Excitement About Mac x86 POST HERE

[fiercetiger224]

I'm very excited to see that Apple will be moving to the x86 platform now. When I first heard about it, I really couldn't believe what Apple was doing, until I realized the possibilities. This includes running Mac OS X alongside Windows. I'm not saying that I really like running Windows, but there ARE some Windows programs that are worth using. And c'mon, GAMING is what you really would use Windows for. Just imagine, being able to use a dual-screen setup, running OS X on one screen and running a Windows based game on the other. Of course this might kill Mac game sales, but hey a person like me would even buy both versions of a game, since I like to do benchmarking and tinker around with that kinda stuff. Think of these possibilities...I believe there is a bright future for Apple.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

I, too, am looking forward to Macs with Intel processors inside (not necessarily x86), but for different reasons than you are.

1. The move will allow Apple to deliver the products customers want more freely than they have been able to with IBM and Motorola/Freescale.
2. The move will allow Apple to unclog their supply chain, which will, in turn, cause fewer product shortages, and therefore more sales.
3. Apple will get more attention than they did before the move - this could be good or bad, but I see it being mostly good.

 

[Veldek]

I, too, am looking forward to Macs with Intel processors inside (not necessarily x86), ...

Isn't it clear that there will be x86 processors used, as this is what's in the developer kits?

 

[wrldwzrd89]

Isn't it clear that there will be x86 processors used, as this is what's in the developer kits?

I'm not saying there won't be x86-based Macs. All I'm saying is that Apple may not make the entire line x86-based. It's also entirely possible, IMO, that the developer kits are x86 because that's all that's available right now - but I suspect that anything of this nature (non-x86 Intel Macs) is at least 5 years away.

 

[dmw007]

I am excited in part because Intel's Pentium M chip is awesome- it whoops the Pentium 4 and is clock for clock as fast or faster than an Athlon 64. Sadly, Intel's current desktop chips (ie- Pentium 4 & Pentium D) get slaughtered by IBM's PowerPC G5.
No doubt the future Intel CPUs will be much better/faster, but the current ones suck when compared to the G5. So excited for the future possibilities, not the current options (with the exception of the Pentium M).

 

[Veldek]

I'm not saying there won't be x86-based Macs. All I'm saying is that Apple may not make the entire line x86-based. It's also entirely possible, IMO, that the developer kits are x86 because that's all that's available right now - but I suspect that anything of this nature (non-x86 Intel Macs) is at least 5 years away.

But wouldn't this mean that another transition is on the way? Unless these would be PPC chips, which would be the only thing I can imagine without causing more problems.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

But wouldn't this mean that another transition is on the way? Unless these would be PPC chips, which would be the only thing I can imagine without causing more problems.

No, I was referring to possibilities like a forthcoming Xstation from Apple being based on Itanium chips, for example.

 

[Veldek]

No, I was referring to possibilities like a forthcoming Xstation from Apple being based on Itanium chips, for example.

I obviously have little knowledge about this, as I thought that Itanium is based on x86, too.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

I obviously have little knowledge about this, as I thought that Itanium is based on x86, too.

Itanium is an EPIC (Explicitly Parallel Instruction Computing) architecture. x86 is CISC instructions with a RISC core. They're two completely different beasts.

 

[cube]

Itanic also does slow x86 emulation.

 

[rosalindavenue]

I'm excited because I'm a laptop person-- I'll never buy another desktop for personal use. Apple couldn't cram the G5, a server chip, into a laptop, and the Pentium M was really starting to smoke the G4-- so I think it was a needed move from a laptop standpoint.

 

[michaelrjohnson]

I'm excited because I'm a laptop person-- I'll never buy another desktop for personal use. Apple couldn't cram the G5, a server chip, into a laptop, and the Pentium M was really starting to smoke the G4-- so I think it was a needed move from a laptop standpoint.

Agreed.

 

[fiercetiger224]

Hmm......The Pentium M is definitely a mighty chip! Hopefully Apple does try to at least have some kind of deal with Intel to make an exclusive chip and chipset for their computers. Such as, a new x86 chip with not just MMX, SSE1-3, but maybe another instruction set of some sort, similar to even Altivec. We still don't know what's going on with Apple and Intel to even justify such a thing to happen. But hey, we can imagine can't we??? :-D

HOPEFULLY now Apple's computer's will be cheaper than they used to be, around $300-$1000 cheaper. That'd just make my day.

 

[Flynnstone]

Itanium is an EPIC (Explicitly Parallel Instruction Computing) architecture. x86 is CISC instructions with a RISC core. They're two completely different beasts.

What if ... Apple can compile for the RISC core. My understanding is that the P4 runs x86 via a high speed hardware emulation method. If this is true, what performance gains can be made to run code native to the RISC core? Perhaps the core is (VLIW) Very Long Instruction Word core like the ... Trans whatever Linux Torvolds was working at.

Ah Ha.
http://www.x86.org/articles/computalk/help.htm
What if Apple can compile directly to VLIW. It doesn't need x86 compatibility precisely. I smell performance.

Wouldn't it be interesting if Apple could kick the snot out of Windows on similar hardware Imagine Steve's joy

 

[jiv3turkey748]

two words: pentium m

 

[Flynnstone]

two words: pentium m

One word , one letter