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

Apple in Talks with Intel?

this rumor is a good thing, if only to put the fire under IBM's butt to stop pussie footing around and give us a freaking mobile G5 already.

i was watching them comment on CNBC's Market Watch about this.
one analyst said "from a hardware standpoint, if you want to sell BMW's, you need to have a good engine. And Intel has the best engine in notebook computers right now" .... "IBM has to be sweating right now".
 
Apple buys Sony, or was it Sony buys Apple?

... must be a slow news day.

There's that rumor again about Mac OS on an Intel chip.

Apple buys Sony is another recurring rumor.

What? No whining for a G5 laptop? :cool:
 
jsw said:
The thought of all those innocent baby IntelMacs, fresh out of assembly, being hated and reviled and spit upon simply because of different genetics... it just breaks my heart.
Click to expand...
LOL :D

Are the Linux circles complaining about Intel? Out of curiousity I wonder how many viruses have made it through to Linux because of x86 based computers :eek:
 
Three words

NEVER GONNA HAPPEN!

Apple have invested far too much in the development of the Mac OSX and the transition to an Intel architecture would turn many Apple new comers back to Windows. However, if Intel could build a chip that works the same as an IBM PPC chip that would stir thing up a bit. If it came to that though, I’d put my money on IBM.
 
jiggie2g said:
In the long term Apple will be better off. IBM has already proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that Apple is not a priority customer. as Sony , M$ , and Nintendo have already leap froged Apple in the who get the CPU's 1st food chain.

I believe IBM has it's hands tied with producing millions of CPU's for every console maker , plus supplying the Highend server market with Power 4 and 5 processor it is already streached thin as it is .Then has to make room for Apple and it's G5 .

Sorry folks but I believe IBM has officially given Apple the shaft , just like Motorola did as they don't see the Mac market as a profitable enough market to keep investing money in R&D.
Click to expand...
What's up with comparing Apple's current G5's with processors in consoles that won't be out in the market for at least 6 months! You know they are demoing the Xbox 360 on PowerMacs at the moment, which means they don't have those chips yet! Don't you think Apple will have faster processors by the time th Xbox 360 start to sell???
 
Mitthrawnuruodo said:
Yes, but those buffer overflows cannot be executed on a PPC, and I can give you thousands of examples of using this exploit to run code on an Intel architecture... ;)

Along with permissions set properly and root privileges protections, which is shared/inherited from the *nix world, this is the main reason why there are no, nill, nought, null, nada virus for Mac OS X, yet...
Click to expand...

I don't know what you mean. I bought a book on security exploits and wrote a C program that does overwrite the stack. I did this on a G4 with OS X Panther. Of course, you'd have to plant the exploit in a process that has root permissions if you wanted to do real damage, and that's why I think OS X does a good job of preventing exploits. Its not the PPC.
 
scottschor said:
If they already have an OS ported to run on Intel, and it opens up new markets and/or offers opportunities for greater performance, why shouldn't they partner with significant others?

Manogomy? Humbug. They shifted from Motorola to IBM and no one lost any sleep over it. You think they're abandoning their core customers? Don't be silly. My trusty old G3/400 still works, still runs Tiger, and will do so for the foreseeable future.

If a partnership with Intel positions Apple for greater exposure and higher heights, then I have no problem with it.

In reading the previous post, it does seem more likely that this partnership may be for a PDA/Tablet type product, but whatever it is I hope it makes a tidal splash.

Go, baby, go.
Click to expand...
Does it work? I bought a G3/600 on eBay & the network port is dead.
 
Let's put this fire out...

-All

Wow, so much consternation and gnashing of teeth.

Apparently, the so-called 'source' (one guy, of course) for the 'two executives close to the situation' is non other than Paul Thurott: he-who-has-been-"predicting"-Apple-On-Intel-since-he-could-stuff-his-face-with-buffallo-wings-at-the-age-of-three. a.k.a. the man who, for some strange reason, is desperate to have this irrational "prediction" come true.

I'd link to the article with which he's patting hiself on the back, but I just bring myself to give that hack to get any more hits.

So, in other words, nothing more to see here, move along folks...
 
B-52 Macer said:
What's up with comparing Apple's current G5's with processors in consoles that won't be out in the market for at least 6 months! You know they are demoing the Xbox 360 on PowerMacs at the moment, which means they don't have those chips yet! Don't you think Apple will have faster processors by the time th Xbox 360 start to sell???
Click to expand...


Yeah they will Approximately .2ghz faster so will be up to 2.9ghz .. :rolleyes:

Yes they have those chip they are being produced as we speak, they just don't have they quantity required to release them now and it's not just PPC chips , ATI/Nvidia need to get GPU chips in quanitity to supply M$ /Sony for Xbox 360 + PS3 as well. they've had 2yrs to prepare for this i'm more then certain IBM already has more chips then you can count.

And Guess what in 6 month I will be typing another post on my Spanking new Athlon X2 4400+ so who cares what Apple has out by then it will be brand new and still be behind..Still running AGP and slow ass 3cas Latency DDR3200.

In 6 Months the Xbox 360 will be out and the Whole High-end and Mid-end PC market will be running Dualcore Pentium D's or Athlon X2's.
 
Anyways I think that apple will have a problem trying to cool a hardcore Intel chip like the P4 5xx, 6xx and 8xx especially with the thin designs that Apple likes to use (iMac, Pbook and iBook).

I reckon that if any talks are happening that they are about the following:

- Intel chips for PDAs and tablet Mac ( just hit the rumours the tablet has too ).
- Pentium-M perhaps for an iBook, PowerBook?

