From MacCentral Report: Apple will go Intel next year

Discussion in 'Hardware Rumors' started by FelixDerKater, Oct 28, 2002.

  1. edesignuk Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
  2. Chaszmyr macrumors 601

    Chaszmyr

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    #3
    I am not so sure that will happen... Apple likes being ahead of the game... and if you are using the same products as your competition you will never have a chance of being ahead.
     
  3. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #4
    Re: From MacCentral Report: Apple will go Intel next year

    sounds like an interesting article and who ever thought that a machine built by apple would ever use a microprocessor built by IBM?

    who ever thought that macs would come with MS software on it right out fo the box?

    anything can happen in the high tech industry but i still somehow hope motorola makes faster processors and apple sticks with them and we get a decently fast G5 or whatever the next generation is called

    even if apple moved to the standard intel platform, apple would still be light years ahead in industrial design and durability

    right now, the best intel running computers are the VAIOs and toshibas...but i still prefer any mac;)
     
  4. peter2002 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    #5
    All right!

    It's about time. I'm glad somebody has woke up at Apple. By October 2003, Intel will have the 4.4GHZ P5 with a 1MB L2 cache and a 600MHZ FSB, so why would anybody want a 1.8GHZ 970?

    Peter :)
     
  5. Telomar macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2002
    #6
    I'd take the report with a grain of salt. It is based on the assumption people want single faster CPUs. In fact market research tells us this isn't the case and there is an increasing push towards multi-processor or multi-core designs.
     
  6. Kid Red macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2001
    #7
    Re: All right!

    Because the 1.8 will wipe the floor with the 4.4 intel, that's why. Performance, performance, performance :rolleyes:
     
  7. peter2002 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    #8
    Because the 1.8 will wipe the floor with the 4.4 intel, that's why. Performance, performance, performance

    Bud, that 970 is vaporware. Nobody knows what kind of performance it may have. I wouldn't bet a billion dollar company on a product that not here, and may never work as claim. CEO's and directors aren't that stupid.

    And I have seen the 970's numbers. It's not even as fast as the 1GHZ Itanium 2. So there is no competition. Just more hot air from IBM. IBM can't compete in the chip market with Intel, nobody can, and nobody ever will. Whoever has the most money always wins, and Intel has got the most mula. IBM has too many forks in the fire.

    Peter
     
  8. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #9
    Macs have been sold with Intels x86 style chip installed before...
     
  9. barkmonster macrumors 68020

    barkmonster

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2001
    Location:
    Lancashire
    #10
    and on that day eminem and vanilla ice will both dress as Corperal Klinger and have a custard pie fight on live TV.

    An in house drive pie is more likely than an intel based apple computer :D
     
  10. Mr. Anderson Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Location:
    VA
    #11
    Ha, all based on speculation. I don't think it will happen and we'll have to resurrect this thread in 14 months to see if it came true.....

    D
     
  11. DakotaGuy macrumors 68040

    DakotaGuy

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    South Dakota, USA
    #12
    In other news...

    Apple will also ditch it's own operating system in 2003 and began selling computers with Windows XP...I mean really...if they are going x86 why waste their money on making their own OS when MS has pretty much caught up with XP. With the new PC Apples, they will come loaded with the great "i" programs and have special styling...those features should keep them competitive against Dell and Gateway. Bill Gates is happy to finally provide the only choice in a consumer operating system, it's either Wintel...or your typewriter.

    (I am being sarcastic if you have not figured it out yet)
     
  12. MrMacMan macrumors 604

    MrMacMan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2001
    Location:
    1 Block away from NYC.
    #13
    OH NO
    :Checks if pig are flying: Hmm... That only means one thing
    :check if core of earth froze: I didn't REALLY want that apocalypse anyway...
    heheh.
    If you read the article it doesn't say that apple will go to intel... plus IBM is showing life with this 970 Chip, Heck Many Motorola can roll over in its grave and make a faster chip too?
    Dare I speak the words of G5! ;)
     
  13. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #14
    Shame on all of you....

    For responding to an idiotic rumor.

    Peter2002: The Itanium isn't a desktop chip, the 970 is. Intel's P5 is no less vaporware than the PPC 970, which has actually been tooled and proto'd.

    This article is based on 1 study of broad market trends which apply to Apple as much as broad weather trends apply to Antarctica.:rolleyes:

    "Analysis of 2002 tropical storms show huge statistical vacuum in Antarctica that guarantees being McMurdo being hit by a cat 5 hurricaine next year!":eek:
     
  14. FelixDerKater thread starter macrumors 68000

    FelixDerKater

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2002
    #15
    The X86 chips sold in Macs in the past were not the main CPU, but rather a PC compatibility card. So, no, Apple has never sold a computer with an X86 processor as the main chip. :)
     
  15. springscansing macrumors 6502a

    springscansing

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Location:
    New York
    #16
    Whatever.. why NOT go to Intel? Think about it.

