Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Apr 23, 2008, 11:20 AM   #76
rtdunham
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: St. Petersburg, FL, Northern KY
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jericho2550 View Post
For me, Apple machines use to have this magic feel. When people would ask me about my PowerBook "how does the processor compare to the new Centrinos?" I proudly answered "you can't compare the processors, these are Apple only processors"
"Everybody believes in something and everybody,
by virtue of the fact that they believe in something,
use that something to support their own existence."
--Frank Zappa
rtdunham is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 11:22 AM   #77
riversky
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
PowerPC derivative

The odd part of this to me is the processors are based on IBM's Power Architecture which is the PowerPC! This will throw everyone. I thought even for mobiles they would go with Intel. I guess not.
riversky is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 11:24 AM   #78
Lepton
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Long Island, NY
Custom system on a chip

I think they bought the expertise to integrate more on a chip. A nice ARM plus all the custom logic for an iPod, phone, or tablet on one chip. Save space, save power, save costs.
Lepton is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 11:37 AM   #79
FoxyKaye
macrumors 68000
 
FoxyKaye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: San Francisco, Terre d'Ange, Bas Lag, Gallifrey
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jericho2550 View Post
For me, Apple machines use to have this magic feel. When people would ask me about my PowerBook "how does the processor compare to the new Centrinos?" I proudly answered "you can't compare the processors, these are Apple only processors."
That "magic" has kept Apple below 2% market share with minimal developer attention for more than a decade. I was skeptical about the move to Intel chips as well, but I was also wrong. The increasing market share numbers speak for themselves, as well as the new applications getting OS X clients for the first time, and the comfort Windows users feel in moving to a Mac because they can still run the one or several favorite (or un-ported) applications from Windows that they use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas2006 View Post
[*]UNIX - If I am correct, only the Intel Macs can claim UNIX certification.
You are correct - PPC Macs running Leopard do not have UNIX certification, only the Intels.
Quote:
Originally Posted by riversky View Post
The odd part of this to me is the processors are based on IBM's Power Architecture which is the PowerPC! This will throw everyone. I thought even for mobiles they would go with Intel. I guess not.
OS X is fairly agnostic WRT PPC or Intel - Apple's primary concern for the mobile market is power consumption, something which the Atom chips still have a way to go on. And, it's not like anyone is going to run an Windows install on their iPhone (yet), so the Intel hardware is less relevant.
__________________
Core i7/1.7 8GB 13" 2013 MBA | Core i7/2.66 8GB 17" 2010 MBP | 64GB iPhone 5s
Chaos is a ladder... The climb is all there is.

Last edited by FoxyKaye; Apr 23, 2008 at 11:49 AM. Reason: Additional Comment
FoxyKaye is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 11:51 AM   #80
zap2
macrumors 604
 
zap2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington D.C
apple should team up with some other big companies too, maybe motrola and IBM?

__________________
"We can't all be heroes because somebody has to sit on the curb and clap as they go by." Will Rogers
zap2 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 11:57 AM   #81
EagerDragon
macrumors 68020
 
EagerDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: MA, USA
Some of you may not agree, but we are all grasping at straws any way.

These low power chips will be going into iPhone, iPods, Apple TV and other upcoming devices. For two reasons:
a) Less heat and low power utilization
b) Less clones

While they are currently PPC compatible, the next iteration could have new instruction sets added to facilitate some operations like media, encryption and other functions, also the memory handling could be different and the I/O could be different. This should prevent cloners from creating a device that can run the Apple developed software and create an exact clone of these consumer devices. These chips do not have to remain compatible with PPC, but be PPC based.

As Apple would control the supply of the chips, others can not insert those chips on their clones.

Many years from now, they may be used for laptops and desktops, but I do not think that is where Apple is going with them. I think the "Mac" will remain Intel based for quite a while more.

Just my opinion.
__________________
Security is a state of mind, Nothing can ever be fully secured and be functional.
Therefore iBricks are fully secured.
EagerDragon is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 11:59 AM   #82
Much Ado
macrumors 68000
 
Much Ado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagerDragon View Post
Many years from now, they may be used for laptops and desktops, but I do not think that is where Apple is going with them. I think the "Mac" will remain Intel based for quite a while more.

Just my opinion.
Yes, these are for the post-PC devices, such as the iPod, iPhone, Time Capsule, ATV etc.

Mega-hyper-uber news.
Much Ado is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:10 PM   #83
stargurl84
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: PA
why do you think mac will stay intel based?
stargurl84 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:11 PM   #84
EagerDragon
macrumors 68020
 
EagerDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: MA, USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Much Ado View Post
Yes, these are for the post-PC devices, such as the iPod, iPhone, Time Capsule, ATV etc.

