Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

AMD and Apple Rumors Part II

Something's wrong with the edit feature. Oh well, I meant to say
wt_brain's. That all I wanted to correct, and I ended up
having a useless comment myself. I couldn't help mine though,
they posted theirs willingly.

Sorry. Please delete this.
 
Crap, I hate it when I do this

there are more than one page,...I had wondered why no one had mentioned it, nevermind...
 
One never knows

By the time I need to purchase my next computer (2005 or 2006), we may have an answer to this on-going rumor. See you then!
 
Have you guys/gals(?) really got nothing better to do?

who really cares as long as your mac rocks?

i_b_joshua
 
😱
Once upon a time there were some very good chip design and fabrication patents. There was an auction of this wonderful intellectual property. Everyone wondered who it was that won this marvelous prize.

This was several years ago. The folks winning the goods? AMD.

The problem with this entire discussion is that people are equating AMD = x86. That isn't really the point.

The point is, if there is any credence to these rumors, the important bit is that it is anti wintel alliance if anything. No to windows, no to intel, no to x86.

Yes to another supplier, someone that can and does meet volume demand for the desktop market. With help from the others. Moto keeps their toes in a bit, at least the PPC people do, while Moto Mothership can shuffle off the horrible demand of actually being asked to manufacture something they apparently cannot.

Most PPCs will be coming from IBM and AMD. These will be faster, and cheaper, and more flexible. And they will work best with Mac OS and other *nix, while easing recompiles of source which may have been written for, oh an intel design somewhere.
 
I think people were being facetious when they were reffering to Amd support.

I am planning on getting a new mac for Christmas or sometime after Christmas, but I am now wondering if I should wait till after MWSF to get it.

Also, If I were to get a new iBook will it be outdated in a year? By outdated I mean will new programs and OSX updates be unable to work on it because it has G3 instead of G4.
 
Originally posted by bbyrdhouse
Also, If I were to get a new iBook will it be outdated in a year? By outdated I mean will new programs and OSX updates be unable to work on it because it has G3 instead of G4.
Click to expand...
Find a "G4" only program. Run it on your G3.

Slow (probably), but runs.

Lesson: you can run G4 programs on G3 processors because G3 has most, if not all, G4's instruction set (ISA), minus AltiVec.

Unless Mac OS X drops G3 support (like they dropped 603/604 "support" in Jaguar), your G3 should be fine for years to come. We just have to wait and see.
 
Apple / AMD partnership

AMD making the new G5 chip instead of Intel?
Sorry guys, I've been predicitng this for 6 months. Why?

•Since Intel can't reconfigure it's server chip to use with Apple for another YEAR,
•Since many upper echalon wonks at Apple SEVERLY distrust and dislike Intel,
•Since AMD is direct competiton wtih Intel, (see previous)
•Since AMD <clearly> makes a superior product,

I then state that the "Intel is going to make Apple's G5 chip"
PHP: 
deliberate
ruse.

I may be wrong, but I've got a 450 batting average at this point on what Apple is going to do in the future: time will tell.....
 
And underneath is...

written this on the MacBidouille site:

[MàJ]
Voici le message que j'ai reçu. Sa langue maternelle n'étant pas le Français, excusez son ortographe.

Alors, les rumeurs qui s'agit AMD ne sont pas vrai. Je reviens de Comdex, et j'ai parlé avec quelque q'un qui est très familier avec la stratégie à long terme de AMD. Il est analyste qui par habitude doit signer des accordes de non-révélation. Je l'ai vus avant le discours principal de Hector Ruiz, Chef d'AMD. J'ai demandé, "qu est-ce que Hector vas dire?" Il y'avait un rumeur qu'il y devait être une grande annonce par Ruiz au sujet d'un associé avec une autre compagnie. Cette analyste m'a dit: <<Je ne crois pas les rumeurs au sujet d'Apple et AMD, et vous ne devriez pas, non plus.>>
Je n'ai jamais cru ces rumeurs, et apres cela je suis convaincu qu ilsexistent seulement dans les esprits des personnes ignorantes.
Click to expand...

