Apple Wants Intel Chips Early?

[k2k koos]

what if..

unlike Dell, Apple is an engineering company, in the sense that they do a whole lot more in research and development than DELL does, who just builds clones essentially.
Apple mey be able to share development costs of new Intel chips and therefore get the first pick, as oposed to Dell who get's "paid" by intel for endorsing their cpu's in their commercials (as are many others, "ping pong pang pong, intel inside".
I don't see apple using that in their commercials, not cool enough, and more inclined to pay for development,especially if their version of the chips have something in store that is for Apple's own use (who knows, an altivec engine perhaps... ) I'm just speculating here, but some of it might not be that far fetched...

 

[solvs]

A lot of people are stupid.

I know no one is going to read this, but that made my day.

If I ever change my sig, that will probably be it. I'm sure there have been 3 pages of people posting since I started this a minute ago, so I wonder if anyone has proven SA correct by talking about the G5s in the new xBox and how great the Cell is.

 

[840quadra]

Perhaps Intel is going to get back at Apple for years of public jabs at their product line?

Meh,

I would rather deal with that, then Microshafts way of simply bringing companies out of business with sly back door tactics. If Intel were smart, they would release the chips to Apple first. Apple's platform is more controlled, with better controls then many other companies, and Apple can do the R&D work in the real world before larger companies have to. Granted apple's work would be secret to the rest of the world, but intel could lock into the deal, shared information exchange with Apple on what Apple computer finds.

But then again, if Apple would run into lots of problems it may cost them money, and customers depending on how flaky the new technology is.

 

[willyjsimmons]

Have you used Intel Extreme Graphics

So what makes a MaTel any different from a Dell, nothing really other than OS X. So does that mean that Apple will have to drop they price to what Dell offers since everything inside is the same with the exception of the OS. Apple no longer has an excuse for charging more.

The newest onboard video from intel, beats the hell out of the mini, emac, and imac.

Over 200MB dynamic, PCI express dual display capable.

If you're serious about your gaming, then you buy an aftermarket card and slap it in.

If you're expecting to play the latest and greatest games on just 64MB of RAM, then you're not thinking straight.

 

[fordlemon]

You must be a fanboy.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2374

according to this article, the turion is just a rebranding of another chip.

And keep in mind, it's still 90nm.

Nice try though.

Ok, that OLD article clearly states exactly what I said. The Turion is more powerful and uses less power when even compared to a POS Centrino.

Work bought me a P4 Centrino laptop. Cost $400 more then my Turion and worked half as fast with less battery life and many less features. Didn't even have bluetooth or a DVD burner.

 

[fordlemon]

If you disagree with my only assertion that Macs just work, then please provide a cogent response instead of nitpicking at me.

News flash, your x86 machine hasn't froze because you're a geek, no disrespect intended.

I did. You just have too much water on your brain.

 

[budugu]

Ok, that OLD article clearly states exactly what I said. The Turion is more powerful and uses less power when even compared to a POS Centrino.

Work bought me a P4 Centrino laptop. Cost $400 more then my Turion and worked half as fast with less battery life and many less features. Didn't even have bluetooth or a DVD burner.

probably you are getting confused between a laptop and the processor ... there is more to the computer than the processor and intel or AMD largely have nothing to do about whether there is a DVD burner or BT in it!

 

[shawnce]

Do you know the reason they are less virus prone? Obviously not.

Do you? Obviously not.

Well, it's because most of the programs written for the Apple are written to use special intruction sets availabe on the RISC cpu. Now that they are switching to x86 a ApDell will be just as vulnerable as any Windoze machine.

Oh come on... Do you understand the difference between a ISA and an operating system?

Just because Apple will start using Intel CPUs (x86) does not magically make Mac OS X any more vulnerable to virus then it is when running on PPC. Windows virus wont magically start to infect Mac OS X running on x86.

A "virus" writer can code in PPC, x86, etc. instructions but they have to code to a target operating system and instruction set. They have to know the functions available from the operating system and often have to know the expected location of those functions to do what they want to virus to do (especially so for buffer overrun using worms) and of course have to leverage a vulnerability know to exist on the target platform.

Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux all have had and continue to have such vulnerability.

If any thing features in Intel (and AMD) chips can help an operating system prevent certain types of attack vectors.

 

[dubbz]

Work bought me a P4 Centrino laptop. Cost $400 more then my Turion and worked half as fast with less battery life and many less features. Didn't even have bluetooth or a DVD burner.

You`re talking out of your ass. P4 has nothing to do with Centrino.

