like you have to take everything out just to get to a simple little battery.

[~Shard~]

I would gladly trade a little "wasted space" for the clean, organized insides of the Powermac. When you need to replace something in a PC it seems like you have to take everything out just to get to a simple little battery.

Very good point, and I agree - all I am saying is that there is indeed ample room with which Apple could redesign things if they wanted to. PC cases don't always have that luxury. ;)

[EricNau]

Very good point, and I agree - all I am saying is that there is indeed ample room with which Apple could redesign things if they wanted to. PC cases don't always have that luxury. ;)
Yeah, I see your thinking. And apple is very good with design, I wouldn't be surprised if they could make the Powermac smaller and keep the pretty insides too. :)

[Eric5h5]

Then how come only 4% of the population uses them, and the other 96% uses Windows?

Your math is off. That adds up to 100%, and there are certainly other OSs other than MacOS and Windows.

Anyway, the sarcastic comment about Apple not making a dent with their system is just plain wrong, unless you consider being the fourth biggest computer maker in the U.S. "not making a dent".

--Eric

[EricNau]

Your math is off. That adds up to 100%, and there are certainly other OSs other than MacOS and Windows.

Anyway, the sarcastic comment about Apple not making a dent with their system is just plain wrong, unless you consider being the fourth biggest computer maker in the U.S. "not making a dent".

--Eric
Last I heard they were 5th. (behind Dell, HP, IBM, & Sony)

Maybe I'm wrong. :confused:

[finchna]

umm, I'd rather see this than the mysterious crashes, hangups, and other problems the G5's have now with bad memory. In the office where I provide support, 4 out of 10 G5s have had problems with memory bought from quality vendors.

Intel, save us....

I've worked with several G5s, from the original dual 2Ghz to the Quad, always using Crucial memory, and I've never seen crashes in the G5s or bad memory from Crucial.

[~Shard~]

Yeah, I see your thinking. And apple is very good with design, I wouldn't be surprised if they could make the Powermac smaller and keep the pretty insides too. :)

Exactly - just look at what they did with the iMac after all, from its progression from G3 to G4 to G5 designs. I don't even know how they could make that thing any smaller, minimalist and simple than its current incarnation. :cool:

[EricNau]

Exactly - just look at what they did with the iMac after all, from its progression from G3 to G4 to G5 designs. I don't even know how they could make that thing any smaller, minimalist and simple than its current incarnation. :cool:
That's what I said about the Rev A/B iMac G5... then Rev C came along. :p

[jhu]

Last I heard they were 5th. (behind Dell, HP, IBM, & Sony)

Maybe I'm wrong. :confused:

apple was 4th at 3.7% on 7/2004 (http://money.cnn.com/2004/07/15/technology/pc_share/) behind dell, hp, and ibm in the us market. globally they're much smaller.

[Stella]

4th place..

And?!!

It still doesn't change the fact Apple have around 4% marketshare.

FOUR PERCENT.

Personally, I prefer worldwide market share because the usa is only one market, and the world is much larger than just the usa. usa != World.


Your math is off. That adds up to 100%, and there are certainly other OSs other than MacOS and Windows.

Anyway, the sarcastic comment about Apple not making a dent with their system is just plain wrong, unless you consider being the fourth biggest computer maker in the U.S. "not making a dent".

--Eric

[amateurmacfreak]

Ok, sorry to annoy with such a question so late in this discussion that doesn't have to do with the Powermac (and one that is probably one that will not be well answered until MWSF) but what is the possibility of new Intel iBooks in January (you think)? Of course I know this is speculation at this point but... I'm really hoping it will happen! And there's a good chance? Right? Or no?

