AMD and Apple Rumors Part II

[iShater]

Well, AMD's chips currently sell fairly cheep compared to Intel, and I believe their profit margins are low. I am totally guessing here, but wouldn't producing PPC chips for a customer like Apple actually bring them more money? no real competition (MOT 🙄 ).

Also, I thought they had some fancy fab facility in Dresden, Germany.

Personally, I would love to have AMD or ANYBODY get into the PPC market and start cranking out some more chips to
1) help improve performance
2) include newer technologies on the logic boards
3) drive prices down
4) force innovation

aaaaaaaaaaahhhh ... we can dream ... 😀

 

[utilizer]

If they don't make the switch...

I hate to say it, but if Apple doesn't make the switch, I'll make it for them by switching to AMD myself. Probably Linux but I wouldn't rule out XP totally. Look, lets be serious here -- 3.06 Ghz RIGHT NOW, compared to TWO 1.25 Ghzs and STILL can't top anything even with the shorter pipelines; I've heard it all before. Puh-leez.
And you're telling me 1.7 Ghz by January of 2004?! Are you out of your mind Apple?! By that time Intel should be up to 4.5 Ghz and AMD will be at about 3.2 Ghz roughly, slaughtering Apple in speed comparsions. Hell, they do that now! And that 7457 G4 (I can't believe we're still using these G4s) to be unveiled at MWSF won't be the knight in shinning armor everybody is purporting it to be.
These AMD rumors are real and have substence. The question is is Apple going to fire the gun that they have cocked?
They better, or else more will switch. Software optimization only can go so far and if it means I have to leave Final Cut Pro for Adobe's Premiere then so be it. At least it'll be leaps and bounds faster than the overpriced hardware they're offering us right now. I love the Mac platform but the only thing that I can justify using it for in the near term with the current offerings of hardware is an Internet surfing machine to organize things like word processing, Excel stuff, accounting and e-mail. Everything else that I have been using it for (Photoshop, FCP, Flash, GoLive, Maya, Lightwave and Bryce) have been recently left in the dust for quite sometime, most notably by some 2.8 Ghz Dells we have at work. And yes, the G4s do beat out the Dells sometimes in Photoshop running consecutive filters but who does that?! No, you wait and apply filters one at a time to evaluate whether it looks good or not, then you move on.
So I may not upgrade my Pismo; this just might be my last Mac. I need to see some solid evidence soon since rendering times are precious and the amount of money we spend on Macs aren't backed up by their claims. Hype and no action I'm sorry to say. 🙁

 

[scem0]

Is apple trying to make Moto, AMD, and IBM all compete against each other, and
therefore make faster processors cheaper, and therefore make
all our lives happier? I hope so 😀

 

[bluecell]

The PowerPC DOESN'T WORK IN APPLE'S FAVOR ANYMORE!!! They absolutely have to make the move to AMD. Their x86-64 processor is amazing and it would be a mistake to pass it up.

Doesn't anyone realize that Apple only holds 5% of the market? The processor speeds in the PC world ARE killing Apple's sales. The transition for developers wouldn't be difficult. Apple really needs to have options with the directions that they appear to be taking. AMD can help provide those options, IBM and Moto cannot.

Rumor has it that Moto's selling off most of their semiconductor unit and IBM is taking their own directions. This will be a great change for everyone.

🙂

 

[Xtreme]

Easier To Understand Translation (???)

Hopefully this might clear things up ...

*******************************
I have yet again recieved rumors which you will like. Quite obviously they are from an anonymous source, But he/she has an excellent reliability.

- Apple will migrate to a 64bit CPU in the coming months.

- The processor will probably come from AMD rather than IBM, the former having a much greater production capacity.

- It's worth noting that as far as the PC platform is concerned, a mass market AMD made 64bit CPU is almost ready. It also has the advantage of being backwards compatible with 32bit software.

- So will it be an AMD x86 or PPC processor that will end up a MAC ?

- On a final note, Autodesk and Lotus Server are currently developing their software for MacOS X.

[Here is the message I recieved]

So, the rumors that involved AMD are not true. I came back from COMDEX, and i spoke to somone who is very familiar to the long term strategies of AMD. He is an analyst who usually has to sign NDA's. I met up with him before the Hector Ruiz (AMD's CEO) keynote speech.