 

[cbigfoot1987]

Intell and amd

why dont they burn the deal with intel and join with AMD i know they would love to Join Apple!!!

 

[egor]

Dell and Apple have very different business models, Dell is efficent.. cheap.. and cheerful.. whilst apple aims higher, asks for people to pay premium prices..

..isn't it obvious that Apple should be paying more to get them early than Dell will be to getting them on time? I don't entirely see the problem with this, other than Macs not being able to compete price wise just yet.

 

[willyjsimmons]

Ok, that OLD article clearly states exactly what I said. The Turion is more powerful and uses less power when even compared to a POS Centrino.

Work bought me a P4 Centrino laptop. Cost $400 more then my Turion and worked half as fast with less battery life and many less features. Didn't even have bluetooth or a DVD burner.

It's more 'powerful', because it's nothing more than a desktop chip, renamed.

'Centrino' is the total chipset, designed specifically for the mobile segment.

And what does bluetooth and a DVD burner have to do with AMD being better than intel?

It's already been established that AMD based systems are less expensive (for certain configurations). And the reason they're cheaper has nothing to do with the CPUs, and more to do with the schwag motherboard and controllers being used.

At the high end, AMD CPUs are only slightly cheaper than Intel.

 

[greenstork]

I did. You just have too much water on your brain.

No, you didn't disagree with any of my assertions, you simply said x86 works fine and is just as susceptible to viruses.

You also rudely assumed I didn't know why Macs didn't get as many viruses, which really had nothing to do with what I was saying, it was just a potshot. Stop trolling and be respectful.

 

[Anonymous Freak]

Intel and computer manufacturers

This is not unheard of. When the Pentium III 1GHz came out, Intel supplied it to a select few companies first, more than three months before it became generally available.

Intel loves Apple. Apple produces the designs Intel loves to show off at trade shows. Intel has been trying to get Apple to use their processors for YEARS.

Apple loves to get product early, and has done so before. The nVidia GeForce3 came out on Apple's Power Macintoshes a few weeks before they became available to the PC market.

Intel is notorious for limited supply of new product for the first month or so. So, how best to limit demand than to only let a 'limited market' company have access to it first?

I can easily see Apple getting access to new processors a month or two before anyone else. This was probably already arranged, and is most likely what sealed the exclusive contract with Intel over AMD. And while Intel said they didn't offer Apple anything 'out of the ordinary', this is perfectly ordinary for Intel and Apple both.

 

[dubbz]

'Centrino' is the total chipset, designed specifically for the mobile segment.

Technically, "Centrino" is nothing but a marketing term. It specify the use of a certain CPU, chipset and wirless networking adapter.

 

[decksnap]

I agree with Silicon- the average user is not really concerned with the architecture. You have to understand that to Apple, the roadmap for Intel's processors simply looks a lot better than IBMs, regardless of what is on the market NOW.

 

[greenstork]

This is not unheard of. When the Pentium III 1GHz came out, Intel supplied it to a select few companies first, more than three months before it became generally available.

Intel loves Apple. Apple produces the designs Intel loves to show off at trade shows. Intel has been trying to get Apple to use their processors for YEARS.

Apple loves to get product early, and has done so before. The nVidia GeForce3 came out on Apple's Power Macintoshes a few weeks before they became available to the PC market.

Intel is notorious for limited supply of new product for the first month or so. So, how best to limit demand than to only let a 'limited market' company have access to it first?

I can easily see Apple getting access to new processors a month or two before anyone else. This was probably already arranged, and is most likely what sealed the exclusive contract with Intel over AMD. And while Intel said they didn't offer Apple anything 'out of the ordinary', this is perfectly ordinary for Intel and Apple both.

I would guess that Apple will get the chip at least a few months ahead of time, all box builders do, or at least a prototype. They still have to engineer around the chip, particularly a 'systems' company like Apple.

 

[decksnap]

Intel is notorious for limited supply of new product for the first month or so. So, how best to limit demand than to only let a 'limited market' company have access to it first?

I can easily see Apple getting access to new processors a month or two before anyone else. This was probably already arranged, and is most likely what sealed the exclusive contract with Intel over AMD. And while Intel said they didn't offer Apple anything 'out of the ordinary', this is perfectly ordinary for Intel and Apple both.

Hmm.. This makes a lot of sense actually. I think you might be on to something.

 

[Anonymous Freak]

I would guess that Apple will get the chip at least a few months ahead of time, all box builders do, or at least a prototype. They still have to engineer around the chip, particularly a 'systems' company like Apple.

