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

Apple set to go Intel? (Again)

Go back to sleep ...

We wait all day for rumours and they give us this!!!???*&*

If thats the best they can do I am going to take my pathetic craving for unreliable gossip elsewhere.
 
ok so the rumor is complete BS, some new site trying to make a name for itself.

But why not a backup plan? Seeing as how Apple was royally screwed by putting all its eggs in one basket (i.e. Moto), I'm not opposed to Apple having a solid plan B. Yes IBM is no Moto. But who knows what the computing landscape will look like 7-10 years from now.

Now for some bit of crazy speculating: what if Apple develops a dual processor strategy, where they reserve PPCs for high-end workstations and Intel chips for low-end systems? I think in a year or so the 970/980 will surpass Pentiums/Xeons in performance. But Intel's offerings will always be cheaper. So cheaper chips for cheaper systems. And at the same time, give Apple more of a mass-market appeal and persuade the corporate world that Apple is worth a long-term investment.

For all those who rant about Apple 'being a hardware company first', adopting Intel does not mean Apple will abandon hardware. Rather, Apple will continue to make their own proprietary hardware, making sure the OS only runs on their hardware. The only thing different will be the main processor.
 
Another thought...why exactly would they have released the G5 if they are moving to Intel? All the R&D and sales for an entirely new chip and developer, and for it not to get past Rev. B? Also, at WWDC didn't JObs say Apple would be committed to IBM for a long time.
 
Originally posted by xpormac
Then they go to P5 .....no biggy.
Click to expand...
Yes, Intel will eventually make a Pentium 5, but they don't have one now and I'd bet they won't have one in the next year, either.

Intel's clock-speed-over-real-performance policy has screwed them over. They can't put together a fast enough 64-bit consumer processor yet.

Apple's got a good head start over Intel.
 
Originally posted by caek
Surely this kind of story is what Page 2 is for. The hallowed turf of the Main Page should be reserved for more credible stories.
Click to expand...
This is Page 2 material at BEST... 😡 Arn what do you have to say in your defence? 😀
 
Originally posted by Freg3000
Do you really think that Apple would force all software developers to recode ALL of their software to run on x86? Didn't they just do that with OS X three years ago?
Click to expand...

No, Apple didn't make their developers recode for OS X, because carbonising an application is not the same as recoding for a different hardware platform. Indeed, most well-written Carbon apps run on OS 9 too (the notable exception is Office X). Apple designed Carbon to get all the advantages of OS X without asking developers to have to drastically recode their applications. None of the really big name applications from OS 9 have been re-coded into Cocoa, as far as I know.

The fictional change to x86 is more similar to the 680x0 to PowerPC change in 1994, but even then the PowerPC could emulate a 68020 and run the old code (though not as fast as native code), which the Itamium certainly couldn't do, because it can't even run emulation of 32-bit x86 code at a sensible speed.
 
This rumors credability doesn't exactly rise when you read the opening paragraph:

"An original idea to release a duel platform MAC has been scrapped according to Apple insiders in San Francisco."

Could someone please explain to me what a "duel" platform "MAC" is? I thought it was "dual" platform "Mac" but of course I could be wrong, tomorrow maybe pigs can fly and come january certainly MAC(?) OS X will run exclusively on Intel-hardware. RIGHT!!
 
IBM G5 or x86 Intel, I care not. Just as long as its an Apple Box with OSX and runs speed rings around everything else, then Im happy.

Maybe the Intels will be in portables?? Ive heard its next to impossible to get a G5 into a Powerbook...

Next Powerbook will be a 3.0gHz Intel-driven, fuelcell-powered, 8x DVD burnin', Magnesium-alloy, Panther Super-laptop? Maybe. 😕
 
itanium? Yeah right

The amd opteron has already sold more chips than the "itanic". The G5 may even have more presales.

If sales dont pick up then this may be a dead chip in a few years.
 
The fact that they misspelled "dual" in the first paragraph makes me wonder about their credibility.
 
Well, Apple releasing OSX for Intel now would likely be very foolish, seeing how successful IBM, NeXT and Be were at competing with Microsoft on x86 (with OS/2, OpenStep and BeOS respectively). However, that might change if (as some speculate) there is a backlash against Microsoft when Palladium DRM is introduced.

I think it's likely Apple is prepared for this, even if it is a 'last resort' option. Rhapsody for Intel was a reality, and we all know what MacOSX was built on. I'd be astonished if they weren't keeping an x86 version of OSX up to date.

