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
Xbox is not related to the G5
IBM isn't even making the chips for the Xbox 360 - TSMC is!
The Xbox CPU comes from IBM's embedded PPC IP. The G5 is a cost-reduced POWER4 chip (which is why it's not compliant with the PowerPC Bible - the "Book E").
Microsoft is making its own PPC chips from a different branch of the PPC family - this has nothing to do with "scale" for the PPC970.
Hiroshige said:
IBM isn't even making the chips for the Xbox 360 - TSMC is!
The Xbox CPU comes from IBM's embedded PPC IP. The G5 is a cost-reduced POWER4 chip (which is why it's not compliant with the PowerPC Bible - the "Book E").
Microsoft is making its own PPC chips from a different branch of the PPC family - this has nothing to do with "scale" for the PPC970.
iMeowbot said:
because that's what the original article was talking about.
See page 10 of the thread
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/128198/
I doubt very much whether Apple will switch to x86. It would be hell for every Mac user.
I would think that it's more likely that Intel is going to produce PowerPC processors that would be in Apple computers. Apple could be choosing Intel because their processors are at least a gigahertz faster than IBM's current top offering.
Or this could all be fake, so that the roumor sites make some more money.
I would think that it's more likely that Intel is going to produce PowerPC processors that would be in Apple computers. Apple could be choosing Intel because their processors are at least a gigahertz faster than IBM's current top offering.
Or this could all be fake, so that the roumor sites make some more money.
I'm with you, wholeheartedly on 1-5, but the 6th point I just cannot backup (see earlier in the thread).chicagdan said:
I'm exhausted - read this whole thread.
A few comments:
(1) If true, VPC would run like lightning. Those of us who are godless heathens who emulate Windows would see a fantastic boost in speed. I don't use VPC, but only because I have a Windows laptop.
(2) I feel sorry for anyone who is actually emotionally invested in this issue. First, because it is only a rumor. Second, because it is just a chip, even if true. Third, because we don't even know which chip it would be.
(3) Perhaps we could just, oh, I don't know... wait and see if anything is actually announced and then maybe, oh, see if it's any good?
A few comments:
(1) If true, VPC would run like lightning. Those of us who are godless heathens who emulate Windows would see a fantastic boost in speed. I don't use VPC, but only because I have a Windows laptop.
(2) I feel sorry for anyone who is actually emotionally invested in this issue. First, because it is only a rumor. Second, because it is just a chip, even if true. Third, because we don't even know which chip it would be.
(3) Perhaps we could just, oh, I don't know... wait and see if anything is actually announced and then maybe, oh, see if it's any good?
The whole RISC is better than CISC argument doesn't hold water anymore. While it's true RISC is better on paper, it hardly works like that in real life. I think going to x86 architecture ensures Apple can compete on a hardware level. It's tough enough having a small marketshare, when you're also trying to compete against the x86 juggernaut. SGI, Alpha, DEC, and many more fell to the onslaught that is the PC. Is Apple next?
This would be GOOD!
The PowerBooks have a 1.6ghz processor but the Bus sucks. Intel's new dual core mobiles rock really. I wonder if this also means that someone using a Dell could then run OS X....It would kill Microsoft's monopoly and could make Apple a huge company in terms of a great market share.
This could have been Steve Jobs plan all along. He is like Gates and meglomaniac so this would be something he'd do to propel the Mac forward.
The 3rd party app issue would be economical for the software companies with a huge new installed base. Remember Adobe saying their apps run better on Windows!...A x86 compatible Tiger would find its way to Dell and others. Real choice in the market....Love the idea.
Look they are focusing on music/iPod/video store/high end production apps (Final Cut etc...) and have TOTALLY neglicted the PowerBook and especially the PowerMAC lines....This would give the software and media side a huge boost.
The PowerBooks have a 1.6ghz processor but the Bus sucks. Intel's new dual core mobiles rock really. I wonder if this also means that someone using a Dell could then run OS X....It would kill Microsoft's monopoly and could make Apple a huge company in terms of a great market share.
This could have been Steve Jobs plan all along. He is like Gates and meglomaniac so this would be something he'd do to propel the Mac forward.
The 3rd party app issue would be economical for the software companies with a huge new installed base. Remember Adobe saying their apps run better on Windows!...A x86 compatible Tiger would find its way to Dell and others. Real choice in the market....Love the idea.
Look they are focusing on music/iPod/video store/high end production apps (Final Cut etc...) and have TOTALLY neglicted the PowerBook and especially the PowerMAC lines....This would give the software and media side a huge boost.
Again can anybody explain to me the benefits with a change of platform?
I can only see that:
a) They would totally screw their current consumers. All current applications would be useless. Backward compability would be very limited, if at all. Current hardware would more or less be outdated immediately. Imagine just bought a new PM 2.7Ghz...
b) Given the prices of Mac hardwares, I seriously doubt they would be able continue the hardware production and thus leave Apple as a OS and iPod manufactor.
so where are the benefits with this transition? Do the really match the possible loss in consumer confidence?
I can only see that:
a) They would totally screw their current consumers. All current applications would be useless. Backward compability would be very limited, if at all. Current hardware would more or less be outdated immediately. Imagine just bought a new PM 2.7Ghz...
b) Given the prices of Mac hardwares, I seriously doubt they would be able continue the hardware production and thus leave Apple as a OS and iPod manufactor.
so where are the benefits with this transition? Do the really match the possible loss in consumer confidence?
Found this thread very amusing. What a pathetic bunch of fanboys most of you lot are.
Both AMD and Intel would be a better option for Macs than the current IBM chips, and at the end of the day thats all they are, CPUs.
I fail to see why a Mac is any less of a Mac just because its running on x86 hardware.