Yes, pretty much all of the OEMs get prototypes way ahead of time. I'm referring to production parts. Intel has been known to release production parts to only a select few (even just one) OEMs a month or two ahead of other OEMs and the general public. Again, the 1GHz Pentium III is one of the biggest examples. They gave it to Dell exclusively for about two weeks, then Gateway and a couple other OEMs for another few weeks, THEN finally released it into the channel as retail boxed and for small OEMs. Yes, Dell and other OEMs had engineering samples ahead of time to validate their end products with; but it was Dell that got it first.

Now that Intel has stylish Apple as a client, they would be more than happy to see the new 'Pentium 5' (or whatever they end up naming it,) show up at an Apple Event a month before anyone else has it. Why? Because by having it be an Apple exclusive for a few weeks draws attention not only to Apple, but also to Intel. (Like a slap at AMD: "When was the last time you saw a stylish computer with an awesome OS with an AMD processor, huh?!")

Note that I'm not saying anything about any superiority of Intel's products over AMD/IBM/Freescale, I'm just talking about Intel/Apple exclusivity.

Disclaimer: I used to work for Intel; but at the time I owned a Mac, and and AMD-powered computer. I have no processor loyalties at all, other than 'what's good'.

 

[pubwvj]

Do you know the reason they are less virus prone? Obviously not. Well, it's because most of the programs written for the Apple are written to use special intruction sets availabe on the RISC cpu. Now that they are switching to x86 a ApDell will be just as vulnerable as any Windoze machine.

Wow! You just demonstrated that you know next to nothing about programing, operating systems and hardware. Good job!

Fact: A Windows specific virus will not run on Linux machine even though they can both run on x86 chips. Likewise, a Windows virus is not going to run on the MacIntel machines, unless you use an emulator but then you are right back to Windows the same as on an emulator on PPC.

Fact: Windows is so virus prone because Microsoft has such poor security in ther OS. It is not the hardware, it is the OS.

Fact: You stopped listening a long time ago. C'est la vie.

 

[840quadra]

Dell and Apple have very different business models, Dell is efficent.. cheap.. and cheerful.. whilst apple aims higher, asks for people to pay premium prices..

Dell Cheerfull !?! ROFL

Yeah, and Apple is all serious business, Plans for 2006 are to drop ALL iLife applications, and other current bundled software. this will be in preparation for the worlds best spreadsheet and flow chart software for the home.

I agree apple aims higher, and does cost more. But in my opinion it offers much better amenities for the price. The only thing i can't personally justify is the cost of Apple displays, but that is an other topic all together.

 

[1984]

Folks, this is a rumor and from a very dubious source.

 

[MikeAtari]

You guys forgot the Source...

You guys forgot the Source of this Rumor.

Look at the Inquirer's past predictions.
Highly unreliable, highly disrespectful of Apple.
They love to start flame wars.
This is one of the AMD KISSUP sites.

They've tried to burn Apple a number of ways.
- Exaggerate Apple reliablity problems, in spite of statistical evidence that apple ships the best systems out there.
- Exaggerated "New" system specs.
- The latest is the "Scratch" problem with the nano.
- The constant use of the "Reassuringly Expensive" phrase. These guys aren't accountants because they can't seem to do price/hardward/software and value comparisons very well. Of course not, Apple doesn't run AMD, and G*D forbid we all don't run Amd.

I love AMD, but, I don't attempt to put an Axe in Apple's back because they chose Intel. But, these guys do it all the time.

They say "All rumor's eventually come true". But, they haven't gotten 1 Apple rumor correct.

Respectfully,
Caveat Emptor

 

[egor]

Dell Cheerfull !?! ROFL

Yeah, and Apple is all serious business, Plans for 2006 are to drop ALL iLife applications, and other current bundled software. this will be in preparation for the worlds best spreadsheet and flow chart software for the home.

I agree apple aims higher, and does cost more. But in my opinion it offers much better amenities for the price. The only thing i can't personally justify is the cost of Apple displays, but that is an other topic all together.

No.. 'Cheap and Cheerful'. I think you misunderstood.. everything, though.

 

[Marvy]

Exactly.

Folks, this is a rumor and from a very dubious source.

Exactly, and it seems we're missing the topic anyway... has anyone actually READ the article? It's not about releasing MacTel's early (nor is it about whether or not Intels are a good choice for apple.

Oh, and one more thing: If I have to listen to another one of those "Intels make Macs more virus prone" BS, I will seriously have to hurt my hardware, which would be a shame. So please don't post stuff like that.