Apple set to go Intel? (Again)

MacRumors · Sep 1, 2003, 11:05 AM

SmartHouse.com.au revives one of the oldest Apple rumors by claiming that "Apple is set to announce an Intel based PC that will run on an Apple operating system."

The first system is expected to be shown at MacWorld San Francisco 2004, with major developers, such as Adobe, already aware of the plan.

The article touches on the issue that all software needs to recompiled, but expects a gradual adoption over time, with an eventuality that "all Macs would be Intel."

Rumors of Apple adopting the Intel/x86 platform have been ongoing for years, and has had some historical basis in reality. In the early 90's a secret project at Apple known as Star Trek ported Mac OS to Intel-based hardware. While an intial technical success, the project was scrapped after running into political problems.

More recently, there have been rumors of an x86 based version of Mac OS X, codenamed Marklar. This version of Mac OS X is said to provide a fall-back plan for Apple. These rumors, however, preceded the introduction of the PowerPC 970 (G5) PowerMacs. A successful adoption of the 970 PowerPC would presumably influence any plans for an x86-based Macintosh.

arn · Sep 1, 2003, 11:08 AM

Yes... old news...

New source though. But of unknown reliability.

arn

SoonToGetAMac · Sep 1, 2003, 11:08 AM

I don't think its too likely...

zach · Sep 1, 2003, 11:11 AM

I don't think this will ever happen. For one, Apple has too much pride to switch to Intel and x86. Two, they just invested a huge amount of money (i think) in the G5, which is already quite popular.

This would be a complete turnaround in Apple's strategy, and I don't believe it will ever happen.

windwaves · Sep 1, 2003, 11:12 AM

Very plausible that something like this would be in the works. Apple must have learned from experience and the experience with MOT must have taught our dear company that it is way too risky to rely on a single supplier/technology for such a fundamental component of its products. This makes me want to go back to the arguments made on whether the G4 debacle was Apple's fault or MOT's. It is only Apple's, exclusively Apple's. It is Apple products we are talking about here !

So, lets hope indeed that Apple is working on alternatives. It is prudent management.

jxyama · Sep 1, 2003, 11:12 AM

yikes... i hope not.

as many will point out, apple is a hardware compoany... OS and software are there to sell the hardware. why would they give up one of the highest hardware margins in the industry, esp. now that g5 is here..? why would anyone buy hardware from apple if OS X would run on a gateway?

(yes, design... but for most people, design alone will not justify spending extra hundreds of dollars, no matter how good the design is.)

Postal · Sep 1, 2003, 11:12 AM

The rumour itself sounds pretty ludicrous. Why would you go to great lengths to co-develop a brand-new PowerPC chip, tout the system it's in as the fastest personal computer, and then promptly switch architecture again? The rumour doesn't jibe at all with what Apple is actually doing. I'm not sure why it's even on Page 1 of the site.

trilogic · Sep 1, 2003, 11:12 AM

can I say bull****?

I can't ?

okay

then I don't say bull****.

NavyIntel007 · Sep 1, 2003, 11:13 AM

I'd probably do the same thing if I was starting up a rumor site. Bring up "New dual G5 powerbooks tomorrow" or "Apple is going x86" and in a week everyone knows your site.

Honestly, IBM has one long roadmap. And everyone knows Intel is running out of steam.

xpormac · Sep 1, 2003, 11:14 AM

Hopefully this will happen one day. Maybe apples will be priced at what they should be if they go to x86.

xpormac · Sep 1, 2003, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by NavyIntel007
And everyone knows Intel is running out of steam.

eh? no lol

tduality · Sep 1, 2003, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by trilogic
can I say bull****?

I can't ?

okay

then I don't say bull****.

Da**ed, you were faster!

With all the smart guys in these forums, sites, journals, it had to be 'Smarthouse' to bring the news.

F/reW/re · Sep 1, 2003, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by NavyIntel007
And everyone knows Intel is running out of steam.

hahaha, what did you have for breakfast?

caek · Sep 1, 2003, 11:20 AM

Surely this kind of story is what Page 2 is for. The hallowed turf of the Main Page should be reserved for more credible stories.

Doraemon · Sep 1, 2003, 11:22 AM

Ridiculous.