I wouldn't think the process of porting apps would be too painful for Cocoa developers, a recompile might even do it since Cocoa abstracts app code to a fair degree from the hardware. I'm not sure about Carbon, but it's possible; I do a lot of cross-platform work with QuickTime code, and quite a lot of the Mac APIs are available. Much of the source just needs a recompile.

Of course, it's still a pain for developers, but at least in this case there is the incentive for developers of a (potentially) much larger user base - as opposed to the move from OS9 to X when they were moving initially to a smaller userbase!
 
Originally posted by agreenster
IBM G5 or x86 Intel, I care not. Just as long as its an Apple Box with OSX and runs speed rings around everything else, then Im happy.

Maybe the Intels will be in portables?? Ive heard its next to impossible to get a G5 into a Powerbook...

Next Powerbook will be a 3.0gHz Intel-driven, fuelcell-powered, 8x DVD burnin', Magnesium-alloy, Panther Super-laptop? Maybe. 😕
Click to expand...

I think you have touched on a very real possibility. Why havn't we seen PB updates? Perhaps Moto is really having problems. Perhaps a small speed bump might suffice at the moment, but by next year if there isn't a replacement for the G4 in the PB line Apple may be forced to go Intel. They can't afford to loose PB sales. And I really don't see any reason they can't use both G5 and Intel. Power users will go for the fastest chip. Who cares what's inside, it's the OS that counts. Apple's industrial design will insure they are competitive with other PC makers, and this strategy would cause the IT world to take notice. If I could put OS X on my existing servers it would be happening immediately.
 
Originally posted by pyrotoaster
The P4's clock speeds are reaching their max, but the G5 is just getting warmed up.
Click to expand...

Hence the statement, "Intel is running out of steam." 🙄

Do some research on MHz/Wattage leakage due to heat on the P4. Or how the brand new processors practically NEED heat pipes or watercooling. Then again, you can also take a look at the ever growing longer-for more megahertz pipeline that has to be flushed ever so often.

This all coming from the company who won't spend a dime of research on industrial diamond semiconducters because it's just not needed yet. 🙄 🙄 😎
 
Originally posted by Kermit
Could someone please explain to me what a "duel" platform "MAC" is? I thought it was "dual" platform "Mac" but of course I could be wrong, tomorrow maybe pigs can fly and come january certainly MAC(?) OS X will run exclusively on Intel-hardware. RIGHT!!
Click to expand...
Here ya go... 😉
Originally posted by qwerpafw on Ars:

I can see the billings now, "Apple insiders fight to the death with duel platform MACs!--see the 10/100 gang take on a fully duplexed gigabit!"

😀 yeah, no credibility whatsoever.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Kermit
"An original idea to release a duel platform MAC has been scrapped according to Apple insiders in San Francisco."

Could someone please explain to me what a "duel" platform "MAC" is?
Click to expand...

I think he means a Mac that will run both OSX and Windows.

Ummmm......I think.😕
 
No way...

Apple won't even switch to a two button mouse w/ scroll wheel think they will go to Intel! No way...
 
Never Happen

Why would apple go X86 when a 1.6 970 is somewhat comparable to a 3 pent 4. And there saying 3 ghz in less than a year? no way, Apple has the edge on power. They would be crazy not to stay with the 970
 
Originally posted by agreenster
IBM G5 or x86 Intel, I care not. Just as long as its an Apple Box with OSX and runs speed rings around everything else, then Im happy.

Maybe the Intels will be in portables?? Ive heard its next to impossible to get a G5 into a Powerbook...

Next Powerbook will be a 3.0gHz Intel-driven, fuelcell-powered, 8x DVD burnin', Magnesium-alloy, Panther Super-laptop? Maybe. 😕
Click to expand...

With a 20 minute battery life... 🙄
 
Re: Never Happen

Originally posted by sonyrules
Why would apple go X86 when a 1.6 970 is somewhat comparable to a 3 pent 4. And there saying 3 ghz in less than a year? no way, Apple has the edge on power. They would be crazy not to stay with the 970
Click to expand...

Probably because they cant get a G5 in a Powerbook. We all know the G5 can be faster (though it may not be just yet) than any Intel, but maybe its a form factor thing. We all know how freakin hot the G5 is, and how how the Powerbook can get. Now combine the two.

ouch
 
arn, did this one slip through the page 2 detector? ;-)

I have but one thing to say...

...and all the software that depends on altivec is going to be....?

e.
 
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