1. Welcome to the new MacRumors forums. See our announcement and read our FAQ

Will Apple Push "Intel Inside"?

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Dec 16, 2005.

  1. macrumors bot

  2. macrumors 65816


    don't really care

    I really don't care if they "push" 'Intel inside'. in the past I did make comments that I didn't want a sticker on my mac unless it was on the back. However, now I find myself not caring. If Intel gives Apple some special deal and can help keep costs down for us then I can remove the sticker.

    at first I hated the idea of "Intel inside" now I don't care if the processor is IBM or Freescale or AMD or _____ as long as it runs like a champ!

    (I know the article isn't just referrinhg to stickers, I'm mostly using that as an easy example to give.)
  3. macrumors G5


    Of course Apple will push "Intel inside." (Or "Intel Core Duo," or "Viiv," or whatever.) The Intel connection has value to them, especially for switchers--and it's not like Apple could hide or downplay the fact that they've gone Intel, even if they wanted to :)

    I don't expect garish stickers on PowerBooks, but some kind of marking someplace on the machine is likely. And on Apple ads? For sure. And the home page of Apple.com. Steel yourself :p

    "Hard to imagine?" The hard to imagine part is Apple going Intel at all. And that's old news.

    Relating to cost: if Intel will help pay for my next Mac, then they can have their sticker and I will scrape it off in .02 seconds. But I can believe Intel would cut special deals with Apple anyway: they have wanted Apple for a long time, AND they know that physical styling is part of Apple's appeal. They may very well accept that their publicity from the Apple deal will come in OTHER ways besides stickers. And I'm sure Intel will get plenty of valuable publicity to keep them happy.
  4. Guest


    They better ****ing not.
  5. macrumors 68020


    I read somewhere that the answer is yes. That the agency working on the new television spot was Chiat/Day (I suppose anyone could have guessed that though). Anyways, it wouldn't bother me. I'm looking forward to Intel Inside my Mac. Free advertising if they do. How could Apple pass that up?
  6. macrumors 65816


    I'm with you there, though I'm not a whining "waahhh I want PPC, Apple promised" (you nothing) type, if Intel can lead Apple to the promised land (better marketshare/acceptance in business/more dominance/self evident better buy than Windoze machines) BRING IT ON! Just don't put that stupid logo on the case.

    The question is begged though, what will Apple call the new machine... G6? G4.5? Guesses?
  7. macrumors 601

    I certainly hope not, but I expect that they will anyway. I still think that in the long run Apple is going to be sorry that they ever thought they could deal successfully Intel. I think that ultimately it will turn Apple into just another commodity vendor like everybody else (but then again, that appears to be where Apple is headed anyway), but I currently have 3 Macs (2 iMacs and a Mini) all running PPC, so I am set for the forseeable furture anyway.
  8. macrumors G5


    I think the PowerBook will be called just PowerBook, or PowerBook D (for dual or Duo).

    iBook will be just iBook and Mac Mini will be just Mac Mini. And some models may have other names after them, in the style of iPod Nano, that don't have to do with the CPU.

    PowerMac will (eventually) become PowerMac D or Dual for dual-core Conroe, and PowerMac Quad for dual-dual.

    iMac G5 will be just iMac again, or iMac D.

    Purely guesses :)
  9. macrumors Core

    the naming scheme will be interesting...

    i dont care if they push intel or not. i just want to use OS X on great hardware. and no intel logos all over the place. i can stand a sticker or two. but no more!
  10. macrumors G5


    Just wondering, what chips would you choose instead of Intel's Yonah/Merom/Conroe/beyond, for the coming years of PowerBooks and Macs?

    Apple already knows they can't deal successfully with Freescale and IBM. Laptops especially have revealed that fact. At least Intel (and AMD--now a possibility) WANTS to make chips for personal computers. IBM and Freescale's profits lie with other devices, like game consoles and embedded CPUs. It would have been awesome if IBM and Freescale had generations of affordable, power-efficient, mobile-ready, high-speed PowerPCs ready to deliver and in sufficient quantities. But unfortunately they don't. The bright side: Apple had a backup plan ready just in case!
  11. macrumors 68020


    The supposed Chiat/Day spot that I referred to was for a PowerBook Duo. Has a nice ring to it ;)
  12. macrumors 601

    I don't have an answer to that question, but if Apple thinks that they will get favorable pricing and product engineering from Intel (and apparently that is what Steve Jobs thinks, at least publicly), I think that they are very much mistaken. Intel will always have much bigger customers and much more important projects to consume their time, and Apple will have to make do with whatever Intel feeds them. They will now be a much smaller fish in a much larger sea.
  13. macrumors 68000

    I second that. Intel inside... pah

    How many fscking times do I have to type this! It will never be called "G". That refers to Generation Of PowerPC. Also (far as I remember), they would have to ask the permission of IBM, Motorolla and Freescale
  14. macrumors G5


    I suspect that Apple already HAD answers from Intel on both engineering and pricing, before making their decision.

