Apple in Talks with Intel?

MacRumors · May 23, 2005, 07:07 AM

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

This Reuters story revives one of the oldest Mac rumors around... Apple switching to Intel?

The rumor originated at The Wall Street Journal:

Quote:

The report, citing two industry executives with knowledge of recent discussions between the companies, said Apple will agree to use Intel chips.

Apple has seriously considered switching to Intel at least twice in its history. One previous project code-named Star Trek actually ported Mac OS 7 to Intel based hardware in 1992. Most recently, internal IBM documents noted that Apple considered switching to Intel but felt it would be too much trouble:

Quote:

Apple believed that using Intel would deeply affect its current customer base. Using an Intel architecture might solve Apple's short-term megahertz dilemma, but customers would have to suffer through a slow transition from PowerPC over the long term.

Orlando Furioso · May 23, 2005, 07:09 AM

oh hellz no.

Chaszmyr · May 23, 2005, 07:11 AM

I find this impossible to believe. I think the recent announcements of Xbox 360 and PS3 (which both contain processors manufactured by IBM, though the latter wasn't developed solely by IBM) show that IBM has some major potential in being the future of the processor industry. Furthermore, even if Apple wasn't going to use IBM, it looks to me like Intel should be the last choice, as AMD has passed them up again in terms of performance.

Bottom line: The only way I think this can be true is if Intel has some big new thing coming out that Apple knows about and we do not.

broken_keyboard · May 23, 2005, 07:14 AM

Intel has consistently been ahead of IBM, and I see no reason to suspect this will change in the near future. Maybe it's a good idea?

rickmac2005 · May 23, 2005, 07:15 AM

If apple chose to switch to intel now they would be choosing the worst time in a decade- with evry other manufacturer making the move to powerpc- even microsoft, it would be stupid to move at a time when intel could eventually be left high and dry.

macmax77 · May 23, 2005, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaszmyr

I find this impossible to believe. I think the recent announcements of Xbox 360 and PS3 (which both contain processors manufactured by IBM, though the latter wasn't developed solely by IBM) show that IBM has some major potential in being the future of the processor industry. Furthermore, even if Apple wasn't going to use IBM, it looks to me like Intel should be the last choice, as AMD has passed them up again in terms of performance.

Bottom line: The only way I think this can be true is if Intel has some big new thing coming out that Apple knows about and we do not.

+1 . But i would hate it, hate the Intel music thingy at the end of the adds

nomore · May 23, 2005, 07:23 AM

Looking at recent Apple patents, maybe it's for a centrino processor for a PDA/Tablet type device. A huge platform shift from OS9 to OSX took quite some time. Imagine how long it would take to transition to a different HW architecture, not to mention the amount of time and cost to ALL OS X software developers. I find it highly unlikely that Apple would change to x86 on the Mac platform.

fraggle · May 23, 2005, 07:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macmax77

+1 . But i would hate it, hate the Intel music thingy at the end of the adds

AFAIK you do not have to do this, it just gives you some money from Intels PR pool... I strongly doubt that Apple would do this

dobbin · May 23, 2005, 07:26 AM

Does this mean that Mac OS would be designed to run on any old POS intel box, or would Apple just be buying in intel chips to put in Macs?

I presume its the latter, but that this could be the first step towards the former.

I don't believe it, although I bet Steve is still mightily p1ssed off with whoever told him he'd have 3Ghz chips by LAST summer

BornAgainMac · May 23, 2005, 07:28 AM

Can IBM keep up with Apple? I don't think it is a Mhz issue more than a demand issue.

harveypooka · May 23, 2005, 07:29 AM

This has all came before - you'd think they'd go for Cell instead of Intel? They'd open up a wealth of applications and games, but they'd possibly lose
their devoted Mac fans. Can you imagine a neat little 'Intel Inside' on the front of your G5? Never! They'll stick with IBM.

scottschor · May 23, 2005, 07:31 AM

If they already have an OS ported to run on Intel, and it opens up new markets and/or offers opportunities for greater performance, why shouldn't they partner with significant others?

Manogomy? Humbug. They shifted from Motorola to IBM and no one lost any sleep over it. You think they're abandoning their core customers? Don't be silly. My trusty old G3/400 still works, still runs Tiger, and will do so for the foreseeable future.

If a partnership with Intel positions Apple for greater exposure and higher heights, then I have no problem with it.

In reading the previous post, it does seem more likely that this partnership may be for a PDA/Tablet type product, but whatever it is I hope it makes a tidal splash.

Go, baby, go.

tamtam · May 23, 2005, 07:34 AM

Glad Apple is sticking with their own architecture.

darkmatter05 · May 23, 2005, 07:37 AM

Im a mac user for the PowerPC, if they switched to Intel, they loose me...