This is just my two coppers.

Anyways its not as if IBM and its PowerPC chips are duff anyways and therefore Apple is looking to Intel - because take the recent XBOX 360 for example - tri-core 3.2Ghz CPUs, lets have some of that tech in a PowerMac please!


Matt
 
adamjay said:
hell even IBM uses Intel chips in their eServer X-Series servers.
it ain't that far fetched folks.
Click to expand...

IBM wants to be everything to everybody, so no surprise there.

What's unbelievable is than Sun used to sell Xeon servers.
 
javiercr said:
Originally Posted by Hiroshige
Wow. I had not even known about the TSMC contract. Apparently many journalists do not know about it either.
I went back and looked at your posts from earlier in this thread and now I understand more.
Click to expand...


javiercr said:
whoever manufactures the thing is irrelenvant, 3rd party companies in asia will manufacture other companies' designs.
Click to expand...

It is quite relevant if you think about it.
 
Sorry, guys, but I call BS on this one. :eek:

You will recall that similar rumors circulated shortly before the release of the G5.

If this does happen, I may very well burn all my material possessions and live in a cave for the rest of my life....

... or totally switch to Linux. :cool:
 
interesting to hear non-programmers tell me how hard this would be, if it happened, for programmers to handle. This would be NOTHING like the switch from 68k to PowerPC and NOTHING like the switch from OS 9 to OS X.

The original MacOS was tied to the 68k processor relied on specific instructions that did not exist on the PowerPC such as the A trap for making system calls. And even after moving to the PowerPC, the OS was single threaded and many of the OS calls assumed single threading. The move to OS X was the move to a whole new operating system - it was far more dramatic of a change than the move to PowerPC from a programmers perspective.

Today, things are totally different. The OS is designed to be platform independent. The core of it has actually already run commercially on several different CPU architectures - 68k, x86, PowerPC. If apple decided they can expand their market by adapting x86 or some other architecture for some of their hardware, it will largely be a non-issue for developers.
 
Xtremehkr said:
I wonder if an Apple would retain its longevity if it started using Intel chips.

I don't know if it is the software makers or the hardware makers in the PC market who make the computers obsolete in such a short period of time.
Click to expand...
If apple started using Intel chips, they would have to be extremely price competitive, and could no longer demand high prices like it had before. Software would be the only advantage, unless the chips are way better than whatever is in most cheaper PC's. Wasn't it the money from the hardware that let apple develop such good software over the years?
 
alandail said:
except if it's running on an x86, VPC no longer has to emulate the x86 instruction set. There is work to do to get one OS running inside of another OS, but the apps themselves would run native.
Click to expand...

Yes that's true. However the original poster was claiming something like a dialog would pop up after you installed OS X for Intel asking if you wanted to somehow "port" all of your Windows apps to suddenly run on OS X...that's a lot different than Windows apps running on Windows running inside OS X.
 
the ipod uses a strongarm processor which is made by intel. apple will never switch to the x86 or other commoditized platform as the result would leave apple as a software company. I think the more likely story would be Windows running on PPC and HP making a workstation/server for the application.
 
muffler said:
Why the hell would you emulate the instruction set of x86 on its own architecture, just to get WIN API ?
Click to expand...

The point the other poster was probably trying to make is that you are ensured of better compatibility (i.e., pretty much perfect) if you are able to actually run Win32 apps on Windows itself inside of another OS rather than trying to map every single Win32 API call to some libraries which in turn try to mimic the functionality of the original function. The problem with trying to do this is that every OS is not going to have the exact same set of features and functions, so this mapping is never going to be perfect in every way.

By the way, how well does WINE run DirectX games?
 
I think you answer your own question...

The $5000 you don't want to spend in new software is what will motivate developers to write new versions.

Companies that develop software are not motivated by what is easy (or the love of Apple) but rather by what will make them money.


7on said:
OSX on X86 happens to be the worst rumor ever.

Why? All apps have to be rewritten much like OS9 apps had to be rewritten for OSX. Sure some developers might do it, but to my knowledge Apple has already made developers rewrite their apps twice (once for teh move to the G3 and another for the move to OSX). Another call for a rewrite quite possibly could upset many developers. For instance, Star Wars Episode 1 Racer works under OS9 only - it was never written for OSX therefore you can not play it. Likewise prolly will many games like Quake 3 and Halo and such will stop working with the switch to x86.

Not only that, how many companies that had OS9 versions offered OSX versions for free? None that I know of. So those of us that rely on expensive software will have to make multi-thousand dollar purchases with such an upgrade - just like what happened not 4 years ago with the move from OS9 to X. This will upset many professionals when you can run Photoshop 4 on even Win XP.

And don't say "It'll be easy for developers to do!" well those that develop for Windows don't have to rewrite their entire code every 4 years or so. SNES9x hasn't been touched by their developers for many many years (not counting the Custom Packs made by other devs using the free source code). And SNES9x still runs like always, the point of this is "Why?" Developers like their work to be easy, rewriting written apps is annoying to them.

Such a move to x86 will take way longer than the move from OS9 to X. The same reason PPC Linux apps won't work on x86 Linux. The only difference is Mac x86 apps will have to boughten as opposed to PPC linux apps.

OSX will not run on x86 generic machines. PearPC will be faster, but things like a Mac's GPU will prolly remain the same. Not to mention drivers from other manufacturers will not exist. And Open Firmware will not be licensed. You don't see OSX on other PPC machines do you?

This is no fanboyism here, I just don't want to have to spend $5000 rebuilding my software library when I need a new machine in 2 years.
Click to expand...
 
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