Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
GeeYouEye said:
Can't answer the first one (but you are absolutely right about it not being on the card) due to NDA (since no one's figured it out yet), but the answer to the second one is PCI express x1. Interestingly, the PCI express x16 slot appears (though I could be wrong) to only have electrical connections for 8 lanes rather than 16, AFAICT... doesn't matter though... this is, after all, only a developer preview.


Interesting comment regarding PCI express. Obviously Apple isn't so naive to think that benchmarks would not be released in-spite of the NDA, however, the FSB is only 800mhz yet the processor is 3.2ghz so why isn't the FSB 1.6ghz? Is this an Intel drawback or are they deliberately sandbagging?

I can see a number of reasons to sandbag, they don't want to release a system that out runs existing hardware that Apple is going to have to try to sell over the next two years. Secondly when they do release the real thing, they will want to make sure it beats expectations in performance.

Of course the case is empty, that is one of the main reasons why Apple wants to swap. The G5 is just too hot it requires too much cooling hence the problems with the iMac and lack of portable machines. The current G5 case is a monster much bigger than the old B&W case. The Macintel is going to be a very much smaller and quieter machine and I think it will beat the G5 on every front by the time it is released.
 
enough already

You would expect intelligent post from adults but that is not what you get here, lets go ahead and use some common sense here people.

1) This move in no way is going to affect Apples market share! This is basically the same as BMW coming out with a new, improved engine and has nothing to do with the end of MAC. It is about time Mac's will have a bit of industry standard, including top notch parts that are new technology. Lets face, I don't care what you say these p4 chips can smoke the G5's in almost every aspect!

2) Apple is not going to support your mac so that you can run windows on it and be virus free. If you decide to run windows on it, you are "hacking" it and they will not support this, yes it can be done however you are on your own. Just as if you want to install linux on your iPod, or linux on your PS2 it can be done but isn't supported. Enough about installing windows on your mac already.

3) When has apple ever let you down with there design standards? Of course they slapped some cheap MOBO's in these already laying around G5 towers for the developers! If you were going to test something would you go out and buy all new parts or would you check your closet first to see what you have laying around?!?! For thoes of you that have no idea what you are looking at you, this is not standard for intel machines you are looking at a crap motherboard setup. Allow me to give you some background here, I am part owner in a networking / IT company that has over 50 clients each with atleast 60 computers. We build alot of workstations, we know a thing or two about good and bad setups. Supermicro is by a long shot the best motherboard out there, yes MSI is decent but when you need 99% uptime, supermicro is the way to go. These boards we use make the boards (built by Foxxcon = crap) in the current G5's look like micro ATX boards. Apple will design a system that flows well, they are known for this. I can tell you right now my personal systems I build for my self make the G5 towers look small, and no water cooling is not only in macs, I have had it for over 5 years!

STOP YOUR SPECULATING IT IS TOO EARLY!! I'm sorry to tell you but when you get your hands on a "MACTEL" you are going to kick your self in the head for thinking the G5 is faster. Enough, Apple is a big company with some of the best engineers in the U.S. They are going to continue to innovate beyond every other company, Microsoft is a SOFTWARE company so quit comparing them with Apple. Who cares about market share, ya ford has a much bigger share in the U.S. then BMW/Mercedes but I think we all know which one is the winner here when it comes to the better car. The reason not every one drives a BMW, they are expensive! Same as Apple, they will never beat Microsoft, and Longhorn will be enough to keep them locked in. However as always people using Windows (FORD) will always wish they could afford an Apple (BMW)
 
mcarnes said:

Well, if one really looked at it...

Macintosh II in 1988 added slots. This is counter to the wishes of SJ, in that the box was expandable. Did the "Mac" die then?

In 1994, Apple brought out the PowerPC Mac. This is mostly an IBM chip. Apple never produced a Mac with the Motorola 68060. Was the Mac dead then?

OS X brought us a completely new OS just five years ago. The OS kernel that was the "classic" Mac OS is no longer being developed. Is the Mac dead now?