Mega-hyper-uber news.
Their current PA performance chip, sounds like it would fit nicely in my dream Multi-touch tablet and would also make a nice home media and file server.

Hey there lets see the multi-touch iTablet and the iTheater media server.
__________________
Security is a state of mind, Nothing can ever be fully secured and be functional.
Therefore iBricks are fully secured.
EagerDragon is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:11 PM   #85
BongoBanger
macrumors 68000
 
BongoBanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargurl84 View Post
why do you think mac will stay intel based?

Market share. It would be suicidal to move away from Intel when so much of the growth is due to the Macs ability to smoothly run Windows and its associated applications.
BongoBanger is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:16 PM   #86
Amdahl
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargurl84 View Post
why do you think mac will stay intel based?
They believe it for the same reason that people thought it would stay PPC based. It shakes one of the pillars of current Apple canon. People apparently believe Apple is locked in to Intel because that's the only way not to run OS X.
Amdahl is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:20 PM   #87
rolandf
macrumors member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Good software needs its own hardware!

Congratulations to keep the POWER architecture as well. If it is true, then customers can already this year start to design 32nm chips, based on IBM led foundry technology.

It might be the deal behind the scene, IBM pushes the corporate software market for APPLE, and Apple profits from the foundry technology advance IBM build up over the last years, and will probably even by able to expand over Intel.

Anyway, in the longer run, it it not enough of a differentiation for Apple to use exclusively Intel.

As I wrote back after the switch, it makes sense to have a mixed portfolio; Intel for the mass market, and Power derived chips for Apple exclusives.


Groundbreaking Apple products have never been based on Intel. Three years passed since the switch and the design of Apple PC's became more and more PC'ish (thick bezel with ugly hinges) and also the magic went away. There is no difference to work on a good PC notebook like HP or a MacBook, but my "old" Titanium is still something special. Imagine what one could pack into that enclosing with today's technology!
rolandf is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:23 PM   #88
digitalbiker
macrumors 65816
 
digitalbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The Road
Quote:
Originally Posted by BongoBanger View Post
Market share. It would be suicidal to move away from Intel when so much of the growth is due to the Macs ability to smoothly run Windows and its associated applications.
Exactly. Apple wasn't even a viable alternative for most users until the switch to intel, Parallels, VMware, and bootcamp.

In fact it bothers me that Apple is buying a semi-conductor company. They just have started to establish a good relationship with intel.

Is Steve going to now piss-off intel like he did IBM, & Motorola before that? It seemed like the intel-Apple relationship was really going somewhere with the customization in the MacBook Air CPU. But I suppose greedy Steve isn't happy with the intel cut and is now working on a way to make even more money from mac and iphone sales.
__________________
It's a shame that 99.9999 % of all lawyers give the others such a bad name.
(Universal Truths, I)
digitalbiker is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:26 PM   #89
Much Ado
macrumors 68000
 
Much Ado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagerDragon View Post
Their current PA performance chip, sounds like it would fit nicely in my dream Multi-touch tablet and would also make a nice home media and file server.
I'll drink to that!

Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalbiker View Post
In fact it bothers me that Apple is buying a semi-conductor company. They just have started to establish a good relationship with intel.
They'll still use Intel chips in Macs. Come on, what are Intel going to do- turn down their custom?
Much Ado is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:27 PM   #90
GeeYouEye
macrumors 68000
 
GeeYouEye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: State of Denial
Send a message via AIM to GeeYouEye Send a message via Yahoo to GeeYouEye
Very interesting. I imagine it's for iPhone 2.0 and/or Xserve RAID 2.0 (3.0?). Those are some mighty nice specs on the high-end chip there.
__________________
I bring order to chaos. You are in chaos Windows, you are the contradiction, a bug wishing to be an OS.
Visit Softyards Software
NEW DEFINITION OF GEEK
Like politics, free speech, computers, entertainment, and more? Join us at Wordforge.net
GeeYouEye is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:31 PM   #91
eastcoastsurfer
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
IMHO, this is a bad move on Apples part. Even if they wanted to use this companies chips, it didn't make much sense to buy them. Apple makes it's money on the combination of many parts. Why do they need (or want to) control something like the processor? Shopping around when they need to build a device will always net them the best proc at the time for their needs. And if it doesn't, companies with many more resources will jump at the opportunity to deliver something to them.

Overall, buying this company seems to be a kneejerk reaction to something and will only add more distractions.

What's next, buying an LCD manufacturer, plastic maker, etc...?
eastcoastsurfer is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:31 PM   #92
paja
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Chips most likely already being tested

Just because Apple bought the company today doesn't mean that they haven't been working with and testing the acquired processor chip(s) for months now.