I asked him "What will Hector end up saying ?" He replied, "There's a rumor that he will make a big announcment about an association with another company"

I personally never believed these rumors, and after this I am convinced that it's just a fantasy that lives in the spirits of ignorant people.
*******************************

 

[nigel_t]

this processor thing

The thing about this whole CPU thing is that although IBM may have said they promise some muscle for apple, Apple themselves have not said a word about the whole thing so I don't see why people are saying PPC or AMD or what ever, just wait and see, They(APPLE) are auctioning off evrything next month so there must be some stuff coming.
So chill out dudes.
😀

 

[skunk]

Anyone notice the interesting LaCie 500GB drive on the same page at MacBidouille? That's what I call back-up!

 

[G4scott]

Apple likes to keep things secret. It adds to the 'aura' or Apple. Besides, it makes rumor sites like this popular. Do you see any windowsrumors.com or intelrumors.com websites? I don't think so...

I just want to have one thing clarified...

If Apple were to switch to an x86 platform, would it require a recompile of just the OS, or of every Mac application out there? I thought that with Cocoa, the apps would be able to run on OSX regardless of the platform its running on...

 

[hobie]

Is recompilation really necessary?!?

Even if Apple was to jump on x86, do OS X apps really need to be recompiled? Yes, AltiVec is implemented now, but then again, no iBook can make use of it (G3), and they still run quite smooth.
Now from my point of view, all what has to be done is to optimize OS X for x86 as a base, and all recent X apps will run on it. Take Linux: it runs on PPC AND x86, just a few kernel changes have to be made, but do the apps have to be recompiled?!? So far not, everything that runs on Linux, runs on either platform, without changes and such stuff!

And what is the issue with a OS X port to x86? Do you guys really think this would break Apple's neck? I'd rather say it'll help to gain market-share. I know a lot of guys who search for alternatives for Windows without spending a fortune or fuzzling around with Linux. When Longhorn comes out with all it's digital rights management stuff and so on, even more users will get rid of M$. Now image Apple is in place then and offers a sleek, clear and highly usable OS, without useability restrictions, just to put it on the old beige boxes... Doesn't sound bad to me.

And to all those guys who mentioned low production capacities at AMD:
They indeed have a reasonable new factory in Germany, just waiting to max out production! There still are capacities left...
And since AMD has to cope with stability problems due to VIA platform chips, I bet they are keen to prove their processor stability by putting them onto Mac platforms.

just my 2 cents

 

[hobie]

Originally posted by G4scott


I just want to have one thing clarified...

If Apple were to switch to an x86 platform, would it require a recompile of just the OS, or of every Mac application out there? I thought that with Cocoa, the apps would be able to run on OSX regardless of the platform its running on...

My saying...

 

[eric_n_dfw]

Re: Is recompilation really necessary?!?

Originally posted by hobie
ETake Linux: it runs on PPC AND x86, just a few kernel changes have to be made, but do the apps have to be recompiled?!? So far not, everything that runs on Linux, runs on either platform, without changes and such stuff!

You are very wrong.

There's a LOT of x86 only linux software out there. This is why there are always separate downloads for x86 and PPC linux. It can take a fair bit of work for a large, x86 package to be ported to PPC. Don't believe me? Try downloading even the source code to an x86 Linux app and try building it on Yellow Dog (PPC) linux. Unless someone has added PPC support, it will not work 90% of the time.

 

[MisterMe]

Re: Is recompilation really necessary?!?

Originally posted by hobie
Even if Apple was to jump on x86, do OS X apps really need to be recompiled? Yes, AltiVec is implemented now, but then again, no iBook can make use of it (G3), and they still run quite smooth.
Now from my point of view, all what has to be done is to optimize OS X for x86 as a base, and all recent X apps will run on it. Take Linux: it runs on PPC AND x86, just a few kernel changes have to be made, but do the apps have to be recompiled?!? So far not, everything that runs on Linux, runs on either platform, without changes and such stuff!

And what is the issue with a OS X port to x86? Do you guys really think this would break Apple's neck? I'd rather say it'll help to gain market-share. I know a lot of guys who search for alternatives for Windows without spending a fortune or fuzzling around with Linux. When Longhorn comes out with all it's digital rights management stuff and so on, even more users will get rid of M$. Now image Apple is in place then and offers a sleek, clear and highly usable OS, without useability restrictions, just to put it on the old beige boxes... Doesn't sound bad to me.