Which translates: <Here's a message I received:
The rumors concerning AMD are incorrect. I've just returned from Comdex where I talked to someone being intimately familiar with the long term strategy of AMD. He's an analyst and thus normally under a non-disclosure agreement. I saw him before Hector Ruiz, AMD's chief gave his talk. I asked him: "What will Hector say?". There is a rumor that there will be a major announcement by Ruiz concerning going together with a big company.
The analyst replied: "I don't believe the rumors concerning Apple and AMD and you shouldn't either." I never believed those rumors and after that I'm sure they only exist in the minds of ignorant people.>

Well, what to make of that? Personally, I don't think Apple's gonna drop the PPC any time soon. So, will AMD produce for Apple ? Who knows...
 
Call me crazy, but I think it would be nuts for Apple to dump the easy transistion to the PPC 970 and IBM for a little company like AMD who might be facing the same problems Motorola is right now in the future. Just remember, if Apple goes x86 and AMD faulters, then where do we go, Intel?

As far as Apple needing AMD for enough production...that is a joke. IBM could deliver more then enough chips for Apple and then many more. I say let Motorola continue to develop the G4 for the consumer machines and laptops and let IBM take on the Power line. If everyone would settle down a little, you can see the roadmap on the 7457 looks very good for the consumer machines and the laptops and the 970 would work well in the PowerMacs and Xserves.

What is wrong with this theory? I bet something like this will happen more so then Apple ditching Moto and IBM for one company AMD. Really can AMD supply all of Apple and their PC customers. How well off is AMD?

I thought Power Macintosh was named so because they had a Power PC processor?
 
Originally posted by scem0


Would a mod please get rid of you and wt_brains useless comments?


It would be very nice if this rumor came true because I think we
all want a fast processor come January. But I think All the reasons
Kelson stated make good sense, but I also think BlueCell makes
a good point. I think that if apple has a simple way to migrate
to the an x86 AMD chip then they should do that, but there are
many reasons why this wouldn't be easy. But if possible, then
they should do it. I don't know what to make of this AMD support
in Jaguar stuff - but it looks promising for those that are pro-switching
to AMD.
Click to expand...

Just a few weeks ago when the PowerPC 970 was introduced you were high on it and was going to save up your money for one, now you want an AMD? AMD is starting down the same path Moto did a couple of years back. They are behind in MHz so what do they do...start naming their processors 2300, 2800, etc. Intel has taken over the PC market and will continue to have the money to have it's way with AMD. When it is all said and done in the end there will be 2 major chip builders, IBM and Intel. I think Apple can see the writing on the wall for AMD. For everyone that wants Apple to go with AMD, don't come crying in a few years, saying Apple needs to dump AMD now because they are going bankrupt. "Big blue" is a MUCH safer and more stable bet for Apple then AMD is. Of course there is always Intel, but we won't go there....

This thread is getting way old...so this is the last post I will make to it.......
 
Originally posted by Abercrombieboy


Just a few weeks ago when the PowerPC 970 was introduced you were high on it and was going to save up your money for one, now you want an AMD? AMD is starting down the same path Moto did a couple of years back. They are behind in MHz so what do they do...start naming their processors 2300, 2800, etc. Intel has taken over the PC market and will continue to have the money to have it's way with AMD. When it is all said and done in the end there will be 2 major chip builders, IBM and Intel. I think Apple can see the writing on the wall for AMD. For everyone that wants Apple to go with AMD, don't come crying in a few years, saying Apple needs to dump AMD now because they are going bankrupt. "Big blue" is a MUCH safer and more stable bet for Apple then AMD is. Of course there is always Intel, but we won't go there....

This thread is getting way old...so this is the last post I will make to it.......
Click to expand...

No, I want AMD come Jan. but I want apple to use the 970
when it comes available. I certainly won't be mad if apple doesn't
use AMD though. I just thing that an AMD chip would be much
faster then a moto chip.
 
Originally posted by scem0
No, I want AMD come Jan. but I want apple to use the 970
when it comes available.
Click to expand...

So you want Apple to switch to x86 and then several months later go back to PPC architecture.

Brilliant.
 
