Y Apple will never release a x86 version of Mac OS X!

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by peter2002, Nov 18, 2002.

  1. peter2002 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2002
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    #1
    Because Apple would promptly go out of business.

    If Apple ported their Mac OS X to x86, it would be no time before hackers would reverse engineer and eliminate any hardware or software protection and make the free version available on KaZaA, iMesh, Gnutella, etc. Why buy a Mac when you download one for free? Only die hard fans would buy a new one.

    With the free warez version of Mac OS X, anybody could download and run any Mac OS X program using a dual boot partition program on a WIntel/AMD PC without having to buy a new or old Mac, and run OS X faster to boot with the new 3.06GHZ P4HT.

    It would open a huge pandora's box since most of the hacking is on the Windows side, not Mac. That's why baby.

    Going with the IBM 970 or praying for a killer G5 is their only hope.

    Peter :)
     
  2. edesignuk Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
    #2
    You have a valid point. In the windows world I can find you ANY application you want, wether or not finding it be a simple as a search on KaZaA or if you have to do a little hunting, it can always be found. The amount of WaReZ out there is amazing!
    Of course there is a little in the Mac world too, but on no where near the scale.
    Also your comments on downloading the OS, again very true.
    Just days after XP Pros release the corporate edition was already on KaZaA, then with the release of SP1 which you couldn't install onto the pirated corporate edition which had made its way around the entire world, there was a crack for the installation of SP1 on the corporate edition produced, it's insane!
     
  3. springscansing macrumors 6502a

    springscansing

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Location:
    New York
    #3
    I guess you haven't been on Carracho or Hotline lately. NONE of my friends payed for Jaguar.
     
  4. springscansing macrumors 6502a

    springscansing

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Location:
    New York
    #4
    Re: Y Apple will never release a x86 version of Mac OS X!

    There's always ways to built your own PPC box and run OS X on it. I don't see how this would be any different.
     
  5. sparkleytone macrumors 68020

    sparkleytone

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2001
    Location:
    Greensboro, NC
    #5
    building your own ppc box is nowhere near as cost effective as building an x86 box. thats why it would be so different.
     
  6. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #6
    Re: Y Apple will never release a x86 version of Mac OS X!

    then why doesn't microsoft go out of business?...they are hacked and they are pirated everywhere...while windows does have security features, they are hard for the average user to set up

    apple may not ever have a commercial os x for wintel, but that does not mean they should forever keep that option closed

    this high tech field changes so fast that few have been able to accurately predict its direction and one can never say never
     
  7. Wash!! macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2002
    Location:
    here, there, who knows
    #7
    Apple is not going X86

    X86 is a dead chip!!! get it already.

    They can do now if they wanted, the code is already inside jaguar all they have to do is turn it on.

    They are waiting for a better chip from IBM and forget Moto they are done for.

    my two cents.
     
  8. mac15 macrumors 68040

    mac15

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
    Location:
    Sydney
    #8
    I can't belive people say, there will be no x86 macs, ofcourse there will be, IBM suck, AMD is good, and I have it on good authority that we will see x86 macs, and they are so much faster than the PPC, so nyeh
     
  9. Nipsy macrumors 65816

    Nipsy

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2002
    #9
    Regardless of whether OSX will go x86, how can you say IBM sucks, and AMD is good.

    AMD is the bastard stepchild of the processor world. Fast, usable, but not as trusted or trustworthy as either IBM or Intel chips.

    Aside from that, the IBM Power4 is king of the chip mountain right now, and the IBM Power5 will likely be king of the chip mountian next year.

    Meanwhile AMD is building really fast chips for k!113r g@m!ng d00dz, and has pushed their corporate chip back again...will we ever see the HamOpteron?

    AMDs are great chips for homebuilt systems, cost cutting, etc., but they certainly cannot compete with IBM, Intel, Moto, or Sun for enterprise work, and may never do so if they can't get the HamOptimusPrime transformed from a dream into reality...
     
  10. mac15 macrumors 68040

    mac15

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
    Location:
    Sydney
    #10
    I can asure you know, IBM will not be king, AMD will rule in a year or 2.
     
  11. Nipsy macrumors 65816

    Nipsy

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2002
    #11
    In 2 years, AMD may have made some inroads into business servers, perhaps a supercomputer or 2...if they ever finish their chip, and surive their financial woes.

    And don't forget that AMD is maintaining IA32 in their 64 bit chip...

    The Power4 of today beats the HamOptithingy of tomorrow in all your spec benchmarks, and I'm sure things will stay that way.

    In 2 years, Power5's will have better TPM, vastly greater installed base, etc.

    AMD is untrusted in the enterprise because they don't have history (just like the Xserve), so even if they can intro a great product, it will take 2 years for them to begin building real trust.

    Power, Xeon, UltraSparc, PA-RISC, etc. are trusted enterprise soultions. Itanium 2 will have to work hard to recover from the failures of Itanium 1, but Intel's marketing budget is probably bigger than AMDs R & D budget.

    Not that I think AMD entering into enterprise computing is a bad thing, it will just be a long and hard road for them, and they certainly need to think about the cheapo server market served by Xeon/Itanium Dells, HPs, Compaqs, etc. before they try to take on the heavy iron of IBM, Sun, Fujitsu/Seimens, or HP.
     
