FROM AMDZONE.com:
Since the summer of 2000 when I was introduced to Mac OSX, I have been extremely excited about Apple's newest operating system. I have always been a x86 PC user subjected to using "Macs". When I learned that OSX was to be based on the BSD platform, my thoughts were that Apple was going to move away from the hardware market and directly into competition with good old Redmond. One would be led to think that this may be an easy step, but it is not just porting software to a new CPU. Apple would have to develop all their tools to compete with Microsoft, if certain products were discontinued for the OSX platform. Since the introduction of OSX, Apple has developed an application base that could compete with Microsoft.
That stance may have changed, if comments made by CEO Steve Jobs at the company's quarterly earnings confab. Asked whether Apple is now mooting a move to x86 chips, Jobs noted that that couldn't happen until the vast majority of its users and - more importantly - its developers have migrated to the UNIX-based Mac OSX. That won't have happened until the end of this year, he added.
Developers, users, as well as hardware vendors would need to be able to supply Apple at launch with quantity parts and software. Unlike the launch of the Athlon MP, AMD would need to have a flawless launch with quantity parts available for Tier 1 OEMs. After seeing the Sledgehammer 1.4ghz running at the Microprocessor Forum earlier this month, one can believe that the final product is ready and they are now in the process of creating a supply of processors, and speed grades for a January launch with multiple Tier 1 OEMs. Since Dresden still produces the performance Athlon XPs, an explanation of why we have not seen quantity of this product (XP 2600 & 2800) is simple. The majority of the production is geared up for Opteron product and what is left for XP product is being retooled to the Barton core for a mid-4th quarter launch. Many Opteron motherboards are almost ready to ship and should be ready to go through validation shortly with AMD.
With Apple looking for a 64-bit solution as well as needing to compete with other OEMs, there are very few choices. These include the Itanium 2, Opteron, and the PowerPC 64. The only two that are cost effective for the common user would be the PowerPC 64 and the Opteron. We know that the Opteron (clawhammer) will be priced combatively against other current multiprocessor solutions. One can assume that
Apple's "continued technical disadvantage" -- which we assume means the race for computer processing speed -- against Intel is expected to force it to adopt x86 technology by the end of 2003, according to a new report by Giga Information Group Inc., a global technology advisory firm.
Apple has the choice to use the new PowerPC 64 in their next generation of systems, but has yet to make an announcement of doing so which makes one think that they are evaluating their other options more seriously. For years Apple has stuck to a proprietary hardware solution until the last few years, in which they have adopted the more common PCI and AGP standards with their additional modifications.
But while that may be easy enough for a dedicated 64-bit microprocessor without native 32-bit support, like AMD's Hammer is likely to have, what happens to all the old OS9 apps and third party OSX apps?
POWER chips do have a 32-bit subset and so can run the old gear, a la Hammer.
The core of MacOSX is extremely portable, he said, and as NeXTSTEP and OPENSTEP has run on SPARC, HP-PA/RISC, PowerPC, x86, and he said, perhaps the Alpha processor too.
I guess for now we will have to wait a couple more months until MacWorld, San Francisco, to see how Apple plays their cards. I hope that with the popularity of Linux and BSD, that a GUI like OSX will gain a strong foothold in the x86 market.
---
Sorry if this was posted already.