This is evolution my friends. My beloved Amiga was a very elegant machine, so was the Mac, 68060, etc. Time marches on. What's to say in another 6 or 8 years, a new processor comes along that makes the ia32/64 stuff obsolete. If anything, Apple's move today keeps us ahead of the curve. I'll use the 6 or 8 year time-table as an example; If some huge hurdle in architecture comes along, Apple will be better prepared with their ability to compile for multiple architectures. At the very least, we'll be used to it and not in a kerfuffle over making "my windows program" work on the latest nVidia super-mega computer processor.

(Note: I have no idea where I pulled the word "kerfuffle" from. I've never used it before in a sentence, but I had heard it before. Strange.)
 
just another drm

Ok I understand the marketing reasons behind the EDID chip (so don't give me a lecture on business practice), but morally, why is it different from DRM ? The evil music business now seeks to use hardware to control and limit how its customers can use the product they purchase while our beloved Apple seeks to... oh wait... exactly the same thing ? I have to say I loath the intentional crippling of technology for any reason.

I've been using Macs since the days of the Classic, but I don't seek a feeling of superiority or membership of an elite club via my ownership of an Apple manufactured box as some posters seem to (though the box IS superior without a doubt ;-) ), and will loudly applaud the first person to crack the protection and allow the Mac OS to run on any Intel box.

It is NOT necessary to use these tactics to remain profitable, and if it seems to be the case then it might suggest that there's something wrong with your business model - particularly in the light of emerging alternative paradigms such as OSS.
 
ryanyogan said:
...then BMW/Mercedes but I think we all know which one is the winner here when it comes to the better car. The reason not every one drives a BMW, they are expensive! Same as Apple, they will never beat Microsoft, and Longhorn will be enough to keep them locked in. However as always people using Windows (FORD) will always wish they could afford an Apple (BMW)

ARGGGGGGGGGGGG! Stop with the inane car analogies!!!!!! Or at least find a new one.

Mac == Mattel Intellivision
Win == Atari 2600

Don't like that? How about...

Mac == Gouda Cheese
Win == Cheese Wiz

If anything, The Mac is a Honda or Toyota sedan and Windows is a Pontiac Aztec. ARGGGGGGGGGG! Now I'm doing it. Analogies SUCK!!!!!
 
Partition limits?

Assuming Apple are going with BIOS instead of OperFirmware (as stated in the universal binary guide pdf Apple distributed), then how many partitions per disk can you have? As I understand things, in a standard BIOS a disk can only have a maximum of four partitions. Can anyone with experience of BIOS confirm or deny?

If true, that'd really suck... A standard OS X install on a blank disk yields three partitions already, (the partition table, OS9 drivers and the OS), meaning you could only have two other partitions on a disk (the OS9 driver partition won't be there I assume). I for one was hoping to be able to boot OS X, Windows XP, Linux and Zeta from different partitions on the same disk on a new Macintel PowerBook......
 
Gabhlan said:
Assuming Apple are going with BIOS instead of OperFirmware (as stated in the universal binary guide pdf Apple distributed), then how many partitions per disk can you have? As I understand things, in a standard BIOS a disk can only have a maximum of four partitions. Can anyone with experience of BIOS confirm or deny?

If true, that'd really suck... A standard OS X install on a blank disk yields three partitions already, (the partition table, OS9 drivers and the OS), meaning you could only have two other partitions on a disk (the OS9 driver partition won't be there I assume). I for one was hoping to be able to boot OS X, Windows XP, Linux and Zeta from different partitions on the same disk on a new Macintel PowerBook......

As others have pointed out, Apple will almost certainly NOT be using a standard BIOS chip a la current PC mobos. Even if O.F. actually is a kind of "BIOS" by definition. They will almost certainly be using EFI, as Intel seem to want to push this technology forward, and it has only been hampered by the backwards mentality... er... compatibilty for Windows that has meant that X86 mobos in general are still using old fashioned BIOS chips.

Now can we all pay attention, and stop rehashing the same old misconceptions, as typified by the "This mobo looks fugly, can't believe Apple would put this out" brigade.

As and when the new Intel Macs come out, they will be up to Apples usual standard of build quaility, attention to detail, etc, and will be as elegant a design as ever, hardware and software alike.