  12. mac15 macrumors 68040

    mac15

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
    Location:
    Sydney
    #12
    I'm not allowed to say anything, but yeah AMD and Apple, you will be so suprised :D
     
  13. Nipsy macrumors 65816

    Nipsy

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2002
    #13
    If (big if) AMD does partner with Apple, I pray I am still able to get a 970 (or two) in a pro machine...
     
  14. mads macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2002
    #14
    Wouldn't OS X on an x86 be very unstable?

    Now Apple can fine tune the software to go with the hardware. If X is released for x86 so it would run on almost all hardware, Apple could not do this anymore.

    I think it would be a better idea to partner with AMD or IBM (if they haven't already) to make the G5.
     
  15. MacAficionado macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2002
    Location:
    An awesome place
    #15
    Again, why is it impossilble for AMD to build a PowerPC chip?
    I know they don't build them right now, but couldn't they just expand and move into the PPC market. It doesn't sound too far fetched to me!

    We can just hope! We all know the PPC needs some help, maybe AMD could provide it.
     
  16. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #16
    and the best value for performance on the market today:D
     
  17. mac15 macrumors 68040

    mac15

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
    Location:
    Sydney
    #17
    I have no probelm with either of the 4 Chip makers, they are all good

    but they have a few flaws is all

    IBM: to slow on bringin new chips out
    Motorola : to slow on bringin new chips out
    Intel : M$ run them basically
    AMD : Not as fast as intel with their updates, but is the best choice for apple
     
  18. al256 macrumors 6502a

    al256

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2001
    #18
    That's a GREAT way to support Apple!!!
     
  19. MacAztec macrumors 68040

    MacAztec

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2001
    Location:
    San Luis Obispo, CA
    #19
    Ok

    We ALL know Apple wouldnt make OS X for the PC, but how about AMD making PPC Chips for the mac? Thats what im talkin about....:cool:
     
  20. mac15 macrumors 68040

    mac15

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
    Location:
    Sydney
    #20
    Re: Ok

    This is how it gonna happen

    AMD making x86 chips for the mac, and they are mac controlled, so you can only run OSX or whatever apple has on it.

    The PPC hasn't got much long to go.
     
  21. alset macrumors 65816

    alset

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2002
    Location:
    East Bay, CA
    #21
    Re: Re: Y Apple will never release a x86 version of Mac OS X!

    MS can stay in business because they control Office. That will keep MS alive, even after you cut off it's head and run a stake through it's heart.

    Think about it... how many large corporations are willing to install pirated software on every machine they have? Pirating is more of a user issue. Employees might load up software they pirated, but the administration is not likely to take the chance on an entire network.

    Dan
     
  22. MacAztec macrumors 68040

    MacAztec

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2001
    Location:
    San Luis Obispo, CA
    #22
    Re: Re: Ok

    Exactly. I was thinking this, OR AMD making PPC chips FOR Apple.
     
  23. jefhatfield Retired

    jefhatfield

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2000
    #23
    Re: Re: Re: Ok

    it might be hard, but AMD is in the business of making chips and doing it for a better price than anybody else

    and we can't rule out intel on making ppc chips

    apple is such a tiny microcosm in silicon valley and high tech that it seems unlikely apple will have more of a choice than motorola and ibm

    as long as apple continues producing good machines and keeps their four-five percent share happy, they will keep making a profit, although small...but stable

    that's where the bmw analogies make sense...we know that bmw will never sell as many vehicles as a major japanese or american maker, but they will have a steady stream of customers who want somehting with that little extra quality

    a lot of the specialty car companies like lambroghini, volvo, and jaguar are owned by more common, but larger/richer car companies

    so even if apple became a division of dell or microsoft one day, the mac users of the world would demand that the quality stay high...even if that meant higher prices

    sometimes it would be nice if the two steves owned apple, but apple is owned by the shareholders and it is always ultimately them who speak with their money
     
  24. springscansing macrumors 6502a

    springscansing

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2002
    Location:
    New York
    #24
    Notice I didn't say that pirating Jaguar was a good thing... I own it.
     
  25. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #25
    Re: Re: Ok

    Mmmm hmmm. And what's going to happen in six years when AMD finally goes belly-up? Is Apple going to get IBM to continue production of this bastard x86 processor of AMD's?

    AMD is a joke. Anyone advocating a switch to this tech needs to get a life.
    AMD hasn't got the manufacturing capability. They're barely able to compete in an economy of scale with Intel as it is. They don't need their resources to become even more strained by manufacturing processors for a company that, like jefhatfield said, is a mere microcosm in Silicon Valley.
    Perhaps this comment alone is the true indicator of your complete cluelessness.

    You speak as if "bringin new chips out" is like baking cookies or something - just finding the right ingredients in the right proportions and mixing them together and baking them and voila. It's a HUGE undertaking that requires MANY MONTHS of time and hundreds of millions of dollars in expenditures. If you think IBM is taking a long time with the 970, imagine how long AMD would take bringing out the same chip (in its plant which doesn't even have the technology to build them). Can you say 2008?

    "M$" does not run Intel any more than Intel runs MS. Like them or not, the relationship between Intel and MS has been full of friction for quite a while. Intel is a fan of Linux and MS has no other choice as to whose processors to run on.
     

Share This Page