Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple in Talks with Intel?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
When all is said and done I believe Jobs will do whatever is best for Apple..
Just this rumour has sent Apple stock up 5.32%
Just this rumour has sent Apple stock up 5.32%
All it says is that "Apple will use intel chips", it doesn't state what kind of chips, but it does repeat itself over and over again. Maybe Apple will use Intel chips in an embedded device, maybe they are considering bringing back the mac/pc hybrid. There is really no "meat" to this story, but we can all speculate anyway.
I can see why - they're salivating over existing Intel hardware with a real OS.Daveway said:Well, regardless of how much we may hate/love this idea, it looks like Wallstreet LOVES the news.
But I believe Darth Vader summarizes my feelings best at the end of Episode III: "Nooooooooooooooooooooo!"
Frisco said:
a scary thought, but in all reality, if apple has any plans to be as big as the monster that is microsoft, than that's the only way it would happen.
jesus no. no no no. NO.
at first i though i was reading an "Apple to lease out OSX for X86 hardware" until the word switch kept popping into mind.
no. not good. cannot be good. it'd be like using a brand new company, all the old software would not run, probably call for new designs.
as a side thing yes. but i like PPC like a son, or daughter! hey im not fussed.
at first i though i was reading an "Apple to lease out OSX for X86 hardware" until the word switch kept popping into mind.
no. not good. cannot be good. it'd be like using a brand new company, all the old software would not run, probably call for new designs.
as a side thing yes. but i like PPC like a son, or daughter! hey im not fussed.
I think the move to x86 architecture is a wise move on Apple's part. How many Mac users really care what chips are inside their macs? It's not like it makes a difference. All this bad mouthing of intel chips is just a trained response with no basis in reality.
Xserve
The xserve to me is the only sensible way to test the water (ala sun) if they build in a bit of linux compatability then the server would have LOADS of software quickly
To me it seems it would be the consumer macs where it would be hard for them. Server side linux software is accepted and top notch (apache as an example)
I would keep consumer side on ppc if nothing else then to keep compatible with MS office (if apple became serious competition do you really think MS would continue to make a mac version?)
Adurbe
The xserve to me is the only sensible way to test the water (ala sun) if they build in a bit of linux compatability then the server would have LOADS of software quickly
To me it seems it would be the consumer macs where it would be hard for them. Server side linux software is accepted and top notch (apache as an example)
I would keep consumer side on ppc if nothing else then to keep compatible with MS office (if apple became serious competition do you really think MS would continue to make a mac version?)
Adurbe
I've got it!
Well, here's the my idea:
If Apple moved some/all of its machines to Intel x86 chips, they will be using all dual-core chips.
Windows (if licensed and installed) could run on one of the cores in its own "finder", while Mac OS X runs simultaneously. iMacs, Powerbooks, iBooks, etc. could all do this. Dual dual-core processors (i.e., Powermacs) could have either OS using 1, 2 or 3 processors (except Mac OS X could use all 4 if Windows Finder was off).
This wouldn't really require an x86 emulator, and Windows apps could conceivably have direct access to the video card, etc. in full-screen mode. This means games would have identical performance as on Windows, but OS X apps could be running in the background on the other processor if the app didn't need the video card, etc.
I've been suggesting a similar idea ever since Mr. Jobs brought up the idea of "multiple finders" at on of the Macworlds some time ago. Dashboard is really the first of these. Windows running natively on the same dual core chip along with OS X would allow for the second "finder". This could potentially allow Linux, etc. to be run at the same time as well, but there really wouldn't be as much interest as there would be for simultaneous Windows apps to be run.
Any feedback?
Lacero said:
Well, here's the my idea:
If Apple moved some/all of its machines to Intel x86 chips, they will be using all dual-core chips.
Windows (if licensed and installed) could run on one of the cores in its own "finder", while Mac OS X runs simultaneously. iMacs, Powerbooks, iBooks, etc. could all do this. Dual dual-core processors (i.e., Powermacs) could have either OS using 1, 2 or 3 processors (except Mac OS X could use all 4 if Windows Finder was off).
This wouldn't really require an x86 emulator, and Windows apps could conceivably have direct access to the video card, etc. in full-screen mode. This means games would have identical performance as on Windows, but OS X apps could be running in the background on the other processor if the app didn't need the video card, etc.
I've been suggesting a similar idea ever since Mr. Jobs brought up the idea of "multiple finders" at on of the Macworlds some time ago. Dashboard is really the first of these. Windows running natively on the same dual core chip along with OS X would allow for the second "finder". This could potentially allow Linux, etc. to be run at the same time as well, but there really wouldn't be as much interest as there would be for simultaneous Windows apps to be run.
Any feedback?
Lacero said:
But where's the software without the developer that spend thousands of hours programing?
On another note:
Steve is probably stunned by all the comase this has caused all over the news.
Whatever Apple are considering, IBM needs to get going on updating processors for Apple. Microsoft and Sony seem to have dumped huge amounts of money into IBM in order to get focus placed on their gaming needs, and probably locked up outside availability to those developments as well.
If nothing happens for too long though, Apple is going to have to do something.
If nothing happens for too long though, Apple is going to have to do something.
SiliconAddict said:
minimax said:
Hi. Might I suggest An Introduction to the American Language
Then come back and READ the context of my post before you respond. Doing so makes you look, at least in part, less like a teenage zealot and more like someone who is capable of conversing without making an idiot out of himself. Go ahead and read those last few sentences again and parse the out what its SAYING.
muffler said:
Code Weavers is just a wrapper for wine. Wine is an emulator. It emulates windows API calls. It runs nothing NATIVE at all.
I don't understand why everyone thinks that if Apple puts x86 chips in their systems that it means any Dell or HP system can magically run OSX. I am positive that OSX would only run on an Apple X86 system. Dell's do not have openfirmare. There are other methods to lock the OS to the Apple specific hardware.
BTW, being a long time Linux and Mac user, the amount of lunacy in this thread seems to indicate that mac users are not as smart as I thought.
harveypooka said:
Check ign.com for a comparison between PS3 and XBOX 360. The latter's G5's will actually be FASTER than the Sony CELL. So moving to CELL would be a bad move.
IBM is stuck with the G5'S scalability AND availability.
Intel's chips are cheaper, faster and include much more advanced technologies. Apple must see that soon IBM will stagnate even more like Motorola did with the G4 and that NOW is the time to make a move.
If they do switch to Intel, it will be the BEST thing ever for Macintosh.
jimbosyn said:
You can emulate windows APIs with native calls - he didn't mean native windows, he meant native to the CPU executing the calls. If you have a Win32 library and a windows executable, both x86 code running on another OS with an x86 processor, you have a native app. It's really no different than what Carbon does for OS 9 apps.