    You'd have the exact same speeds as the competition, guaranteed. Neutral.

    BUT, you'd also have OS X, and great looking machines. If people see a ugly machine, and a beautiful one, same speed, they get the nicer one. Plus OS X is an easy sell over XP. They could target all advertising at this one thing.

    Plus, I'm not a programmer, but I'd assume running Intel chips would make porting programs MUCH easier. I might be wrong here, but I don't think I am... there would be a lot greater incentive to develop for mac, since it's not too much more work.

    Intel would mean much more mac software, same speed as the competition, better OS, better systems in general, etc.

    So... what's SO bad about intel? If IBM is faster, go IBM. But Intel would be great too!
     
  16. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #17
    Please think before posting.

    Actually, you WOULDN'T have OS X OR the pretty machines: The pretty machines are reliant on a much lower-heat chip than Pentium and re-doing OS X, regardless of x-Darwin would be a giant pain in the ass. It would be vastly easier to go with the IBM PPC 970 and/or Moto PPC 7457 that rewrite and retool everything from the ground up.

    Intel would NOT mean more software as OS X isn't Windoze, which is way more pivotal to the software issue than which processor.

    You're basically saying that if Pigs could fly we could all have fried pork wings and wouldn't that just be peachy.:rolleyes: Because of course, not being a genetic scientist it would make all that cooking stuff so much easier. If this was a face to face I'd slap you. :p
     
  17. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #18
    Never said CPU, said installed in a Mac...

    Up to that point it was a self-install. :p

    So technically, Apple has sold Wintel machines before.
     
  18. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #19
    Remember, you asked for it...

    While all the old arguments, as to why it's bad to embrace the Wintel world still stand, it would be like embracing OS/2s fate.

    If you're just another compatible machine/OS, why bother writing for the other machine/OS.
     

    Attached Files:

  19. iJon macrumors 604

    iJon

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    #20
    I would rather be with my competition than fastly falling behind it.

    iJon
     
  20. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #21
    Ah.... if only it were that simple....

    Okay, listen up all you newbies:

    <Flame on>

    APPLE SWITCHING TO INTEL OR ANY OTHER X86 CHIP WOULD BE A TREMENDOUS WASTE OF RESOURCES AND WOULD ONLY CONTRIBUTE TO FALLING FURTHER BEHIND.

    IF IT WERE AS SIMPLE AS JUST POPPING IN AN ATHLON APPLE WOULD HAVE A DIFFERENT PROCESSOR EVERY YEAR.

    IN ORDER TO TRANSFER TO X86 APPLE WOULD HAVE TO RECOMPILE ALL THE CODE IN OS X ABOVE DARWIN AND REDESIGN ALL THE HARDWARE FROM SCRATCH.

    UNLESS YOU REALLY WANT AN APPLE LOGO ON A PC CLONE I SUGGEST YOU THINK SIGNIFICANTLY MORE ABOUT THE IDEA YOU ARE PROPOSING BEFORE SUGGESTING IT LIKE AN IDIOT.

    <Flame off>

    Now admittedly all of us have posted some very stupid things from time to time but when you don't really know, I suggest you research or make your comment in the form of a question so we can debate viability rather than roasting you like marshmallows.;)
     
  21. iJon macrumors 604

    iJon

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    #22
    Yeah i know man. I would hate apple you go to intel. im just saying apple is behind in the speed business. although it really doesnt matter to me because i dont buy a comptuer for its speed, but for what it can do.

    iJon
     
  22. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #23
    Re: Please think before posting.

    Moving Mac OS X to Intel/AMD would not be that difficult because it was written with portability in mind. Moving some of the applications, which might not be so carefully written, would probably not be.

    Certainly, there wouldn't be any more software just because they changed the main processor because Mac OS X isn't suddenly going to have a Windows compatibility layer.
     
  23. mac15 macrumors 68040

    mac15

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
    Location:
    Sydney
    #24
    They can port it in a week minimum, But It would kill Applehardware. not unless intel made a special apple only thing on a new non ppc format.
     
  24. mangoduck macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2002
    Location:
    lost at sea
    #25
    the second comment to that article is great: " Yep. It's official. They're having snowball fights in hell. Honest. I have a giga report saying so."

    and why would they switch to x86 when they're going to have the ppc970 (or some variation thereof) at their disposal by that time?

    been said before, it would kill apple hardware. dead horse plz.
     

Share This Page