Sun Baked · Sep 1, 2003, 11:25 AM

Yes it would be "smart" for a company to spend all that money on developing a computer and it's chipset, then ditch it within 6-months for the CPUs competition.

Somehow the future looks bright for a portable PPC970 in the near future, and future development of the processor.

Heck the interest from the anti-MS/Intel crowd looks HUGE.

The momentum of a viable PPC platform looks as strong now as during the Windows PPC/Apple clone era. Right before MS killed Windows PPC and Apple follow shortly after.

---

The portable Itanium would probably require you to drag several car batteries with you to power the thing. 100+W

Of course Intel is probably buying Apple in and will announce it at MW SF 2004...

This would be the only way to build momentum for the Itanium and kill the PPC970 Linux whitebox market.

Equivalent to the stake MS drove into the PPC platforms heart by killing Windows PPC.

modyouup · Sep 1, 2003, 11:26 AM

Ummmm are they talking about Apple making a computer with INTEL IN IT?! Cause that's bull**** their favorite thing to do is show how feeble and stupid intel chips are.

Orr are they talking about just the ability to have Mac OS X on a PC? Cuz I guess that would be okay.

ibjoshua · Sep 1, 2003, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Due to the frequent recurrance of this rumor as well as being from a rumor source of unknown reliability, it is felt to be unlikely.

hmmm...
gotta agree with some of the other posters. Arn usually puts this stuff on page 2.

i_b_joshua

xpormac · Sep 1, 2003, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by modyouup
Ummmm are they talking about Apple making a computer with INTEL IN IT?! Cause that's bull**** their favorite thing to do is show how feeble and stupid intel chips are.

Orr are they talking about just the ability to have Mac OS X on a PC? Cuz I guess that would be okay.

making the mac os usable on x86 platform. Not limited to intels.

pyrotoaster · Sep 1, 2003, 11:29 AM

Hoo wee!

I guess this means that Apple will switch to Intel, get bought by Disney, and start making Donald Duck iPhones.

Steve Jobs would never ever risk his company with a stunt as foolish as an Intel switch.

In fact, Apple's moving into a really good position against Intel right now. The P4's clock speeds are reaching their max, but the G5 is just getting warmed up.

Freg3000 · Sep 1, 2003, 11:29 AM

This just is not going to happen. No matter how many stories are written about it, will not come to fruition.

Do you really think that Apple would force all software developers to recode ALL of their software to run on x86? Didn't they just do that with OS X three years ago? It would be suicide.

xpormac · Sep 1, 2003, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by pyrotoaster
In fact, Apple's moving into a really good position against Intel right now. The P4's clock speeds are reaching their max, but the G5 is just getting warmed up.

Then they go to P5 .....no biggy.

acj · Sep 1, 2003, 11:31 AM

Nothing's impossible. I'm sure Apple will choose the best hardware for them at any given time. If intel produces a $99 PPC CPU with Altevec II, full SSE I/II/III and X86 compatibility, that is 64 bit, has a 4 stage pipeline, runs at 4 GHz with dual cores and dissipates 19 watts, then Apple would be stupid not to use it.

Obviously this is not expected to happen, but anything it possible. Brand loyalty is dangerous.

AngryAngel · Sep 1, 2003, 11:31 AM

The most unlikely aspect of the story is that the Intel chip Apple has supposedly choosen is the Itanium. I thought that the Itamium was very expensive, and not that great performance.

I think if Apple has any x86 plans, then they are with AMD. Notice how AMD chips have never been used in any shoot-off benchmarks. Apple has always targetted themselves at Intel (possibly as the market leader), but they do seem to be leaving open the option AMD as a back-up. I think Steve Jobs has said having choices is good.

This story is nonsense- Itanium isn't a choice, it's a joke (for Apple's target customers). AMD could offer Apple an economic low-end chip underneath the G5 models. However, the disruption of having PowerPC and x86 code required for the different models would be a serious drawback to this idea, so I have been talking rubbish!

Apple will stay with the PowerPC for a while at least (now that the G5 has materialised).

qazwsxedc30 · Sep 1, 2003, 11:34 AM

why isn't this on page two?