Originally posted by hitman


So you want Apple to switch to x86 and then several months later go back to PPC architecture.

Brilliant.
Click to expand...

That isn't what was said. He only said he wanted AMD as yet another supplier, not that he wanted OS X on an X86. Nothing says anything AMD supplies HAS to be an x86 based design.
 
Re: Re: AMD PROOF!

Originally posted by MisterMe
This has been covered elsewhere, probably in this thread. Amd stands for AutoMount Daemon.

Launch Terminal.

Type "man amd".

Read and be wise.
Click to expand...
Never happen...

They take too much joy in being dense as a rock.
 
Originally posted by hitman

So you want Apple to switch to x86 and then several months later go back to PPC architecture.

Brilliant.
Click to expand...
I want Apple to do something different than what they've been doing. I've said it before, IBM and Motorola seem to be incapable of giving Apple the options they need. Apple's been living on 5% of the market for way too long. They need to get that 6%, 7% and higher.

Why do most of you want Apple to be crippled? The 970 just isn't enough. The G4 is tired, the G3 is outdated and I don't expect IBM to anything differently. Why is everyone so afraid of AMD? They're a good company. That Forbes article really doesn't shine light on anything. It's too bad some of you aren't able to look at this rationally.
 
Originally posted by bluecell

I want Apple to do something different than what they've been doing. I've said it before, IBM and Motorola seem to be incapable of giving Apple the options they need. Apple's been living on 5% of the market for way too long. They need to get that 6%, 7% and higher.


Why do most of you want Apple to be crippled? The 970 just isn't enough. The G4 is tired, the G3 is outdated and I don't expect IBM to anything differently. Why is everyone so afraid of AMD? They're a good company. That Forbes article really doesn't shine light on anything. It's too bad some of you aren't able to look at this rationally.

Amen to that!
😀
 
Originally posted by bluecell
Why do most of you want Apple to be crippled? The 970 just isn't enough. The G4 is tired, the G3 is outdated and I don't expect IBM to anything differently. Why is everyone so afraid of AMD? They're a good company. That Forbes article really doesn't shine light on anything. It's too bad some of you aren't able to look at this rationally.
Click to expand...
And the x86 architecture isn't outdated? The PowerPC ISA is several generations newer than x86, and as long as Intel has to keep backward compatibility with the 80386 (and debatably the 8086) chip, it will stay that way.

The question is, "Is the PowerPC, RISC ISA better than the x86 one?" Theoretically, yes - but, as we all see, theories don't always become fact.

And why is the 970 "not enough". The Power4 chip beats the crap out of anything out there today and the 970 is supposed to be a derivative of it. There's every reason to believe that the 970 will be "more than enough".
 
For some reason, most of you here seem to think that the 970 is going to bring Apple out of the black hole that is the PPC. NO!!! The FACT is that IBM and Motorola have crippled Apple when it comes to competing with AMD and Intel offerings on other platforms. I talked to some of my programmer friends and they all say the same thing. This should be a relatively painless move if they do it sooner rather than later. Steve Jobs said it himself, once most developers move to OS X, then they would have OPTIONS. He could've easily said "no, it can't be done," but he didn't. He realizes that this is what he needs to do. A move to AMD would be a tiny entrance into a large spectrum for Apple.

Look, the PPC 970 is just one processor. Yes, it's 64-bit, but so are AMD's Opteron and Athlon 64 processors and Intel's Itanium2. All of which show higher performance than the PPC 970. In the 32-bit world, RISC would be favorable to CISC. But as you can see here, it doesn't seem to make a difference. Do you realize that MacOS X isn't even optimized for PPC? I have more faith in AMD maintaining development of their x86-64 processors than I have for IBM maintaining their PPC processors. And there is plenty of room for development with x86-64.

Oh, and the PPC 970 is about a year away. I think I speak for most Mac users when I say the G4 should be dead and buried. The G5 doesn't look that exciting in comparison to the 64-bit AMD offerings. Besides, the G5 roadmap has been static for a while now. Motorola will just set Apple back even further. Since AMD does produce in high volume, I'm willing to bet that their offerings are more cost effective than the IBM PPC 970.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back