So new or improved products could be in the development cycle as we read this. Possibly ready for announcement as soon as Macworld 09.

Apple probably liked what they had seen in their research Labs and decided to buy the company before someone else did.
paja is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:35 PM   #93
Much Ado
macrumors 68000
 
Much Ado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by eastcoastsurfer View Post
IMHO, this is a bad move on Apples part. Even if they wanted to use this companies chips, it didn't make much sense to buy them.
Exclusivity.

(And the power to shape the product roadmap.)
Much Ado is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:40 PM   #94
cube
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: May 2004
Good, now Apple can put on the roadmap to stop fiddling with this x86 crud and make real computers again.
cube is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:45 PM   #95
Moonlight
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Quote:
Originally Posted by rolandf View Post
Three years passed since the switch and the design of Apple PC's became more and more PC'ish (thick bezel with ugly hinges) and also the magic went away. There is no difference to work on a good PC notebook like HP or a MacBook, but my "old" Titanium is still something special. Imagine what one could pack into that enclosing with today's technology!

So...the Macbook, the Air, the iMac...all look more PCish since the switch??
__________________
1984 Macintosh 128k, PowerMac 7100/80av, Ruby iMac, iMac G5, Mac Mini, Newton 2100, iPod 5gb, iPod Nano 2gb, iPod nano 8gb, iPhone 2G, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 5, iPad 1, iPad mini, AppleTV.
Moonlight is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:47 PM   #96
Moonlight
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Quote:
Originally Posted by cube View Post
Good, now Apple can put on the roadmap to stop fiddling with this x86 crud and make real computers again.
So you are against the switch to Intel? Why? You like slower computers, and g4 powerbooks?
__________________
1984 Macintosh 128k, PowerMac 7100/80av, Ruby iMac, iMac G5, Mac Mini, Newton 2100, iPod 5gb, iPod Nano 2gb, iPod nano 8gb, iPhone 2G, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 5, iPad 1, iPad mini, AppleTV.
Moonlight is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:48 PM   #97
pabloman
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Norway
Finally we'll see a PowerBook G5!!!!
pabloman is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:52 PM   #98
cube
macrumors G3
 
Join Date: May 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlight View Post
So you are against the switch to Intel? Why? You like slower computers, and g4 powerbooks?
I like elegant computers. And who said Power is slower than x86?
cube is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:55 PM   #99
digitalbiker
macrumors 65816
 
digitalbiker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The Road
Quote:
Originally Posted by Much Ado View Post
They'll still use Intel chips in Macs. Come on, what are Intel going to do- turn down their custom?
Yes!

Both Motorola & IBM started out wanting the Apple market. They woo'd Apple and developed some great processors. However both Motorola and IBM soon realized that the market share wasn't there to support any new development of these chips. They wanted Apple to pay more money for chips. Apple on the other hand wanted to pay less so they could make more money on mac sales.

In both cases, Motorola and IBM eventually broke up with Apple and quit providing them the chips they needed. So I see Apple repeating the same thing with intel. Just when they get to the point where intel is developing new designs exclusively for Apple. Apple turns around and buys a semi-conductor company so now I wonder if intel is going to just forget about developing custom cpu designs for Apple. It just isn't going to be profitable for them to try and garner that meager market share as well as compete with Apple's own semi-conductor designs.
__________________
It's a shame that 99.9999 % of all lawyers give the others such a bad name.
(Universal Truths, I)
digitalbiker is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Apr 23, 2008, 12:57 PM   #100
Moonlight
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Quote:
Originally Posted by cube View Post
I like elegant computers. And who said Power is slower than x86?
What is not elegant ? The OS is the same, the enclosures are the same... did you open yours and are staring at the intel chip as you work ?


PowerPC in laptops are by far slower than intel... Do you not remember the Powerbook G4, when everything else was a G5 ? And the lack of a 3ghz G5 in towers?
__________________
1984 Macintosh 128k, PowerMac 7100/80av, Ruby iMac, iMac G5, Mac Mini, Newton 2100, iPod 5gb, iPod Nano 2gb, iPod nano 8gb, iPhone 2G, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 5, iPad 1, iPad mini, AppleTV.
Moonlight is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
No Deal in Sight for Apple to Acquire Waze MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 66 Jun 12, 2013 03:30 PM
Apple Hires Key Chip Designer from Samsung MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 151 Nov 5, 2012 11:07 AM
[Mod change] Why Apple should acquire Nokia Corporation smoledman Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion 13 Oct 7, 2012 04:20 PM
Key Apple Chip Designer Jim Keller Returns to AMD MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 28 Aug 3, 2012 04:03 PM
What I don't get: Why doesn't apple acquire companies like corning? brinycbri iPhone 25 Jun 5, 2012 02:13 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:45 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC