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

Apple and AMD Rumors

I've got it!

It's an Apple/AMD partnership to build small chips for ultra-portable computers! In other words...an Apple PDA! :p

It will be an AMD chip, running OSX lite. (well, one can wish, right?) As such, since new versions of software would be needed anyway, why not start here?
 
Re: Sorry to post twice.....

Originally posted by agreenster
...but I found this on Comdex.com....its a preview of his speech tomorrow

"Let's Get Real
It's time to put the Virtual-Pie-In-The-Sky visions aside. It's time to end the fascination with technology for technology's sake alone. It's time for demonstrating innovation that people can use, to talk in real-world terms about tangible benefits that technology is bringing to customers today. Paradoxically, more technology deployment has led to less innovation. In our rush to find the next big thing, it is easy to overlook the innovations that are driving demand right now. The road to recovery requires the entire IT industry to re-examine our value proposition, to make technology advances secondary to true innovations that have the potential to drastically improve the computing experience. Expect the unexpected as AMD CEO Hector Ruiz takes attendees through an insightful trip that outlines the real-world innovations that re expanding what is possible. From the back office to the home office and beyond, the road to recovery has already been paved. Are you ready?"

I wonder if Steve helped him write it? It sure sounds like Apple jargon.....

(boldface added for effect)
Click to expand...

Mmm... jargonlicious.

Seriously though, I'd be pissed if Apple went x86. Not cause of anything else than jealousy though... I just bought a new dual 867 Friday. :)

Let's all just wait and see. I say maybe 10% chance of Apple using AMD chips.
 
Re: Apple at Comdex

Originally posted by Blackcat
Checking out the Comdex website Apple is doing iPod related stuff. That's why they are there.
Click to expand...

ipod related stuff at a convention featuring business computing solutions. That alone sounds a bit fishy. It costs alot of money for Apple to have a booth at one of these.
 
Re: AMD vs Microsoft

Originally posted by Blackcat
If AMD started working with Apple on MacOS X x86, Microsoft would suddenly stop XP running on IA64. This would kill AMD faster than Apple could save it, unless Apple bought AMD which would use the whole $5bn.

Make no mistake, Microsoft sees MacOS X as a threat. It only made profit on Windows and Office last quarter so won't stand anything eroding that, and an AMD/Apple CPU partnership might.

So I think there more important reasons why this won't happen. It's not like MS was particular scared by it's run in with the law.
Click to expand...

If you factor out Linux, you would be right. However, Linux on the Opteron has the potential to put the hurt'n to Intel and MS if MS were to drop them. MS needs Intel to deliver a solution similar to the Opteron in order for MS to take control of the situation.
 
Re: Re: Apple at Comdex

For all the weeping and wailing and knashing of teeth, it would seem that the Apple/AMD announcement will be about this. For those of us who want Apple to continue to concentrate of the PPC, we have nothing to worry about. For those who want Apple to risk suicide by switching processors, it looks like that ain't gonna happen.

Read it and weep.
 
Originally posted by LethalWolfe


Easy there trigger, no need to have a heart attack. ;)

I'm on "pins and needles" 'cause I want this rumor to be done with. I really don't care what the answer is I just want something to kill, or prove, all these x86 rumors.

So take a few deep breaths and wait until the announcement is made before viens in yer head start exploding. :)


LEthal
Click to expand...

Yeah, that would be so nice and quiet. No more flamefilled, exploding threads, with people just screaming "Yes, blahblah" and "No Never, blahblah" to eachother.

Would be the end of a legendary time.
 
Re: Re: Re: Apple at Comdex

Originally posted by MisterMe
For all the weeping and wailing and knashing of teeth, it would seem that the Apple/AMD announcement will be about this. For those of us who want Apple to continue to concentrate of the PPC, we have nothing to worry about. For those who want Apple to risk suicide by switching processors, it looks like that ain't gonna happen.

Read it and weep.
Click to expand...

The rumor said shattering... and there's nothing shattering about a 802.11 improvment... maybe this is it, but I doubt it. I doubt AMD chips in Macs too though. Hell, it might be nothing. Let's wait.
 
Where's the g5opterhammeron?

Maybe something with wireless. Wireless and rendevous is what I predict, if anything. THis show is about gadgets and the user experience. This forum is about "when do we gets the G5?" but there are other things than that.

Rendevous is a really cool technology that could have lots of cool implementations. What about an iPod with rendevous? Or Phillips implementation? Or Apple's own method of a Tablet PC?

Or they could just be there to raise awareness of Apple technologies but that would be too simple, most of all it wouldn't be a g5opterhammeron.
 
I wouldn't mind AMD producing chips for Apple. Not knowing enough about chip architecture in relation to PPC code and x86-64 code, how much would be involved for AMD to produce a PPC based chip? Probably a lot. I'm not sure what would require more work, AMD producing PPC based microprocessors or Apple and third parties supporting x86 and PPC. AMD would probably really like to have a Apple ordering microprocessors and Apple probably wants more than one supplier of microprocessors.

AMD already has a solid line of MP microprocessors on the market and Apple wants to offer MP computers. This could be a great match.

note:
I could certainly imagine Apple announcing hardware specs at someplace other than MacWorld Expo. Actually I'm all for that. They could save aesthetic and OS additions and improvements for MacWorld and announce hardware manufacturing improvements throughout the year. I think MacWorld should be focused on the OS and applications as apposed to hardware.

Apple IBM AMD – AIA
macbandit.gif
 
Re: Re: AMD vs Microsoft

Originally posted by Cappy


If you factor out Linux, you would be right. However, Linux on the Opteron has the potential to put the hurt'n to Intel and MS if MS were to drop them. MS needs Intel to deliver a solution similar to the Opteron in order for MS to take control of the situation.
Click to expand...