    You seem to be assuming Intel is not interested in Apple. That's not actually true:

    * Apple's not THE biggest PC maker, but they are one of the biggest, and one of very few profitable ones, and their sales are growing.

    * Intel has been very open--even BEFORE Apple's decision--about wanting to make Apple a customer.

    * Apple's a much more exciting, high-profile partner than other PC makers. Great PR, great mindshare for Intel.

    * Apple's not bound to Microsoft--and that means Apple can adopt Intel technologies freely. Intel can innovate faster if they have a big, non-Windows customer to be an early adopter. Intel WANTS to be more free of Microsoft.

    In addition, if Intel lets Apple down (like IBM and Freescale already have), Apple still has a second potential supplier: AMD. They need not be tied to Intel forever if it's not worthwhile.

    Best of all, even if Intel is late on some chips (it WILL happen sometimes), at least now Apple's competitors will be in the same boat.

    Lastly, even if the Intel change isn't "perfect"--that's life, and that's business. Sometimes there IS no perfect option--you have to choose the BEST option. Would you agree that there are no better options for Apple? If so, then Apple has chosen the best one.
  15. macrumors P6


    Not sure how I feel about this.

    On the one hand, it might not be a bad idea for Apple to promote this, as it will help bring recognition of the switch and so forth to the PC world, who they are trying to steal market share away from. If you've made this huge transition to Intel which could revolutionize your company, might as well make everyone know about it!

    On the other hand, I don't want an "Intel Inside" sticker on my beautiful Mac. :p :cool:
  16. macrumors G5


    I agree, I tend to think Apple won't use a "G" because Apple will want the name to be a nod to the change. However, they COULD use a G number without permission from IBM or Freescale. The G names are entirely Apple's, and Apple could use the G in any way they wish to. No IBM or Freescale products use that name. (For instance, Apple could ship a PowerMac G6 with Conroe and say that the G6 means it's the sixth generation of PowerMac, or the 6th generation after 68000... or that it means nothing at all except for being newer than G5. Likewise with "PowerMac"--once upon a time it was a reference to PowerPC, but it's Apple's name to use as they wish--it can just mean "power." PowerBook, for example, did NOT mean PowerPC to begin with.)
  17. macrumors demi-god


    I could live with seeing the Intel logo on print and TV advertisements. But I don't want to see one on my computer -- if necessary, hide it on the bottom/in the back with the serial number.
  18. macrumors P6


    You are incorrect. The "G" moniker is actually Apple's "marketing name" for the processor and has nothing to do with IBM/Moto/Freescale. IBM sold Apple the PPC970, what Apple decides to brand it as is up to them. So yes, Apple could indeed use the "G" again, however to better differentiate these new Intel machines form the PPC machines, I agree with nagromme, and assume they would want to go with something different. :cool:
  19. macrumors 603


    Yah I want a big *** Intel Inside logo laser etched onto the top of my PowerBook's lid and instead of a glowing Apple the etching will glow and pulse an eery blue.

    *dives into his bunker before any Macrumor’s residents have a chance to beat him senseless* ;) :D
  20. macrumors 603


    PS- No I don't. Apple isn't about pimping their internal components. I expect ads, I expect in store flyers, I expect everything other then a sticker. Jobs is anal enough that he would NEVER allow any stickers on a PowerBook or iBook. It’s just not how he does things.
  21. Moderator


    Staff Member

    Please jebus, no stickers.
  22. macrumors P6


    Props on the Family Guy reference... :cool:
  23. macrumors 603


    The iBooks do come with stickers showing you how to eject the CD iirc. :p
  24. macrumors 603



    Psst....Shard...Its from the Simpsons. :cool:
  25. macrumors 603



    Really? Huh. Where? Trip to the Apple store this weekend me thinks. I guess I spend more of my time at the Pro section. :p :eek:

Share This Page