Frisco · May 23, 2005, 07:41 AM

I think Apple will have a response pretty quickly if this rumor is false, because this rumor will hurt Mac sales. Who would buy a Mac now if they are moving over to Intel--oh sorry Mactel

animefan_1 · May 23, 2005, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scottschor

Manogomy? Humbug. They shifted from Motorola to IBM and no one lost any sleep over it. You think they're abandoning their core customers? Don't be silly. My trusty old G3/400 still works, still runs Tiger, and will do so for the foreseeable future.

You seem to be forgetting the little fact that both Motorola and IBM are part os the PowerPC 'AIM' alliance (the 'A' being Apple). That, and the fact that when Apple switched from Moto to IBM, they didn't change processor types - it remained PowerPC.

animefan_1 · May 23, 2005, 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkmatter05

Im a mac user for the PowerPC, if they switched to Intel, they loose me...

You're not a Mac user for the Mac OS? wow.

animefan_1 · May 23, 2005, 07:47 AM

I'm going to call this rumor bullsh*t. It's been the same way for years and we're still on PowerPC.

Apple.Girl · May 23, 2005, 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomore

Imagine how long it would take to transition to a different HW architecture, not to mention the amount of time and cost to ALL OS X software developers. I find it highly unlikely that Apple would change to x86 on the Mac platform.

I agree, it seems unlikely and would probably stir up a lot of resentment, anger, and animosity. I switched from a PC for the PowerPC/OSX architecture. I'm running a 1.33GHz G4 in my PowerBook and I find that pretty fast for almost all tasks (except Photoshop edits), so I find it hard to believe that it's just a megahertz decision... and if Apple is considering a move, would strongly urge them to reconsider!

Mitthrawnuruodo · May 23, 2005, 07:48 AM

If Apple changes to an Intel platform two things will definitely happen very fast:
- The first effective OS X virus will exploit a buffer overflow that can be executed on the crappy Intel CPU.
- I will stop considering myself to be a Mac user, after 11 years on the platform. My next purchase would NOT be a Mac.

Evangelion · May 23, 2005, 07:49 AM

Few problems with this:

1. Apple has for years told people how x86 sucks and how PPC is better. How would they rationale mving from that "superior" CPU to the "crappy" CPU?

2. Why Intel? AMD has the better CPU's. Their dual-core solutions are better and more elegant, their CPU's run cooler, have more bandwidth and generally are faster than Intel's CPU's.

3. Moving to x86 would make it very difficult for Apple to do those "Apple vs. Intel/Dell"-comparisons

.

abrooks · May 23, 2005, 07:49 AM

As much as I hate to read this flapdoodle, I see no reason why we cannot imagine the opposite, is it possible that Intel are dabbling with PowerPC architecture, as someone has already mentioned Microsoft and many other companies are moving to this architecture for games consoles, maybe Intel have seen the light.

Dr.Gargoyle · May 23, 2005, 07:51 AM

First SCSI -> IDE, then ADC -> DVI, and now PPC -> Intel???
Are they aiming to make a Wintel clone?

I hope this rumor is false.

Frisco · May 23, 2005, 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abrooks

As much as I hate to read this flapdoodle, I see no reason why we cannot imagine the opposite, is it possible that Intel are dabbling with PowerPC architecture, as someone has already mentioned Microsoft and many other companies are moving to this architecture for games consoles, maybe Intel have seen the light.

Good Point! That would make more sense. It's only a rumor so who knows.

I bet IBM would be pissed though.

Uma888 · May 23, 2005, 07:57 AM

why intel? why not use sony's cell processor?

May 23, 2005, 07:26 AM	#9
dobbin macrumors 6502a Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: England	Does this mean that Mac OS would be designed to run on any old POS intel box, or would Apple just be buying in intel chips to put in Macs? I presume its the latter, but that this could be the first step towards the former. I don't believe it, although I bet Steve is still mightily p1ssed off with whoever told him he'd have 3Ghz chips by LAST summer __________________ the future's bright, the future's cherry and white

May 23, 2005, 07:29 AM	#11
harveypooka macrumors 65816 Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Not Akron	This has all came before - you'd think they'd go for Cell instead of Intel? They'd open up a wealth of applications and games, but they'd possibly lose their devoted Mac fans. Can you imagine a neat little 'Intel Inside' on the front of your G5? Never! They'll stick with IBM. __________________ "I've wrestled with reality for 35 years, and I'm happy, Doctor, I finally won out over it." - James Stewart (Elwood Dowd) in Harvey, 1950.

May 23, 2005, 07:34 AM	#13
tamtam macrumors member Join Date: Aug 2004	Glad Apple is sticking with their own architecture. __________________ tamtam My first ever Apple is a 2.5 Ghz G5 with 2.5 Gigs ram, 2x 250GB HD, 9800XT, BT keyboard & mouse.