Sep 1, 2003, 11:05 AM	#1
MacRumors macrumors bot Join Date: Apr 2001	Apple set to go Intel? (Again) SmartHouse.com.au revives one of the oldest Apple rumors by claiming that "Apple is set to announce an Intel based PC that will run on an Apple operating system." The first system is expected to be shown at MacWorld San Francisco 2004, with major developers, such as Adobe, already aware of the plan. The article touches on the issue that all software needs to recompiled, but expects a gradual adoption over time, with an eventuality that "all Macs would be Intel." Rumors of Apple adopting the Intel/x86 platform have been ongoing for years, and has had some historical basis in reality. In the early 90's a secret project at Apple known as Star Trek ported Mac OS to Intel-based hardware. While an intial technical success, the project was scrapped after running into political problems. More recently, there have been rumors of an x86 based version of Mac OS X, codenamed Marklar. This version of Mac OS X is said to provide a fall-back plan for Apple. These rumors, however, preceded the introduction of the PowerPC 970 (G5) PowerMacs. A successful adoption of the 970 PowerPC would presumably influence any plans for an x86-based Macintosh.

Sep 1, 2003, 11:11 AM	#4
zach macrumors 65816 Join Date: Feb 2003	I don't think this will ever happen. For one, Apple has too much pride to switch to Intel and x86. Two, they just invested a huge amount of money (i think) in the G5, which is already quite popular. This would be a complete turnaround in Apple's strategy, and I don't believe it will ever happen. __________________ MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo 2.4 GHz you, you're a history in rust

Sep 1, 2003, 11:12 AM	#8
trilogic macrumors member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Switzerland	yeah right can I say bull**? I can't ? okay then I don't say bull**.

Sep 1, 2003, 11:13 AM	#9
NavyIntel007 macrumors 65816 Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Tampa, FL	I'd probably do the same thing if I was starting up a rumor site. Bring up "New dual G5 powerbooks tomorrow" or "Apple is going x86" and in a week everyone knows your site. Honestly, IBM has one long roadmap. And everyone knows Intel is running out of steam. __________________ Fujitsu T4020 iPod Nano 4 GB (RED)

Sep 1, 2003, 11:22 AM	#15
Doraemon macrumors 6502 Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Europe (EU)	Ridiculous. __________________ Mac Pro, 2x 4-core 2.8 GHz, 4 GB RAM, GeForce 8800GT, 320 GB HDD PowerMac G5, Single 1.8 GHz, 2 GB RAM, Radeon 9600XT 128MB, SuperDrive, 250 GB HDD

Sep 1, 2003, 11:08 AM	#2
arn macrumors god Join Date: Apr 2001	Yes... old news... New source though. But of unknown reliability. arn

Sep 1, 2003, 11:08 AM	#3
SoonToGetAMac macrumors 6502 Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: California	I don't think its too likely...

Sep 1, 2003, 11:12 AM	#5
windwaves Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: manhattan	Very plausible that something like this would be in the works. Apple must have learned from experience and the experience with MOT must have taught our dear company that it is way too risky to rely on a single supplier/technology for such a fundamental component of its products. This makes me want to go back to the arguments made on whether the G4 debacle was Apple's fault or MOT's. It is only Apple's, exclusively Apple's. It is Apple products we are talking about here ! So, lets hope indeed that Apple is working on alternatives. It is prudent management.

Sep 1, 2003, 11:12 AM	#6
jxyama macrumors 68040 Join Date: Apr 2003	yikes... i hope not. as many will point out, apple is a hardware compoany... OS and software are there to sell the hardware. why would they give up one of the highest hardware margins in the industry, esp. now that g5 is here..? why would anyone buy hardware from apple if OS X would run on a gateway? (yes, design... but for most people, design alone will not justify spending extra hundreds of dollars, no matter how good the design is.)

Sep 1, 2003, 11:12 AM	#7
Postal macrumors regular Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada	The rumour itself sounds pretty ludicrous. Why would you go to great lengths to co-develop a brand-new PowerPC chip, tout the system it's in as the fastest personal computer, and then promptly switch architecture again? The rumour doesn't jibe at all with what Apple is actually doing. I'm not sure why it's even on Page 1 of the site.