Microsoft does indeed see Linux as a threat but knows business needs Office and desktop applications. Linux can offer these but it's still very technical and hard to support, it also has little from Adobe, Macromedia, etc etc

MacOS X on IA64 might offer business a more viable alternative desktop with industry support. It's all perception rather than AMD being better than Motorola, suddenly Apple becomes a player rather than a rebel.

Business prefers stability over radical thinking so a non MS desktop by a real company using a real CPU might be tempting, Microsoft would hate that.

For the same reasons Linux on Opteron is no big threat, it's too obscure currently. But X offers all the nicieties of a commercial OS, and the strength of Unix. That scares Bill.
 
Everyone calm down, Ruiz's keynote will be about HyperTransport
Keynote=Connectivity
Apple+AMD=Hypertransport
Connectivity=Hypertransport

Remember Uncle Steve's Stockholder meeting, Macs will be on the PowerPC platform for a long time.
 
Originally posted by arn


I'm not holding my breath.

arn
Click to expand...

We'll see what happens...

I think apple has been hitting home the fact that architecture is where performance is gained. Take apples new architecture and throw in some screaming AMD chips and that is a good, more affordable machine.

Run those new IBM chips in the high end apple gear and you got some powerhouse high ends.

Who makes the chips doesnt matter, its who uses them and how they are used that matters.

Then people can run OSX on their home built amd machines and it wont run as well as their own apple/amd machines, but they will be cheaper.

what a model! go apple.
 
Originally posted by ogun7
Everyone calm down, Ruiz's keynote will be about HyperTransport
Keynote=Connectivity
Apple+AMD=Hypertransport
Connectivity=Hypertransport

Remember Uncle Steve's Stockholder meeting, Macs will be on the PowerPC platform for a long time.
Click to expand...

No Joke. I agree. I mean the PPC 970 was designed to run on the hypertransport system. This is probably an announcement that in 2003 that apple will be fully supporting the hypertranport group and apple will be the first vendor to use it in commercial comps, or something.

So if there is a rumor is that Apple is definately going PPC970 and Hypertransport.

64-Bit in 2k3 all the way :D
 
Re: Re: I dont GET you PEOPLE!!

Originally posted by rugby


Part of the reason IMO that Windows crashes is because of the multitude of hardware platforms it supports. How many different motherboard chipsets does WIndows XP support? Lots. Apple has enough problems getting OS X to be 100% stable on their own motherboards. Now add to that a couple hundred different chipsets and Houston, we have a problem.
Click to expand...


who said apple would support ALL 86 hardware?
wouldnt they just pick the cream of the crop?

so NO they wouldnt need to support your claim.
 
Originally posted by sweetaction


We'll see what happens...

I think apple has been hitting home the fact that architecture is where performance is gained. Take apples new architecture and throw in some screaming AMD chips and that is a good, more affordable machine.

Run those new IBM chips in the high end apple gear and you got some powerhouse high ends.

Who makes the chips doesnt matter, its who uses them and how they are used that matters.

Then people can run OSX on their home built amd machines and it wont run as well as their own apple/amd machines, but they will be cheaper.

what a model! go apple.
Click to expand...

You are wrong on at least 2 points.

Firstly, going AMD does not mean $500 PowerMacs. As it is, G4s are a lot cheaper than P4s, AMD might be cheaper still but don't expect ANY pricedrops.

There is nothing much wrong with our architecture. The G4 needs a better bus but the rest is very good. Once IBM releases the 970 and G3 with VMX, problem solved.

And Finally, Apple won't allow home built Macs. To do that would be suicide.
 
Re: AMD vs Microsoft

Originally posted by Blackcat
If AMD started working with Apple on MacOS X x86, Microsoft would suddenly stop XP running on IA64. This would kill AMD faster than Apple could save it, unless Apple bought AMD which would use the whole $5bn.

Make no mistake, Microsoft sees MacOS X as a threat. It only made profit on Windows and Office last quarter so won't stand anything eroding that, and an AMD/Apple CPU partnership might.

So I think there more important reasons why this won't happen. It's not like MS was particular scared by it's run in with the law.
Click to expand...
Btw, AMD isn't on IA64. That's Intel. AMD's Hammer series are x86-64.

Besides, if Microsoft thinks Mac OS X is a serious threat, why make Microsoft Office for it?

I think it's a great way to get out of the PowerPC hell. But as far as how they plan to do it or even if they plan to is still totally up to Apple and we don't know what they are exactly yet.

PowerPC 970 is an alternative, guys, but it still isn't a confirmation. 2003 will prove to be a very interesting year, no? :D
 
Originally posted by Blackcat


You are wrong on at least 2 points.

Firstly, going AMD does not mean $500 PowerMacs. As it is, G4s are a lot cheaper than P4s, AMD might be cheaper still but don't expect ANY pricedrops.

There is nothing much wrong with our architecture. The G4 needs a better bus but the rest is very good. Once IBM releases the 970 and G3 with VMX, problem solved.

And Finally, Apple won't allow home built Macs. To do that would be suicide.
Click to expand...

P4 2.8GHz @ $385
Athlon 2700 XP (333 FSB) @ $352
G4 ????

How much does it cost to buy just a G4 processor? The prices above are from www.pricewatch.com, and I am sure that big OEMs get better pricing then the above.

We don't necessarily want cheaper(less expensive) Macs, we want faster.

At this point, no-one wants a home-built Apple. Mac means simplicity, thus the iMac. Apple does the work for you, so you don't have to.

Do I think Apple will go with AMD as their CPU, NO.

Do I want Apple to go with AMD as their CPU, YES.
 
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