Phil Of Mac
macrumors 68020
I'm not sure, but from many accounts, I've heard that they're starting to run out of steam. Time will tell, but I'm sure that the PPC will be the better solution in the long term.
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 set to go Intel? (Again)
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
unless they change the processor up like centrino is, where it uses lower power and ghz but matches higher ghz processors.
Bring it on!
I would love to see OS-X run on my 3.06 Xeon's with 1MB Cache. I run Windows Server 2003 now because it is so much more stable and faster than Windows XP. I think OS-X would rock on a X-86 Platform as well.
As far as the PPC G5 goes, I love it. It's an excellent CPU. Remember who builds them though. I keep hearing everyone say Apple makes them. Not so! IBM makes them. IBM is one of first to manufacture X-86 computers.
Get over it! Both processor types are good. OS-X on PPC or X-86 is a great thing!
I would love to see OS-X run on my 3.06 Xeon's with 1MB Cache. I run Windows Server 2003 now because it is so much more stable and faster than Windows XP. I think OS-X would rock on a X-86 Platform as well.
As far as the PPC G5 goes, I love it. It's an excellent CPU. Remember who builds them though. I keep hearing everyone say Apple makes them. Not so! IBM makes them. IBM is one of first to manufacture X-86 computers.
Get over it! Both processor types are good. OS-X on PPC or X-86 is a great thing!
According to the account in "Apple Confidential", the "Star Trek" build was demo'd in front of a bunch of Apple execs including the head of hardware engineering. That guy saw his job flashing before his eyes. He made sure that project got stuck where the sun doesn't shine.
There's as much chance of Marklar/Star Trek getting released as there is of Microsoft releasing Microsoft Office for Linux. I.E. none whatsoever.
There's as much chance of Marklar/Star Trek getting released as there is of Microsoft releasing Microsoft Office for Linux. I.E. none whatsoever.
what the hell are you talking about? never said they won't match intel or amd.
<edit: im one of those people that love this, because the companies keep going against each other and processors just get better, faster, cheeper.>
edenwaith
macrumors 6502a
Whatever.
My subject pretty much sums it up. I'll believe it when I see it. While trying to port Mac OS X to an Intel structure might not be an impossible task, I certainly don't imagine Apple doing it anytime soon, especially with the G5 chip out now. It just would not seem to make sense for Apple to have spent a lot of time and energy on co-creating the G5 and then decide to go the x86 route. Maybe as Plan B, but not for now.
One of the reasons Star Trek [supposedly] did not progress further is that the PC version of Mac OS was running faster on 486 machines than on the new PowerPC chips. So why bother butchering their machine sales?
My subject pretty much sums it up. I'll believe it when I see it. While trying to port Mac OS X to an Intel structure might not be an impossible task, I certainly don't imagine Apple doing it anytime soon, especially with the G5 chip out now. It just would not seem to make sense for Apple to have spent a lot of time and energy on co-creating the G5 and then decide to go the x86 route. Maybe as Plan B, but not for now.
One of the reasons Star Trek [supposedly] did not progress further is that the PC version of Mac OS was running faster on 486 machines than on the new PowerPC chips. So why bother butchering their machine sales?
Phil Of Mac
macrumors 68020
Sure, but at that time, Apple wasn't as healthy as it is now, and the G4 debacle set us back. The mere fact that hte G5 has given us a big leap back into the race all of a sudden shows that we're gaining at a pretty fast clip. Now is the time for the true potential of the PowerPC to shine through.
Re: Re: Linux doesn't have any trouble
What do you think Apple is with less than 3% market share? I would call that a nich market. Apple would go from 3% to 30% if it supported multiple platforms. We all know that OS X is superior to Windows, but it's the other 97% that don't; if they did, I believe there would be a mass exodus from MS.
Also, I don't think that Linux' success can be attributed to just being open source. Apple supports almost all open source projects. Linux still costs money, just not as much as Windows. I think in IT it is MS security track record and their outrageous CAL licensing that has moved people to Linux. OS X can compete in this space, but they also will capture a larger percentage of home users (once people understand what they are missing).
What do you think Apple is with less than 3% market share? I would call that a nich market. Apple would go from 3% to 30% if it supported multiple platforms. We all know that OS X is superior to Windows, but it's the other 97% that don't; if they did, I believe there would be a mass exodus from MS.
Also, I don't think that Linux' success can be attributed to just being open source. Apple supports almost all open source projects. Linux still costs money, just not as much as Windows. I think in IT it is MS security track record and their outrageous CAL licensing that has moved people to Linux. OS X can compete in this space, but they also will capture a larger percentage of home users (once people understand what they are missing).
I am not suggesting they do. Let's see, if we walk down the isle at Best Buy Linux costs about $79 for a professional distribution. I know it can be had for free, but that isn't the point. If you had your choice between a $129 Windows XP or a $129 OS X which would you choose? When IT purchases a server with Linux it is not free, but it doesn't cost as much as Windows. Apple would attract a lot of people just because they wouldn't have to purchase new hardware to use the OS. Once they use it they will come back and when its time to buy new hardware who do you think they will look at first? Apple needs mind share as much as market share.