And to all those guys who mentioned low production capacities at AMD:
They indeed have a reasonable new factory in Germany, just waiting to max out production! There still are capacities left...
And since AMD has to cope with stability problems due to VIA platform chips, I bet they are keen to prove their processor stability by putting them onto Mac platforms.

just my 2 cents

Linux does not run the same binaries of PPC as it does on Intel. They are different. A UNIX or Linux software vendor may distribute its application as either source code or a make file which is then compiled as binary on the target system. Most UNIX/Linux software is distributed this way, but it is novel in the personal computer industry.

 

[DakotaGuy]

Is this whole x86 rumor going to turn into an iWalk rumor? I am already getting tired of hearing about this everyday, but nobody really knows anything about it. For all we know, AMD and Apple might not be anything.

 

[bbyrdhouse]

Apple, AMD, and an APPLE PDA

Well, I think it is pretty obvious that Apple needs to do something to fill in the speed gap. I know that MGHTZ isnt everything, but if Apple is trying to increase it's market share they are going to have to understand that when the average user walks into a CompUSA and goes to look at all the "pretty" macs and then strolls over to the PC side of the store and sees a Processor 2 or 3 times faster than the mac and cheaper to boot. The average user says "hey I can do without all the good looks"
I am saying it IS a problem!

A move to AMD only makes sense, but as one reader stated erlier that it's not about good sense it's about Steve Jobs. Personally I think he relishes being the "underdog" the "few, the proud, the Mac owners" and I think he wants to keep it that way. I dont think he has ANY intention of filling in the "speed gap".

Now for other news. Apple will come out with some sort of PDA! Mark it down! Thats what the iCal is all about

 

[lelereb]

My brother has a Compaq laptop with a P4 1.4 ghz... it doesn't impress me so mutch... it's not so responsive... and has a battery life time of 2.5 hours.

I'm not sure x86 are so good processors, they are builded to declare a lot of mhz, 'couse mhz is the only think that normal people can understand of a processor, regardless of real speed.

My brother's previous laptop was a compaq with a PIII 1133 mhz, and was a bit faster than the actual one with the P4 1.4 ghz. Strange.

 

[GPTurismo]

Re: Re: Is recompilation really necessary?!?

Originally posted by eric_n_dfw

You are very wrong.

There's a LOT of x86 only linux software out there. This is why there are always separate downloads for x86 and PPC linux. It can take a fair bit of work for a large, x86 package to be ported to PPC. Don't believe me? Try downloading even the source code to an x86 Linux app and try building it on Yellow Dog (PPC) linux. Unless someone has added PPC support, it will not work 90% of the time.

Try using SuSE PPC bud...


As for this arguement.

PR wise, apple will shoot itself in the foot changing over to an x86 style system.

First, it's CISC, and the only place cisc is really great is in large database applications do to the slow steadiness of the system.

Second, the fight against the megahertz myth. If for the past 4 years they have fought it and say, OOPS, our mistake, you guys were right, they will loose a TON of respectability in the market by the industry and definately by the average consumer.

Third, Apple has tons of money invested in Altivec, they bet the farm on it, and to ditch it now, they would basically be conceding to wintel and saying "You guys are right"

Fourth, Altivec is an extended VMX, which is a risc only instruction set. Not going to see that on Intel's or AMD's CISC archetectures anytime soon

Fifth, AMD, even though I like their products, isn't highly innovative themselves. Basically everything they have built in the past 6 years has been vastly off of Intels R&D. When Intel had a major chip shortage, they had to go to AMD since they were the only ones that were capapable and willing to help them fabricate. THe big thing Intel had to do is allow AMD have access to all their RnD, and AMD has used all of that to develop all of their processors. AMD as an entity HEAVILY relies on others for their RnD, and that can be bad news in the long run. This is also one reason they don't want to leave x86 behind. Also not having to fund an extensive RnD department is one reason their costs are lower than anyone elses.

Sixth, Apple has already said they are supporting Hyper Transport, which is where all the AMD + Apple rumors started anyway. But Tons of companies are supporting hypertransport.