Sep 1, 2003, 11:14 AM	#10
xpormac Banned Join Date: Aug 2003	Hopefully this will happen one day. Maybe apples will be priced at what they should be if they go to x86.

Sep 1, 2003, 11:20 AM	#14
caek macrumors newbie Join Date: Apr 2003	Surely this kind of story is what Page 2 is for. The hallowed turf of the Main Page should be reserved for more credible stories.

Sep 1, 2003, 11:25 AM	#16
Sun Baked macrumors 603 Join Date: May 2002	Re: Is this guy thinking of Amiga? The othe PPC computer maker starting with an A. Yes it would be "smart" for a company to spend all that money on developing a computer and it's chipset, then ditch it within 6-months for the CPUs competition. Somehow the future looks bright for a portable PPC970 in the near future, and future development of the processor. Heck the interest from the anti-MS/Intel crowd looks HUGE. The momentum of a viable PPC platform looks as strong now as during the Windows PPC/Apple clone era. Right before MS killed Windows PPC and Apple follow shortly after. --- The portable Itanium would probably require you to drag several car batteries with you to power the thing. 100+W Of course Intel is probably buying Apple in and will announce it at MW SF 2004... This would be the only way to build momentum for the Itanium and kill the PPC970 Linux whitebox market. Equivalent to the stake MS drove into the PPC platforms heart by killing Windows PPC. __________________ May you be plagued by images of Richard Simmons flouncing through you brain, and squat thrusting his way though all waking thoughts.

Sep 1, 2003, 11:26 AM	#17
modyouup macrumors member Join Date: Jan 2002	Ummmm are they talking about Apple making a computer with INTEL IN IT?! Cause that's bull**** their favorite thing to do is show how feeble and stupid intel chips are. Orr are they talking about just the ability to have Mac OS X on a PC? Cuz I guess that would be okay.

Sep 1, 2003, 11:29 AM	#20
pyrotoaster macrumors 65816 Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Oak Park, IL	Hoo wee! I guess this means that Apple will switch to Intel, get bought by Disney, and start making Donald Duck iPhones. Steve Jobs would never ever risk his company with a stunt as foolish as an Intel switch. In fact, Apple's moving into a really good position against Intel right now. The P4's clock speeds are reaching their max, but the G5 is just getting warmed up. __________________ Watch Farscape! AppleWorks is DEAD! Muwah-ha-ha...!

Sep 1, 2003, 11:29 AM	#21
Freg3000 macrumors 68000 Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: New York	This just is not going to happen. No matter how many stories are written about it, will not come to fruition. Do you really think that Apple would force all software developers to recode ALL of their software to run on x86? Didn't they just do that with OS X three years ago? It would be suicide. __________________ FregTK This Is Momentum.

Sep 1, 2003, 11:31 AM	#23
acj macrumors 6502 Join Date: Feb 2003	Nothing's impossible. I'm sure Apple will choose the best hardware for them at any given time. If intel produces a $99 PPC CPU with Altevec II, full SSE I/II/III and X86 compatibility, that is 64 bit, has a 4 stage pipeline, runs at 4 GHz with dual cores and dissipates 19 watts, then Apple would be stupid not to use it. Obviously this is not expected to happen, but anything it possible. Brand loyalty is dangerous.

Sep 1, 2003, 11:31 AM	#24
AngryAngel macrumors regular Join Date: Jul 2003	The most unlikely aspect of the story is that the Intel chip Apple has supposedly choosen is the Itanium. I thought that the Itamium was very expensive, and not that great performance. I think if Apple has any x86 plans, then they are with AMD. Notice how AMD chips have never been used in any shoot-off benchmarks. Apple has always targetted themselves at Intel (possibly as the market leader), but they do seem to be leaving open the option AMD as a back-up. I think Steve Jobs has said having choices is good. This story is nonsense- Itanium isn't a choice, it's a joke (for Apple's target customers). AMD could offer Apple an economic low-end chip underneath the G5 models. However, the disruption of having PowerPC and x86 code required for the different models would be a serious drawback to this idea, so I have been talking rubbish! Apple will stay with the PowerPC for a while at least (now that the G5 has materialised).

Sep 1, 2003, 11:34 AM	#25
qazwsxedc30 macrumors newbie Join Date: Jul 2003	why isn't this on page two?

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