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

AMD Based Apple Laptop?

this is totally bull. Apple is in no position to stab Intel in their back at this time. Plus, Intel is being very reliable delivering on schedule the chips Apple needs. Maybe in few years if their relationship deteriorate I might consider seeing Apple moving into AMD. But it is not happening anytime soon.
 
Why would they go with AMD when there is the Core2Duo? AMD needs something big to compete. AMD? I can't see it.
 
gugy said:
this is totally bull. Apple is in no position to stab Intel in their back at this time. Plus, Intel is being very reliable delivering on schedule the chips Apple needs. Maybe in few years if their relationship deteriorate I might consider seeing Apple moving into AMD. But it is not happening anytime soon.
Click to expand...

I don't see any deterioration of Intel/Apple relations anytime soon, since the xeon and C2D chips are way better than anything on AMD's lineup. Plus, I doubt apple will bother making an obscure laptop model just to have AMD in its stable. It probably wont be pro status, and the fact that there are 3 different macbooks in the consumer level line makes the addition of another simply superfluous nonsense.
 
Okay so IF they did go to AMD...

Do they have to remake a new "Universal Binary?" Because aren't the current UB's for Intel and PPC? Please tell me they wont. I don't wnat to have to wait again for new UB's
 
Well, no one said ditching.. I'm sure Apple's got their gear running on all sorts of things, just in case. Where Apple's machines are in the market, the Intel name and specs are far more valuable than AMD, no? Intel's got a fire under them now, and the sleeping giant's gathering steam, so while I'm sure Apple's got many plans, I can't see them expanding x86 suppliers for a long, long time..

But, then again, who wants to watch movies on a 3" screen? :)

sunfast said:
I can't see Apple ditching intel this early somehow.
Click to expand...
 
flir67 said:
this is bull, noway....

but amd would be cheaper I bet...
Click to expand...

No it wouldn't. You might pay less for chips, but you will need to wait much longer as AMD doesn't anywhere near the capacity to produce processors like Intel does, therefore making Apple pay more in the end. That's part of the reason Apple went with Intel.
 
villanova329 said:
Do they have to remake a new "Universal Binary?" Because aren't the current UB's for Intel and PPC? Please tell me they wont. I don't wnat to have to wait again for new UB's
Click to expand...


In the windows world, they don't have separate or universal binaries for amd/intel. You wouldn't for OSX either.
 
villanova329 said:
Do they have to remake a new "Universal Binary?" Because aren't the current UB's for Intel and PPC? Please tell me they wont. I don't wnat to have to wait again for new UB's
Click to expand...

I think it would just be an additional code in the x86 part of the UB. Correct me if I'm wrong...
 
Warbrain said:
I think it would just be an additional code in the x86 part of the UB. Correct me if I'm wrong...
Click to expand...

Probably you are wrong.

The firmware would have to be written to work with the net hardware, but AMD chips are i86 compatible processors with the same 64 bit extensions that Intel use (Intel had to suck it up and use the same 64 bit extensions as AMD when the universe + dog rejected their take on 64-bit processing).
 
Moving to, or simply including a 'budget' line of AMD powered Macs wouldn't be a big deal at all.

The vast majority of everyday computer users don't know the difference between AMD and Intel, anyway.

AMD is more than capable of meeting Apple demand, by the way, considering that if Apple were to include an AMD option, that option would likely only represent a portion of an already small market share.. and more than likely in a low end 'budget' machine.

What Apple has learned over the years, is it's best not to box yourself in with a single part manufacturer like they did with the PPC. Their migration from ADB to USB, from NuBus to PCI & AGP.. Apple has really been making the transition from proprietary hardware for some time.. the actual CPU was really the last piece in a much larger puzzle.

As mentioned earlier, many people in the 'osx86' camp have successfully installed OSX on AMD powered machines, and in many cases, with great results rivaling that of the higher end Intel powered machines. The only stumbling block appears to be that Apple has been using specific Intel motherboard chipsets, which aren't overly AMD friendly.

It would be easy for Apple to include AMD processor support in 10.5, and release it along with a line of sub $500 iMac machines.

Although I suspect Apple probably enjoys a nice price break on the Intel hardware, a price break that very well could hinge on Apple being an 'exclusive' Intel customer.

I personally have never cared for AMD processors much.
 
The Register called shenanigans on this. I would have sent it to Arn to post but the whole thing seems absurd. I'd wager Apple's contract stipulates going all the way to Intel and probably a certain duration as well at least a year of selling all computers with Intel chips.

AMD somehow got behind Intel in terms of power and I've seen no signs of catch up. Not to say that in a year or two they won't be ahead, but not any time soon.

Apple won't introduce a AMD based machine until late 2008 at the earliest. I would almost expect a return to PPC first.
 
Some of AMDs embedded products would be very interesting if used on a small form factor i.e. tablet or PDA like device. Perhaps iTV uses AMD components???

http://www.amd.com/epd/index.html

http://vip.amd.com/de-de/ConnectivitySolutions/ProductInformation/0,,50_2330,00.html

With the supply problems they are having right now AMD is not the choice to supply MacBook components. Not when Intel have the capacty and a very strong lineup of products (Core 2 Duo is what they had in mind when Apple switched - Core Duo was just a stop-gap).
 
intel offers better chips for the same price. and why releasing a thurion notebook? it's way slower and consumes more power.

the one and only possibility for me is an super-beginner notebook with a weak chip.
 
No basically. Not saying it won't ever happen, but Apple is way to happy with Intel right now to go to a competitor. Its not going to happen until Intel and Apple fall out of love.
 
Consider that Apple, Intel, and AMD are IT developers and always expanding and inventing new pathways. AMD is not asleep, and neither is Intel, and frankly, Apple, being the Rolls Royce of computers would not impose limits on their capabilities. Maybe we will not see an AMD Apple real soon, but these people are on the leading edge, and I cannot imagine that the engineers do not think in this direction. IF Apple does go that way it will be for a very good and valid reason.

SO

Meanwhile, let's enjoy our Rolls Royce type computers without trying to turn them into Lamborghinis

:D
 
There is absolutely no, no, no way that Intel did not enter a contractual agreement with Apple that explicitly prohibits or deters Apple from using AMD's competitive products. Intel and Apple's partnership - not the traditional buyer-seller - extends into R&D and other considerable investments. Additionally, Apple is too small of a company to be able to leverage their volume in a way that would free them from such an agreement. Bottom line? We won't see an AMD in Apple for another 2-3 years, if it were to happen at all.
 
this is not going to happen in the near future. This probably has a chance if Apple's notebook marketshare doubles from what it is now. They might have to have two chipmakers to satisfy demand in about 5 years..........but now this is just bs, i wish digitimes would stop speculating about apple rumors because their always way, way off.
 
iGary said:
I threw up in my mouth a little bit™ for a month with the Intel switch.

I may have to hospitalized if this actually happens.
Click to expand...

You should understand the technology a bit more before making assumptions about "evil x86 processors" ( thats Intel and AMD ). The intel processors ( now ) are way better than IBM could produce.

There absolutely nothing wrong with AMD. In recent times they have fallen back a bit ( didn't produce better processors than the AMD64 ) - but thats the way its always been - AMD get ahead of Intel , and vice-versa.

For a long time AMD desktop processsors were cheaper and better than Intels. This has changed since the latest Intel processors. AMD mobile processors have always been second best.

Two years ago, I would have taken an AMD desktop over Intel.

( Yes, I realise this is about mobile processors )
 
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