Re: Re: Re: Linux doesn't have any trouble
Thats your opinion, not everyones. 🙄 Even if they supported all hardware forms, there wouldn't be a mass exodus from MS.... 🙄
Thats your opinion, not everyones. 🙄 Even if they supported all hardware forms, there wouldn't be a mass exodus from MS.... 🙄
Re: Re: Linux doesn't have any trouble
Apple can do it better. (and thanks for the compliment) What Linux has failed to accomplish Apple can. I work for a small company, but I have already been tasked by managment to look at alternatives to MS. SECURITY is the issue driving this. At the moment I have to look at Linux and Solaris; but Unix is not for the faint of heart, it takes time to learn and master. It's a big reason I purchased an OS X workstation. Apple could go a long way to making adoption of it's platform relativly painless, but still have the Unix power. If I had an OS that ran on my hardware they would go for it, but trying to pursuade them to purchase all new hardware...forget about it.
Apple can do it better. (and thanks for the compliment) What Linux has failed to accomplish Apple can. I work for a small company, but I have already been tasked by managment to look at alternatives to MS. SECURITY is the issue driving this. At the moment I have to look at Linux and Solaris; but Unix is not for the faint of heart, it takes time to learn and master. It's a big reason I purchased an OS X workstation. Apple could go a long way to making adoption of it's platform relativly painless, but still have the Unix power. If I had an OS that ran on my hardware they would go for it, but trying to pursuade them to purchase all new hardware...forget about it.
This kind of logic just doesn't make any sense to me. Quite the contrary, Apple's leading design would make them sell even more hardware. They only have 3% market share. Imagine if they had 30%. Just the sheer numbers of people using their OS would drive hardware sales. Why would people prefer a Gateway or HP to a beautiful Apple? People are affraid to switch to Apple so they settle for a peice of crap HP, Gateway, or Dell because they have too.
And why is Apple considered a "hardware" company? They make some of the most amazing and cutting edge software out there (but we are the only ones who know that!). Imagine how much money they would make if all their iApps ran on both Windows and OS X. There are literaly millions of people who would drop their hard earned cash for this software. I think Apple lovers are just affraid because it would put Apple on a head-to-head battle with MS; and everyone who has tried to beat them has lost. Apple will not loose that battle. They have superior products and we all know it, but the millions of Windows users havn't even heard about it yet. Apple on Intel will change Apple, that's for certain, but it's a change for the better.
Analog Kid
macrumors G3
Personally I think this is a tired, recycled rumor, but because I'm bored I'll offer the following perspectives:
People seem focused on the "Intel is cheaper" aspect, but the article specifically calls out the Itanic as the processor to be used. Certainly not cheap, and certainly not a laptop processor! (Not sure what would worry me more, the heat of the plant or the tank of LN2).
I'm sure Apple is keeping an Intel build around. Not hard to do since NeXT ran on Intel when they bought it. Darwin for Intel is public. Whether it's a backup, or a possible dagger against MS, or both, it's a cheap development to keep in the wings.
I take it as a given that the Aussies confused statements from their sources, or that someone is intentionally spreading mis-information. With that in mind, it could be:
Intel trying to show that *someone* is accepting the Itanic. IBM hasn't, Dell ain't doing well with it, HP is panicked...
Someone trying to undercut G5 sales by implying that the platform is going away.
Apple trying to get IBM to allow them to run OS X on the Power4/5 directly as a high end enterprise system. I don't know, but I'd guess IBM is reluctant to OEM their high-end chips.
Maybe we'll see a shootout between Darwin and Linux on an Itanic at MW2004, just to show which OS has better underpinnings.
Most likely though, it's all just bunk.
People seem focused on the "Intel is cheaper" aspect, but the article specifically calls out the Itanic as the processor to be used. Certainly not cheap, and certainly not a laptop processor! (Not sure what would worry me more, the heat of the plant or the tank of LN2).
I'm sure Apple is keeping an Intel build around. Not hard to do since NeXT ran on Intel when they bought it. Darwin for Intel is public. Whether it's a backup, or a possible dagger against MS, or both, it's a cheap development to keep in the wings.
I take it as a given that the Aussies confused statements from their sources, or that someone is intentionally spreading mis-information. With that in mind, it could be:
Intel trying to show that *someone* is accepting the Itanic. IBM hasn't, Dell ain't doing well with it, HP is panicked...
Someone trying to undercut G5 sales by implying that the platform is going away.
Apple trying to get IBM to allow them to run OS X on the Power4/5 directly as a high end enterprise system. I don't know, but I'd guess IBM is reluctant to OEM their high-end chips.
Maybe we'll see a shootout between Darwin and Linux on an Itanic at MW2004, just to show which OS has better underpinnings.
Most likely though, it's all just bunk.
Phil Of Mac
macrumors 68020
People could care less what their desktop looks like underneath their desk. Its not being afraid, its that they know they don't have to shell out $1,500 for a computer that they just want to surf the net and check their mail with. I'm on an hp/compaq laptop right now and i'll tell you, from their past, they certainly have changed for the better. Much better product 😀 So no need to call them crap 😉
Wrong! MS has buggy code because they haven't really done a complete rewrite. All "new" versions of Windows are essentailly patched and padded versions of previous incarnations. Every time they come out with a new OS they claim it's new, but that is BS. What do you think "built on NT technology" means? And don't think Longhorn will be any better.
3.2 ghz actually 😉 Trying to find a website that gives their plain for the next year. Not having much luck.