The lines between PPC and x68 have been blurring more and more for years now.
Also all you Powerbook owners who have been moaning for god knows how long about being deprived or a G5 on your notebooks should be welcoming a Pentium M or A64 solution to replace your aging G4s
As for Cell, its a very difficult platform to code for, so all I could see happening on that front is only the big development houses being able / having the budget to produce fast well optimised code. All the smaller software houses would either have to pull out or release software that performed poorly.
Both AMD and Intel would be a better option for Macs than the current IBM chips, and at the end of the day thats all they are, CPUs.
I fail to see why a Mac is any less of a Mac just because its running on x86 hardware.
The lines between PPC and x68 have been blurring more and more for years now.
Also all you Powerbook owners who have been moaning for god knows how long about being deprived or a G5 on your notebooks should be welcoming a Pentium M or A64 solution to replace your aging G4s
As for Cell, its a very difficult platform to code for, so all I could see happening on that front is only the big development houses being able / having the budget to produce fast well optimised code. All the smaller software houses would either have to pull out or release software that performed poorly.
Sun Baked said:
Alright guys, after reading 300 posts of junk and speculation and utter chaos, this guy finally got part of it right. If I remember correctly Intel owns the rights to PCIe. Apple doesn't have PCIe in it's machines yet. Either way, all of the new video cards are going towards PCIe. I read somewhere the other day that Nvidia's next generation video cards won't be AGP, only PCIe. This means that if Apple wants to try and stay up there with video cards and everything, they need PCIe. Now, both video card companies, ATI and Nvidia, are making a type of SLI compatible card. (ATI is developing theirs right now). To use SLI, you need PCIe. It was also mentioned in a previous rumor, Apple had hired/was going to hire, whatever, game guys. And what do you use SLI and PCIe for right now? Oh, that's right, gaming. OH, and Apple was also talking to ATI at some point in time about something, which I can't remember right now. (Sorry) So, apparently, Apple wants to bring gaming home, and Intel has the keys. Case solved. End of story.
Church said:Alright guys, after reading 300 posts of junk and speculation and utter chaos, this guy finally got part of it right. If I remember correctly Intel owns the rights to PCIe. Apple doesn't have PCIe in it's machines yet. Either way, all of the new video cards are going towards PCIe. I read somewhere the other day that Nvidia's next generation video cards won't be AGP, only PCIe. This means that if Apple wants to try and stay up there with video cards and everything, they need PCIe. Now, both video card companies, ATI and Nvidia, are making a type of SLI compatible card. (ATI is developing theirs right now). To use SLI, you need PCIe. It was also mentioned in a previous rumor, Apple had hired/was going to hire, whatever, game guys. And what do you use SLI and PCIe for right now? Oh, that's right, gaming. OH, and Apple was also talking to ATI at some point in time about something, which I can't remember right now. (Sorry) So, apparently, Apple wants to bring gaming home, and Intel has the keys. Case solved. End of story.
You solved it.
AidenShaw said:
Hah!
Sorry, could you try to explain to non-geeks.
Not trying to be sarcastic just interested in what exactly your trying to say.
Nice post dudeChurch said:Alright guys, after reading 300 posts of junk and speculation and utter chaos, this guy finally got part of it right. If I remember correctly Intel owns the rights to PCIe. Apple doesn't have PCIe in it's machines yet. Either way, all of the new video cards are going towards PCIe. I read somewhere the other day that Nvidia's next generation video cards won't be AGP, only PCIe. This means that if Apple wants to try and stay up there with video cards and everything, they need PCIe. Now, both video card companies, ATI and Nvidia, are making a type of SLI compatible card. (ATI is developing theirs right now). To use SLI, you need PCIe. It was also mentioned in a previous rumor, Apple had hired/was going to hire, whatever, game guys. And what do you use SLI and PCIe for right now? Oh, that's right, gaming. OH, and Apple was also talking to ATI at some point in time about something, which I can't remember right now. (Sorry) So, apparently, Apple wants to bring gaming home, and Intel has the keys. Case solved. End of story.
Lacero said:
First of all, the x86 architecture is starting to show its age, and RISC is starting to take the lead.
Second, the x86 architecture is old and drags a long list of legacy crap.
Third, even if x86 was better today, it wouldn't mean it'd stay the best tomorrow.
RISC was (and still is) a forward-looking architecture and CISC was created because RISC wasn't fast enough in the beginning.
And fourth, just for the sake of it, Apple already switched from the 68K to the PPC and from OS 9 to OS X. In less than a decade (I think). Switching yet another time would really, REALLY piss off a lot of developpers, maybe enough to get dropped support from a few of them (when you have 5% of the market you don't want to piss off developpers, IMHO).
bbyrdhouse said:Hah!
Sorry, could you try to explain to non-geeks.
Not trying to be sarcastic just interested in what exactly your trying to say.
If you search this thread for his other posts and read them and do just a bit of searching the net for info, you could figure out what he is saying.
This whole rumor is moronic.
I heard from Steve Jobs' mouth LAST NIGHT that 'Apple makes the best hardware out there, and we have no reason to switch our strategy.'
So Apple takes a bunch of meetings with Intel...Intel sells a lot of different type of chips, and now the "press" spreads rumors that we have to deal with.
Why oh why will this rumor not die? You don't think Apple didn't do a long term deal with IBM so they could get the best possible price?
Moronic.
I heard from Steve Jobs' mouth LAST NIGHT that 'Apple makes the best hardware out there, and we have no reason to switch our strategy.'
So Apple takes a bunch of meetings with Intel...Intel sells a lot of different type of chips, and now the "press" spreads rumors that we have to deal with.
Why oh why will this rumor not die? You don't think Apple didn't do a long term deal with IBM so they could get the best possible price?
Moronic.