[EricNau]

apple was 4th at 3.7% on 7/2004 (http://money.cnn.com/2004/07/15/technology/pc_share/) behind dell, hp, and ibm in the us market. globally they're much smaller.
OK, I won't argue because 4th is better than 5th. :p

[~Shard~]

That's what I said about the Rev A/B iMac G5... then Rev C came along. :p

Oh, I know Apple will always do it and find a way somehow - I just never know how, but they always seem to pull through and amaze me time after time. :)

[amateurmacfreak]

That's what I said about the Rev A/B iMac G5... then Rev C came along. :p
*looks at computer* They are small and sleek and nice and quiet aren't they?:p :D

[EricNau]

Ok, sorry to annoy with such a question so late in this discussion that doesn't have to do with the Powermac (and one that is probably one that will not be well answered until MWSF) but what is the possibility of new Intel iBooks in January (you think)? Of course I know this is speculation at this point but... I'm really hoping it will happen! And there's a good chance? Right? Or no?
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=167964

[Eric5h5]

Final Cut Studio, Logic, iLife '06, OS X, All OS X Software Applications. For me that is a lot. I also expect Rosetta to be very efficient.

I guess you don't know much about CPU emulation then. Rosetta is a fancy JIT emulator, and will generally get JIT speeds or a little faster. Apple's own developer documentation describes Rosetta as most suitable for programs that spend most of their time waiting for user input (like word processors) and not very suitable for anything CPU-intensive. What you should realistically expect is a lot of people with Intel Macs constantly whining to developers of their favorite programs to make universal binaries, because those programs are now laggy and slow, and occasionally glitchy. (People have seen OpenGL graphics problems for example, and some programs just don't run at all for unknown reasons.)

To believe that no third party software will be Universal Binary at MacWorld Expo SF is a very cynical view I do not share.

Did I say "no software"? I do believe I said "90%" won't be native for some time. It generally takes effort to make a universal binary. It's not just clicking on a "X86" box. With some programs the effort is quite trivial, for other programs it's very involved. Don't believe the hype, either about the ease of making universal binaries or the speed of Rosetta. I'm not being cynical, I'm being realistic, because I have some idea as to how software works. Being a programmer and all. Anyone expecting x86 Macs to be magically better and faster in every way is just begging to be disappointed. Eventually everything will be sorted out, but there will be a lot of annoyances along the way.

All of which is a long-winded way of saying that anyone buying a PPC Mac now should be happy with what he or she has got, because the next shiny new thing will have its share of problems for sure. It's not really as shiny as all that.

--Eric

[Eric5h5]

4th place..

And?!!

It still doesn't change the fact Apple have around 4% marketshare.

FOUR PERCENT.

And? How many other computer manufacturers, in the world or in the U.S., are profitable? Apple's made quite a big dent indeed, and arguments about OS marketshare are beside the point. They get decent margins on their hardware, and don't have to come up with dodgy schemes relying on charging excess amounts for support in order to make a buck. So yeah, proprietary is good. As long as you're making rather substantial wads o' cash shifting substantial numbers of boxes, who cares if the global marketshare of the OS is .0001% or 100%?

--Eric

[pjkelnhofer]

And? How many other computer manufacturers, in the world or in the U.S., are profitable? Apple's made quite a big dent indeed, and arguments about OS marketshare are beside the point. They get decent margins on their hardware, and don't have to come up with dodgy schemes relying on charging excess amounts for support in order to make a buck. So yeah, proprietary is good. As long as you're making rather substantial wads o' cash shifting substantial numbers of boxes, who cares if the global marketshare of the OS is .0001% or 100%?

--Eric

That is a good point. Also, what are the actual percentages of the three manufactures above Apple? And, one more question, when people say marketshare does simply mean sales within a given quarter. I would be interested to know what are the percentages of different manufacturers computers in use. I often wonder if since Macs seem to last longer they sit on a bigger percentage of desks than the 4% marketshare number suggests.

[pjkelnhofer]

I have tried to read through this read and see if anyone else picked up on this, but I thought the general consesus was that Apple would not be participating in the "Intel Inside" or other similiar Intel programs where companies stick the Intel logo on the outside of the PC?