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.
Behind the Apple-Intel Deal, IBM Surprised
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
MikeBike said:
I think they had the dream, but the dream turned into a bit of a nightmare (certainly for Motorola) when Jobs unilaterally killed the clones.
The gaming market (I imagine bigger than Apple) gave IBM a chance to increase their customer base for PPCs, and Apple wasn't sharing enough of the development costs for them not to go for that.
We'll never know if killing the clones was the best in the long term, but that decision I think contributed to IBM/Moto's ambivalence to PPCs for Apple...
beatle888
macrumors 68000
themacman said:
jobs doesnt seem to like to disclose anything unless he has to. just because he says no to something now doesnt mean that apple wont prepare for when that "no" turns into a "yes". its sorta like what just happened with intel. or what about the flash based iPods. both of these examples were originally declared by jobs as something apple wasnt interested in. my point is...no one knows what apple is going to do, especially the posters on a fan rumor site.
themacman said:
Yes, but he also said that Apple's been creating Intel builds of OS X for five years, well before the G5 switch, so who knows? This amounts to an insurance policy for Apple - the question is whether the premium's too high.
The Bill Gates Factor!!!???
- You say it was the clones but that was what 10 years ago.
- The current situation has these elements.
Apple is the ONLY seller of PowerPc Desktop and Laptops.
Apple is selling less expensive xServes using the 970 then IBM.
( Now IBM could educate it's buyers about the benefits of the True POWER Line, better protection against Cosmic Radiation with protected datapaths from memory to the cpu for example. )
But the trend is commodity hardware, and the xServer is commodity hardware compared to the Power servers.
Finally, no one has brought up the Bill Gates Sleeze Factor.
IBM has always been willing to "Follow the Money" in the short term, even if in the long term it hurt them.
So, here's some
<Speculation>
Microsoft goes to Power for Games.
But, Gates says we also want a SLOWER ROADMAP for our friends at APPLE.
We don't want our IP mixed with their IP.
We don't want you to sell Apple cheap processors.
To Gates it's just a game of Chess and he enjoys screwing the competition.
So, did IBM agree to onerous new contract terms with Microsoft to screw Apple?
We need a Deep Blue Throat to find out.
</Speculation>
irobot2003 said:
- You say it was the clones but that was what 10 years ago.
- The current situation has these elements.
Apple is the ONLY seller of PowerPc Desktop and Laptops.
Apple is selling less expensive xServes using the 970 then IBM.
( Now IBM could educate it's buyers about the benefits of the True POWER Line, better protection against Cosmic Radiation with protected datapaths from memory to the cpu for example. )
But the trend is commodity hardware, and the xServer is commodity hardware compared to the Power servers.
Finally, no one has brought up the Bill Gates Sleeze Factor.
IBM has always been willing to "Follow the Money" in the short term, even if in the long term it hurt them.
So, here's some
<Speculation>
Microsoft goes to Power for Games.
But, Gates says we also want a SLOWER ROADMAP for our friends at APPLE.
We don't want our IP mixed with their IP.
We don't want you to sell Apple cheap processors.
To Gates it's just a game of Chess and he enjoys screwing the competition.
So, did IBM agree to onerous new contract terms with Microsoft to screw Apple?
We need a Deep Blue Throat to find out.
</Speculation>
VanNess
macrumors 6502a
rotorblade said:
I don't think you understand. Apple didn't do this simply because Jobs was pissed (although he would have every right to be). Apple did this because they had absolutely no other choice available to them. No matter how clever or innovative your plans are for a transition like this, no company would ever take on something this enormous at this time unless they had no other conceivable option available to them. You can bet the farm that if there was a sliver of a chance for IBM to keep pace with the rest of the industry, developing advancing and delivering the PPC, then the big switch to Intel would of never happened. There's been a lot of tabloid-like references to Jobs personality, but he's also almost universally regarded as pretty charismatic guy. As Apple's unofficial lead marketer, he has a unique ability (actually rare for a company CEO) to connect with ordinary people as well as industry professionals. He's also regarded as being very sharp, and as a technology visionary, he's been right on the money almost every time. But even all of those qualities won't save him (or Apple) if the products he sells come up empty-handed next to the competition.
It doesn't seem to be sinking in how royally IBM f'd up with the G5. IBM says they were "surprised," but how on earth could that possibly be? They've been sending the message consistently to Apple since the introduction of the G5 - via broken promises, massive shipment delays, and anemic G5 updates - that they were incapable of being a viable CPU solutions provider. Furthermore, IBM is no stranger to the computer technology industry. Having failed itself in the PC business, IBM probably better than most understands that maintaining key strategic technologies on your platform are essential for survival in today's market. To say that they were "surprised" by Apple's move to Intel assumes that they are either clueless about the very basics of computer industry competition, or they were unable to meet their technology commitments for internal reasons unrelated to cost (if cost was really an issue, that would have been vetted by the parties before this. Therefore no claim of "surprise"). No matter how you spin it, in the end IBM looks hopelessly feckless. And for Apple, that spells trouble with a capitol T.
In fact, if you want another clue regarding how bad this was for Apple, it was when Jobs declared that this was going to be "the year of HD video." Well, H264 is here. Now look at the processor requirements for playing H264 HD content on Apple's Quicktime website. Looks like they are pretty much locked into the upper end of the G5 line, not much headroom left over. Even the 1.6 G5 can't do it, and the G4's, which includes EVERY Apple laptop, need not apply. H264 is a massively important technology for Apple going forward on both the consumer and professional level, and about 3/4 of it's own computer line-up is presently shut out from playing just a 2 minute movie trailer.
Of course, that's not a reason to throw a tantrum. It's a reason to directly address the problem with real solutions for customers, not with another round of delays, excuses, and broken promises. The obsolescence clock is always ticking, whether your name is Steve Jobs or not.
By the way, thanks to scu and sacear for your comments earlier, Appreciate it.
beatle888
macrumors 68000
manu chao said:
where do you get the time frame of one to two years to update and optimize to a point where the intel will out perform a G5? didnt they demonstrate that Mathmatica was recompiled in two hours AND running multiple computations?
I think you might be wrong...we will see. you have to remember OSX was designed to run on other chips from the beginning. if the app is native OSX it should be cake to recompile. im not worried about performance at all.
we will see.
MikeAtari said:
Yes killing the clones was almost 10years (7.5 or so) ago but I think it fairly closely coincided (perhaps coincidentally) with Motorola's lack of enthusiasm for investing lots of money in PPC development for PCs... which triggered a whole sequence of events leading to the present situation. Of course Motorola's inability to improve 68K performance was the thing that led to the switch to PPC in the first place.
In some ways Motorola (Freescale now I guess) again is the cause for this transition as well, since they weren't able to get G4 performance up to par, and IBM apparently wasn't interested in catering to Apple's laptop market.
I actually had a related thought to the Microsoft/IBM Machiavellian speculation, and that was what if Microsoft tries to undercut the Intel/Apple collaboration by getting Intel to develop Micorsoft/Windows specific performance enhancements in the next couple of years...
bbyrdhouse
macrumors 6502
As soon as the switch to Intel takes place, or as soon as ne iMacs, eMacs and mini's are avaiable I will purchase 3-4 of one of them or maybe a mixture.
Although I am a little bummed that I just purchased my first Powerbook in February and now the switch to Intel.
After gloating to all of my buddies about the mghtz myth and everything I have a little bit of egg on my face. But I do think that this will be better for Apple in the long run. Hopefully this also means more software companies will support the Mac platform.
Also, I guess this means that Suse Linux will run on the new Macs. Cool!!! A Powerbook that runs Suse.
Although I am a little bummed that I just purchased my first Powerbook in February and now the switch to Intel.
After gloating to all of my buddies about the mghtz myth and everything I have a little bit of egg on my face. But I do think that this will be better for Apple in the long run. Hopefully this also means more software companies will support the Mac platform.
Also, I guess this means that Suse Linux will run on the new Macs. Cool!!! A Powerbook that runs Suse.
VanNess said:
I understand Steve's reason(s) for going to Intel and your take on the matter doesn't differ much from mine. Sorry you spent all that time commenting on something I already agree with.
bbyrdhouse said:
That'll teach you not to gloat. Though you may feel bad, look on the bright side; you can't possibly look as silly as Steve!
Still, the MHz myth is not myth. Clock cycles aren't everything. Intel has proven that with their Pentium-M architecture.