So personally, I think it's the hyper transport issue, and with the PPC970 supporting altivec, maybe it has something with either a) amd making the PPC chips earlier than IBM can, or something to do with the mobo's, maybe AMD is going to make UMA 2.0, or even with all the Digitial Lifestyle Devices, maybe amd is going to help apple build something sice their chips are usually cheaper.

I think this speculation is stupid, and uneccessary. Finally, if you are so damn concerned with megahertz and thing it matters, go ahead and jump ship. Your whining is old.

GPT

PS. Megahertz only matters to boys with small pee pees and have to compensate somehow 🙂

 

[agreenster]

Boy oh boy oh boy.

Its been a LONG time since I have seen such anger in the hearts of Mac loyalists.

I get the feeling that their anger has nothing to do with the rumor, but more to do with the fact that no one knows what approach Apple will take if they DO decide to switch to AMD.

Will OSX need only a recompile?

Will the software need adjusted to meet the new processor requirements?

Will Apple still luv us now that they have switched to the 'dark side' of processing? 🙄

Point is people--no one knows. Apple and AMD may really have a trick up their sleeve. Maybe they dont. But dont be so angry and confrontational to people who are simply opening their eyes up to the possibility.

Maybe, just maybe Apple engineers who have tons of credentials have already addressed all the problems we have mentioned (ya think?) and are solving them as we type.

Just wait and see--and if nothing pans out, so what? Just enjoy the fact that you know something is cooking at Apple, and (one way or another) we are all going to be in 64-bit hog heaven sometime soon.

 

[GPTurismo]

Originally posted by Abercrombieboy
Is this whole x86 rumor going to turn into an iWalk rumor? I am already getting tired of hearing about this everyday, but nobody really knows anything about it. For all we know, AMD and Apple might not be anything.

Amen to that

 

[agreenster]

Re: Re: Re: Is recompilation really necessary?!?

Originally posted by GPTurismo

PS. Megahertz only matters to boys with small pee pees and have to compensate somehow 🙂

Honestly sir, I could give two $hits about MhZ. But one thing I know for sure. My dual Xeon blows the doors off of a dual 1gHz G4.

Pick your Application. Photoshop, Premiere, Maya, Flash, DVD Playback, Cinema4D, the list goes on and on and on.

The Macintosh needs to speed up. Period. If Apple wants to continue to push themselves as a home multimedia computer, then they need to perform better than the competition.

I can see future Dell ads:

"Who wants to sit around Christmas afternoon waiting for my iMovie to Render? I switched to a Dell and could export my holiday home digital video in half the time. Hi, Im Ellen Feiss, and I saved Christmas!"

 

[Frobozz]

re: bluecell

"The truth is that IBM and Motorola have let Apple down in a big way."

No, only Motorola. IBM has been priducing high quality, high mhz, and high production yield G3's for years now. They could have been doing G4's, but didn't see the market. That's not letting Apple down, that a business decision that shouldn't have effected Apple if Motorola had kept up their end of the G4 deal.


"AMD will most likely be Apple's next move. If you don't think the rate of x86 development matters to Windows users who want to switch to Mac, you are very mistaken."

LOL. Oh yes, clearly!


"Considering MacOS X isn't even optimized for PPC, a switch to AMD's x86-64 looks pretty good."

Actually, it is. It's saturated with AltiVec code, but the core is platform independent.


"How exactly does it make marketing sense for Apple to stay with PPC?"

They will not move to x86. It's not going to happen.

1) Even if they _could_ countrol the hardware with an x86 box (they can't), they'd never do it. Easily hacked via software.

2) Too much consumer confusion. Apple is a simple OS/hardware strategy, and the OS X/OS 9 situation is already straining this considerably.

3) Their marketing is directly based on the AltiVec component of the PowerPC, which is a smaller marketing component of the "our chips are better" campaign. They CAN successfully argue a 1.0 GHz G4 is as fast as a 1.75 - 2.0 GHz P4. The problem they run in to is the fastest G4 will probably only be 1.4 GHz in January x 2 = 2.8 GHz. So, if you have a program optimized for dual processors you are close to a single processor 3.08 GHz P4 system. Dual P4's aren't as beneficial as dual G4's, so they are close--- but need to ramp up to probably 2.0 Ghz soon.