May 23, 2005, 07:41 AM	#15
Frisco macrumors 68000 Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Nutley, NJ	I think Apple will have a response pretty quickly if this rumor is false, because this rumor will hurt Mac sales. Who would buy a Mac now if they are moving over to Intel--oh sorry Mactel __________________ Frisco

May 23, 2005, 07:47 AM	#18
animefan_1 macrumors regular Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: New York	I'm going to call this rumor bullsht. It's been the same way for years* and we're still on PowerPC. __________________ http://www.airamericaradio.com - Great Liberal talk --------------------------- Never Doubt Apple.

May 23, 2005, 07:09 AM	#2
Orlando Furioso macrumors 6502 Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Bezerkeley	oh hellz no.

May 23, 2005, 07:11 AM	#3
Chaszmyr macrumors Demi-God Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Boulder, CO	I find this impossible to believe. I think the recent announcements of Xbox 360 and PS3 (which both contain processors manufactured by IBM, though the latter wasn't developed solely by IBM) show that IBM has some major potential in being the future of the processor industry. Furthermore, even if Apple wasn't going to use IBM, it looks to me like Intel should be the last choice, as AMD has passed them up again in terms of performance. Bottom line: The only way I think this can be true is if Intel has some big new thing coming out that Apple knows about and we do not.

May 23, 2005, 07:14 AM	#4
broken_keyboard Banned Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Secret Moon base	Intel has consistently been ahead of IBM, and I see no reason to suspect this will change in the near future. Maybe it's a good idea?

May 23, 2005, 07:15 AM	#5
rickmac2005 macrumors newbie Join Date: Jan 2005	If apple chose to switch to intel now they would be choosing the worst time in a decade- with evry other manufacturer making the move to powerpc- even microsoft, it would be stupid to move at a time when intel could eventually be left high and dry.

May 23, 2005, 07:23 AM	#7
nomore macrumors member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: United Kingdom	Looking at recent Apple patents, maybe it's for a centrino processor for a PDA/Tablet type device. A huge platform shift from OS9 to OSX took quite some time. Imagine how long it would take to transition to a different HW architecture, not to mention the amount of time and cost to ALL OS X software developers. I find it highly unlikely that Apple would change to x86 on the Mac platform.

May 23, 2005, 07:28 AM	#10
BornAgainMac macrumors 68030 Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Florida Resident	Can IBM keep up with Apple? I don't think it is a Mhz issue more than a demand issue.

May 23, 2005, 07:31 AM	#12
scottschor macrumors newbie Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Connecticut	If they already have an OS ported to run on Intel, and it opens up new markets and/or offers opportunities for greater performance, why shouldn't they partner with significant others? Manogomy? Humbug. They shifted from Motorola to IBM and no one lost any sleep over it. You think they're abandoning their core customers? Don't be silly. My trusty old G3/400 still works, still runs Tiger, and will do so for the foreseeable future. If a partnership with Intel positions Apple for greater exposure and higher heights, then I have no problem with it. In reading the previous post, it does seem more likely that this partnership may be for a PDA/Tablet type product, but whatever it is I hope it makes a tidal splash. Go, baby, go.

May 23, 2005, 07:37 AM	#14
darkmatter05 macrumors newbie Join Date: May 2005	Im a mac user for the PowerPC, if they switched to Intel, they loose me...

May 23, 2005, 07:48 AM	#20
Mitthrawnuruodo Demi-God (Moderator) Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Bergen, Norway	If Apple changes to an Intel platform two things will definitely happen very fast: - The first effective OS X virus will exploit a buffer overflow that can be executed on the crappy Intel CPU. - I will stop considering myself to be a Mac user, after 11 years on the platform. My next purchase would NOT be a Mac. __________________ Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it; those who fail to learn history correctly... why, they are simply doomed.

May 23, 2005, 07:49 AM	#21
Evangelion macrumors 68040 Join Date: Jan 2005	Few problems with this: 1. Apple has for years told people how x86 sucks and how PPC is better. How would they rationale mving from that "superior" CPU to the "crappy" CPU? 2. Why Intel? AMD has the better CPU's. Their dual-core solutions are better and more elegant, their CPU's run cooler, have more bandwidth and generally are faster than Intel's CPU's. 3. Moving to x86 would make it very difficult for Apple to do those "Apple vs. Intel/Dell"-comparisons .

May 23, 2005, 07:49 AM	#22
abrooks macrumors 6502a Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Northamptonshire, UK	As much as I hate to read this flapdoodle, I see no reason why we cannot imagine the opposite, is it possible that Intel are dabbling with PowerPC architecture, as someone has already mentioned Microsoft and many other companies are moving to this architecture for games consoles, maybe Intel have seen the light.

May 23, 2005, 07:51 AM	#23
Dr.Gargoyle macrumors 65816 Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: lat: 55.7222°N, long: 13.1971°E	intel inside???? First SCSI -> IDE, then ADC -> DVI, and now PPC -> Intel??? Are they aiming to make a Wintel clone? I hope this rumor is false. __________________ Don't insult the freaks.

May 23, 2005, 07:57 AM	#25
Uma888 macrumors 6502 Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Birmingham, United Kingdom	why intel? why not use sony's cell processor?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode