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.
Businessweek: "Apple has deliberated over moving away from Intel chips"
- Thread starter gto55
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, that's great to hear. After launch, salespeople at the Apple stores can proudly proclaim how their computers run dozens of programs.
I think there're rumours they're going to make their own chips like the chip in the iPhone 5:
http://semiaccurate.com/2012/09/24/an-update-on-apple-moving-away-from-intel/
http://semiaccurate.com/2012/09/24/an-update-on-apple-moving-away-from-intel/
Guys, this is Businessweek, a clickwhore e-rag not worth the pixels it's printed on. They print rampant, blatant, attention-riling speculation all the time and it never amounts to squat. Disregard and go about your day in contentment.
I call BS on this story. It would be very expensive for apple to design a new architecture chip and even then they could be even worse than AMDs offerings! Apple can't go on thinking that they own every tech market out there. It just isn't possible, as there are so many things to focus on in business that you don't pay much attention to any of them as you have to work on all the other aspects that have to be worked on. This is why we have intel/AMD for our processor, nvidia/ATI for graphics and google or most third party software. Had this all Been made by one big company there wouldn't be near as decent quality as we get today!
Bringing the technology in house is very aggressive and risky business, but it'll pay off big if they can pull it off. Major productivity softwares will have to be willing to jump aboard and sail with it, and that's no small feat. What incentives are there from the software developers standpoint since the audience for the newly created market will be so far and few between?
The move from PowerPC to Intel made a lot of sense since it made Apple become more efficient, and taking advantage of existing technologies and riding on others R&D to get themselves further. The switch to Intel opened doors that they couldn't open prior. But stepping away from Intel to their own architecture may be counter productive. In the long run it may pay off, but it's definitely risky business.
The move from PowerPC to Intel made a lot of sense since it made Apple become more efficient, and taking advantage of existing technologies and riding on others R&D to get themselves further. The switch to Intel opened doors that they couldn't open prior. But stepping away from Intel to their own architecture may be counter productive. In the long run it may pay off, but it's definitely risky business.
No, i'll move away regardless - probably back to Linux or FreeBSD.
There is nothing wrong with x86. Yes it is an ugly hack of an architecture, but it is fast. And virtually no one programs in assembly language any more anyway, so you shouldn't care what the cpu is like internally.
PowerPC has nothing power competitive.
Intel has the best fabs in the world, and can supply on time and in volume.
Plus, currently i can run any mainstream operating system on my box, at native speed.
Move back to PowerPC? I lose VMware. I lose bootcamp. I'm stuck with Mac OS X (or Linux PPC which is pretty useless in terms of application support) - which, as much as I love the OS, does not serve all of my needs. I use my machine for work.
I'm starting to think Lynux will have soon its chance,look at Steam,
not only they're developing for Lynux but also started to sell apps instead of just games.
Windows 8?We'll see,if decide to be the next Apple ..no.
Otherwise if harvests ,what Apple is stupidly dismissing,the desktops..well it will make the new bang,games,apps,tablets,phones.
Let see..while Cook ruins all with the Forstall advices... .
not only they're developing for Lynux but also started to sell apps instead of just games.
Windows 8?We'll see,if decide to be the next Apple ..no.
Otherwise if harvests ,what Apple is stupidly dismissing,the desktops..well it will make the new bang,games,apps,tablets,phones.
Let see..while Cook ruins all with the Forstall advices... .
I could speculate that Apple is actually considering sub-licensing specific Intel CPU architectures, where Intel would allow Apple to design its own unique chips meants for Apple devices only. Analogous to how Apple now licenses ARM architecture but is able to design its own system on chips (SoC) meant to be used for Apple's own hardware (e.g. A6)
They certainly have more than enough money to do this. Just a matter of convincing Intel to go along.
They certainly have more than enough money to do this. Just a matter of convincing Intel to go along.
Without any real drag and drop between appz-real multitasking and rename extension capability with a visible real filesystem..no Ipad,iphone,i.device could ever substitute a real computer in the creation of contents.
Wait but wasn't this half the problem before with the whole PC v Mac CPU debate?
At least Intel seams to have a handle on releasing new CPUs regularly, compared to IBM?
Plus wouldn't this screw up the whole software issue again with some users yet to switch to Intel from PPC?
I don't like this one bit!
At least Intel seams to have a handle on releasing new CPUs regularly, compared to IBM?
Plus wouldn't this screw up the whole software issue again with some users yet to switch to Intel from PPC?
I don't like this one bit!
Infact if they will do it will be after having losed all their Pro base cutting desktops to become a toy factory.
It's only my opinion...
EDIT: And anyway Apple have way more money now than back then and they designed their own ARM chip for the iDevices.
Last edited:
I interpreted it as a move away from chips made specifically by intel, not that architecture. Something like that would be HUGE for AMD as they're starting to slip into obscurity.
I don't see why the non-pro machines would need an Intel chip, or even an x86 compatible chip for that matter. As long as the app store is "good enough", the only sticking factor would be Microsoft Word and the Adobe suite.
Oh my goodness, just a big fuss over nothing. "Apple has deliberated..." about moving away from Intel chips probably just means someone at a Board meeting said they'd heard Apple was finally going to release the fabled G6 PowerMac - to which someone suggested that maybe Apple should think about releasing a G9.75 chip for the Harry Potter fans ....
And after everyone wiped the tears from their eyes... they moved on to discussing Intel's roadmap for the next 10 years.
Seriously.... if I was a major shareholder in Apple, I'd actually want them to deliberate whether Intel chips still were the best choice. Especially if the conclusion was, repeatedly, that they were. These decisions need to be reviewed regularly. Otherwise you got locked into a "because we always did it that way" mentally. And it keeps your suppliers sharp if they know you aren't permanently locked into their solutions. "Deliberate" simply means they reviewed the pros and cons. It absolutely does not mean that they are necessarily taking any action.
And after everyone wiped the tears from their eyes... they moved on to discussing Intel's roadmap for the next 10 years.
Seriously.... if I was a major shareholder in Apple, I'd actually want them to deliberate whether Intel chips still were the best choice. Especially if the conclusion was, repeatedly, that they were. These decisions need to be reviewed regularly. Otherwise you got locked into a "because we always did it that way" mentally. And it keeps your suppliers sharp if they know you aren't permanently locked into their solutions. "Deliberate" simply means they reviewed the pros and cons. It absolutely does not mean that they are necessarily taking any action.
Doing this removes the ability to bootcamp or use parallels to run Windows. Doing away with bootcamp = losing a huge % of their customer base. I'm waiting on the next iMac, but I would immediately dismiss it if I learned bootcamping wasnt an option.