4) That would be admitting they lost. They won't do that. Mac OS has always been tied to the belief that efficient design is more important than anythign else. Even the 64 bit AMD hammer isn't an efficient design-- it consumes MASSIVE amounts of power and generates a lot of heat. That means you can't use it in a laptop and won't be able to for a LONG time.

5) The PowerPC architecture is an excellent laptop chip. Apple sells a lot of laptops and their laptop line is faster than anything in the PC world. Not so with their desktops.

6) They'd inevitably split their developers into two camps-- x86 and PPC. Another death blow.

 

[Clockwork]

Ohhh please!

At the moment Apple is selling computers like they haven't done in a long time. They are one of the few companies in the industry today that are NOT actually in a state of crisis. (Dell are doing exceptionally well, but they are scraping prices and are creating a false market wich will probably bounce back in their face). We have customers coming to us because they are looking for other options than Windows and they like the look and feel of the Macintosh computer. They don't care if intel have pumped their crippled x86 cpu's up to 3 ghz and included this thing called hyperthreading(OEM's ship hyperthreading as default off... hmmmm, I wonder why?) I can spend 20 minutes talking about the functions of OSX and when I come to the part where I'm about to talk about the cpu and architecture they want to know more on OSX. That's why Gateway got the cold shoulder for their Profile4 and Apple has recieved all those great reviews for their iMac line even though the Profile4 has a 2.8 ghz chip and the iMac is at 800. The point is that Apple is really not in such a hurry to get faster chips out. They can wait until MWNY for the IBM 970 to intro in the XServe and PowerMac line, because they are sitting on another goldmine. OSX and the iApp's. I'm a student and sell mac's part time at a Apple dealership. The rest of the day I spend shooting film and working in After Effects, FCP3, and DVD Studio Pro. It works like a charm on our dual ghz system's. The last two apps are the best in the business and they don't even exist for Wintel PC's, so when someone say that they would gladly trade away FCP to start working on a PC with Adobe Premiere just to get that extra mhz boost I don't know what to say except that you must have had some REALLY BIG problems with your Mac. Every company has it's downturn every once in a while, but It's not Apple's fault that we are getting lower clocked cpu's. Motorola needs to get the G4 to 0.13 micron to reduce heat and power usage + be able to clock the G4 at a higher frequency. 2003 shall be a very exciting year for those of us who are still sticking with the mac platform.

 

[Groovsonic]

Just to correct agreenster, it would be Janie Porsche that saved Christmas on her crappy dell, not ellen fiess.

 

[agreenster]

Re: Ohhh please!

Originally posted by Clockwork
The rest of the day I spend shooting film and working in After Effects, FCP3, and DVD Studio Pro. It works like a charm on our dual ghz system's. The last two apps are the best in the business and they don't even exist for Wintel PC's

You've obviously never actually worked in the editing business.

AVID, my friend, is the best in the business. And yes, it is used on a PC very often, and very well. Just watch any credits on any film. They often have the AVID logo at the end.

Final Cut Pro is making headway.

But noe of this is my arguement. My first response to your post is that Mac people sometimes become to zealous and forget that performance isnt such a bad thing. The current line of PC's are cheaper and more responsive. Windows isnt very fun, but its a tradeoff for the performance you get.

For example, I just rendered (here at work) a minutes worth of video, uncompressed at 640x480 on a dual 1ghz G4 and a dual Xeon. The same file, both in Premiere-- took 7minutes on the PC---13 minutes on the Mac.

Now, had I been exporting a half hour worth of stuff....well, you get the idea.

 

[bluecell]

I give up. Most of you seem to be missing the bigger picture. Apple only has 5% of the market. That's not going to change unless they make some changes. The sad reality is that Apple is losing out with PPC. They need OPTIONS. Anyone who has questions relating to recompiling and OS optimization should check out the article on Unsanity.org entitled MACH-O ABI. OS 9 is now a legacy OS. OS X is a whole new start for Apple. Are you going to stop using Mac when Apple starts using AMD processors? No, you won't. You'll just have a faster machine running an amazing OS.

 

[agreenster]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
Just to correct agreenster, it would be Janie Porsche that saved Christmas on her crappy dell, not ellen fiess.

I know. I was just mentioning Ellen Feiss again because she makes me laugh.

Oh, and BlueCell, thanks for an insightful post. Mac People WONT stop using a MAc just because it has an AMD processor. In fact, give em a week, and they will start wearing AMD t-shirts.