The Apple/Intel political thread

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Thomas Veil, Jun 6, 2005.

  1. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #1
    As you've probably heard, Apple is reportedly going to announce that they are moving to Intel chips today (Monday).

    Damn that Bush and those Republicans! This is all their fault!









    ;)
     
  2. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #2
    I blame the Marklar crew, with their shadow government and their secret agenda.
     
  3. jelloshotsrule macrumors G3

    jelloshotsrule

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Location:
    serendipity
    #3
    can we give a codename with a sexual connotation (i suggest "emeril") to the person who leaked the story to the press????
     
  4. Thomas Veil thread starter macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #4
    It was a woman. Her code name was Silicone Valley.
     
  5. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #5
    To hijack this thread and steer it on a real topic (and since any comments I make up top will be buried within that 1000+ post monster thread), I plan on buying a G5 iMac soon.

    I was leaning towards a middle-of-the-road G5 PM, but with the iMac having 128MB on the video card now, and at that price, I think I'll pick one up to bridge the gap to the Intel era.

    I will echo others' sentiments that hope the gaudy "Intel Inside" logo doesn't appear outside the new Macs and that Apple TV ads will be exempt from having to play the Intel trademark chime.

    I will also point out that the current roadmap for the Pentium line doesn't have a chip that can match the FSB speed of the 2GHz G5, and can't come close to the 1.35Ghz FSB speed of the 2.7GHz G5.
     
  6. Thomas Veil thread starter macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #6
    You're no fun. [​IMG]

    Though I agree with your points. :D
     
  7. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #7
    hey well at least you didn't just switched(more "added") to a mac mini just 3 months with thinking about finally leaving the old x86 design behind ... i 'knew' the day i got it that with my luck apple gonna switch to x86 and microsoft to powerpc within a year

    oh well, i thought about reading about about development in cocoa for mac during my sommer and trying to program a few small testprogramms .. looks like the amount to read icnreased a lot thanks to this ;).. heck according to the .pdfs there won't be openfirmware but perhaps something new and completly different and somewhere even something with different disk partiitions is written there

    looks like i will skip any altivec stuff since the rosetta thing doesn't work with that either...


    depends while i'm against hose intel stickers directly o nthe machien itself i would have no problem with a intel sticker on the package (perhaps on the side or bottom ;) )
    and for commercials i would use all the brand recognition i could get
    while perhaps not as nice for current mac users (;)) a lot of other people might find it more interesting

    and none knows how the intel chips will be called anyways
    perhaps they are somehow custom and could jsutify another name like G6 ;) or perhaps Pentium 5 mac edition etc.

    at least i hope that they will be _all_ based on the pentium m and not the P4 (didn't intel say that their next generation will be based onthose Ms ?)

    looks like i'm gonna jump a generation of chips completly and go straighgt to intel chips thenand i really hope they get even more affordable ;)
     
  8. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #8
    I was a little curious about the FSB issue myself. My understanding was that that was one of the real big advantages to IBM's chip architecture. Also, does this mean we're moving from RISC to CISC?

    I'm very ambivalent about the whole thing.
     
  9. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #9
    well it has been some time since Powerpc has been a RISC (the r is for reduced but a modern power pc like the G4 or G5 have way lot more instructions than a classical RISC design...)

    i think there was a risc once with roughly 25-30 isntructions and power pc of today has easily more than 200 i tink just like pentium (who even has more)

    i doubt that the front side bus gonna play big role like it used to ...

    lack of power of the cpu is not the thing i'm worried about with the switch to intel.. mroel ike energy consumption and heat ... but intel learned alot from their errors with the P4 and ae going to do something against it (and i hope the patchwork of the x86 architecture won't hinder software developers much)
     
  10. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #10
    Speaking of the "politics of computers," my beloved LA Times ran this cliché-ridden story on the switch to Intel in today's paper. Clichés highlighted for those who might have a difficult time spotting them...

    http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-apple7jun07,1,3556212.story
     
  11. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #11
    Flip Side -- from the Windows users side.

    Steve Jobs sold out to the PC world and made Apple the most exciting new PC maker.