I think it's overstating it a bit to say that IBM royally screwed up... First we (or at least I) don't know exactly what the agreement they had with Apple was, other than apparently (based on what Jobs said) they promised 3GHz by last year. Second a 2.7GHz G5 is quite competitive with a 3.6GHz Xeon for applications it was designed for (see the recent arstechnica article). Although agreed that it lags a bit behind AMD.VanNess said:
Did IBM agree to target laptops with the G5? Again, I personally don't know, maybe they did. However, it could be the deal was that IBM would provide bragging rights on high-end pro-desktops and Moto/Freescale would take care of laptops/consumer machines.
True IBM had problems with their process, but apparently so did the rest of the industry.
I don't think IBM could be surprised that Jobs was unhappy with their current relationship, but I imagine the way the split went down might have been unexpected.
I don't get it.
Why surprise the company you're leaving? Don't you want to make the threat, try and bargin and see if they can give you something better, first? If you're gonna leave, you should at least see if you can force them into working a bit for you first.
Maybe they got a contract down for specs and numbers of chips for this year, first, and didn't want to loose bargaining power for that?
Or maybe they've been making the threat for so long, it's been taken as an empty threat, and this is part of Jobs trying to project his personality, make intel work harder, because now they know, that they won't see the end coming if they screw up, he'll go behind their backs and get what he wants?
I'd actually bet on the last one. It's good to have the image of playing hardball.
Why surprise the company you're leaving? Don't you want to make the threat, try and bargin and see if they can give you something better, first? If you're gonna leave, you should at least see if you can force them into working a bit for you first.
Maybe they got a contract down for specs and numbers of chips for this year, first, and didn't want to loose bargaining power for that?
Or maybe they've been making the threat for so long, it's been taken as an empty threat, and this is part of Jobs trying to project his personality, make intel work harder, because now they know, that they won't see the end coming if they screw up, he'll go behind their backs and get what he wants?
I'd actually bet on the last one. It's good to have the image of playing hardball.
BenRoethig
macrumors 68030
wdlove said:
Yeah. Excuse my language here but if Steve pissed off IBM buy keeping them out of the loop on this? If they choose not to produce chips, Steve's transition schedule is null and void.
chatin
macrumors 6502a
BenRoethig said:
Just in case, I bought this closeout iMac G5 at Compusa this afternoon. Brand new, giveaway priced at $749. "managers special" It's only a 1.6 but I upgraded my own RAM for $19 (after rebate!) and put in the Tiger upgrade DVD from my mac mini.
I set the processor control form auto to highest to give the illusion that I spent real money on an expensive Mac PPC! 😉 Compusa reported brisk sales of the bargain machines. 🙂
Not much chance of that. Semiconductor fabrication isn't something you just start or stop all of a sudden. IBM would have investment in materials and fabrication based on their existing contracts with Apple, so they'd be losing out too if they stopped production for Apple. From what I've read it was a pretty low margin business for IBM anyway, so if anything they'd be trying to make sure Apple all the Chips they'd planned on, otherwise they'd be behind.BenRoethig said:
Plus I'm sure the contracts are pretty water tight, and Apple's legal team would just love to have a go at IBM!
AidenShaw said:
Oh please. He obviously just shelled out bucks for a mini, and went out and bought an iMac shortly thereafter. There's worse things in the world then taking a copy of an OS that you legally own and bending the rules a little bit. Im not advocating piracy, but its getting a little old all the people talking about "pirating" the OS, and the ramifications of such. Steve Jobs just announced Tiger was the fasting selling release in OS history. I don't think that lends itself to this notion that a activation key needs to be put in place. It might be done, but I assure you it's not due to "lost" sales. Just imho... 🙂
AidenShaw said:
The fact that he bought it this afternoon entitles him to an upgrade. I would agreee that if he doesn't take advantage of the Mac up-to-date program, then he is pirating OS-X. On the other hand, if he installed an existing copy in anticipation of sending for and receiving his u-t-d copy, I see nothing wrong with that. As he provided little information regarding his intention, I'll reserve judgement.
Steve gave IBM slack
Agreed, and Jobs also sort of apologized for IBM instead of criticizing them (by explaining the difficulty in 90 nm process, etc.). He gave them several months, and they didn't produce. That's probably the reason he opened the door to Intel.
aswitcher said:
Agreed, and Jobs also sort of apologized for IBM instead of criticizing them (by explaining the difficulty in 90 nm process, etc.). He gave them several months, and they didn't produce. That's probably the reason he opened the door to Intel.