    Sucks for us, but is great for the above average Windows buyer that has been drooling over the PowerBook and iBook but couldn't afford the switch.

    That is if Apple doesn't sell out on quality, to capture sales based on price. :(
     
  12. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #12
    i never talked about apple _not_ being part of the PC world so far ;) depends of point of view

    haha count me in for a Powermac 2,5+ years from now when it's time to upgrade , no matter what ... next time i'm gonna get a big tower again ..well at least i hope so ... must resist drooling ... (i really hope they can keep a G5 powermac like exterior design )
     
  13. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #13
    Please see the Intel Q&A thread in the OS X section to dispell some of these assumptions.

    My question is this: How long will it take Sonnet to build a Pentium slot for existing PowerMac designs? :rolleyes: ;) :D :cool:
     
  14. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #14
    You forgot one...

    [OS X] which is widely viewed as more stable
    ;)

    And what are they talking about, saying Apples share dropped with the introduction of OS 9? They forgot to add the one.
     
  15. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #15
    Given the development time that Apple and Intel have had, I am curious about may have been developed jointly between Apple and Intel.

    Apple is just not abruptly making the jump, so it makes me wonder whether or not they have been working with Intel to improve on certain technical aspects that will put Apple ahead of most computer makers who use Intel chips.

    With IBM floundering in their chip development, I don't know what else they could have done. What would have happened if it too the next major PB upgrade 3 - 5 years due to restrictions caused by heat? Even the most loyal of users would be frustrated at that point.

    I just don't think it will be Intel as usual when they are used in an Apple.

    And why not AMD?
     
  16. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #16
    I think you might have answered your own question. AMD doesn't have the resources to move things forward for Apple like Intel does.

    The politics of this thing are fascinating. Within the same month we have Microsoft jumping to IBM and Apple jumping to Intel, two things nobody would have seriously predicted a year ago. In a way, IBM working closely with Microsoft again is the most interesting. Considering how badly IBM was shafted by Bill Gates back in the early '90s, you'd think they'd have no appetite for another go-round with with a guy who will back-stab most of his partners sooner or later. It's amazing, really.
     
  17. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #17
    I think we'll see exactly what we saw with IBM: A "consumerized" version of one of their most painfully powerful chips. I could see a mass-production designed derivative of Xeon (Itanium?) or perhaps the first-to-market with their 64 bit architecture.

    No matter how you slice it there's a plethora of technologies Intel hasn't been able to sell to the standard manufacturers who are so focussed on lowballing each other that they don't implement the more interesting features offered. Apple has a perfect opportunity to pull the market along technologically by beig first to market with some Intel features that you just can't find all together in one stock (read: debugged) box.

    I think it's accurate to guess that Apple has been talking to Intel under the table since they bought Next. It's only a short drive between campuses and there's lots of nice restaurants in between. ;)
     
  18. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #18
    After looking briefly at the lineup these two chips seem most likely for the PowerMacs.

    Dual Processor, Dual-core @ 3+ GHZ with an .8Ghz to 1.066Ghz FSB, Hyperthreading, potential for Hypertransport via ASIC, DDR2 support on the CPU, Quad Channel PCI-Extreme via Intel's board control sets.

    Hummuna. This could be a lot of fun to watch. :eek:
     
  19. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #19
    and now... my favorite bit of retardation from the press:
     
  20. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #20
    That's a pretty good one, but did you miss this from the article above?

    He can probably also imagine himself as Napoleon.
     
  21. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #21
    Nope, this one was definitely a Democratic induced mess, they did after all stick Al Gore on the board a couple years ago.
     
  22. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #22
    Are you saying macs can connect to the recently-invented internet now??? :eek:
    :p
     
  23. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #23
    you laugh, but my mom's neighbors opted for a PC instead of a mac because the DSL salesperson told them it would work only with a PC.
     
  24. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #24
    I know it's a common misconception. Stupid is as stupid does....
     
  25. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #25
    It's even more a matter of laziness, IMO. The guy on the phone only knows how to set somebody up with Windows, so instead of turning the page or asking somebody he just says it isn't possible.
     

Share This Page