Not sure why so many people think that a Mactel will be the same as a Dull.
 
Damn Apple's got me under a strict NDA. According to the NDA, I'm not allowed to tell you what's in the NDA... rule number two: no talking about fight club and the like. So I'm afraid I must be quite vague. I've read over that thing a couple of times so I think the following remarks should be fine, but please correct me if I'm wrong...

• Apple's done a hell of a job.

• Rosetta is beautiful

• Many of my development worries were very quickly put at ease.

• After a day of work on the Dev machine, it's become obvious that not only is this transition going to be smooth as silk, but it's probably one of the best decisions Apple has made. After years of hearing how much better the IBM processors are, it's quite a shock to see what the intel processor can actually do.

- IG
 
steeldrivingjon said:
The virus won't know how to deal with the Mac OS X filesystem, so it couldn't do anything to the files. If it mucks with the partition table, or tries to write raw data to the Mac OS X partitions, there might be trouble. I don't know if there's any way to protect from that.

I have no idea what a Windows virus would do to an OS X volume on a firewire drive. I wouldn't be surprised if Windows virii just ignored such things, because they aren't common on Windows machines.

So that might be an option : set up a backup on a firewire disk, or even a RAID mirror.

The safest way to use Windows on an Intel Mac would be to run it inside VMWare or VirtualPC. With those, you can create the Windows volume as a disk image-type thing on your disk. This lets you run Windows in its own sandbox.

Most viruses won't do a &@#%*& thing to an HFS+ partition, as most viruses (as they are today) simply work with the filesystems the OS knows how to read. If you have a piece of software that runs on the Win partition and can read and write HFS+, the virus will be able to affect that. If you have MacOpener running on your Windows partition, MacOpener will probably enable viruses to read and write to your HFS+ partitions, including FireWire partitions (including iPods). However, the virus will not be able to infect your OS X system - i.e., if you get infected with a spambot worm in your Windows system, it won't run on your OS X system, though it might be able to write copies of itself to the HFS+ partition that OS X runs on (if you have MacOpener, that is).

Some viruses can muck with the partition table or write binary data to partitions. There are also BIOS flash viruses, which by altering the firmware on the BIOS would affect the functioning of the hardware regardless of the filesystem or operating system being used They are rare, though, because they take far more in the way of programming skill than the script kiddies and spam kings who write most of the viruses are capable of, and are pointless: they don't give you anything more than a criminal record.

In other words, let's say you had a Macintel system with no HFS+ partitions on its internal drives, a Mac-formatted iPod, and an external FireWire drive with a Windows XP partition on it and with MacOpener installed, and that the firmware (let's say EFI) on the computer enabled bootable FireWire drives and was flashable. Let's say MacOpener for these machines mounts your internal HFS+ partition as your E:\ drive, and your iPod as your F:\ drive. Next, let's say that someone writes a new version of the Win95.CIH virus (aka Chernobyl) that runs under XP and can flash EFI (rather than running only under 95/98/ME and flashing BIOS like the real CIH virus can), and spreads as a worm via an unpatched Windows vulnerability. You now have a very expensive set of paperweights.

Thing is, I am not sure that one could WRITE a version of CIH for XP (it only runs on 9x), or one that could flash EFI. Though Symantec lists CIH as being in the wild, I haven't heard of anyone getting it (or anything like it) for years. Such a virus would require real skill, and would have no use except simple mayhem: no spambots. Such virulent viruses aren't common any more.

See http://www.sophos.com/virusinfo/articles/cihfive.html for a quick, non-technical discussion of Win95.CIH, see http://www.theregister.co.uk/2000/09/15/chernobyl_virus_author_faces_3years/ for some more information on the author, and see http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/cih.html for the Symantec description of the virus.

Short answer: if you want to run Windows on your Mac (when it becomes possible) and access your Mac files, use antivirus software and a good firewall product (and proabably it's best to put the machine behind a router of some sort), and patch as soon as patches are available and worry about what software they break later. But don't be terrified of it: the odds that you'll get something that slags your machine, or that affects your OS X partition in any way, are very, very, very low.

These are also good ideas for Macs without Windows. Though I think the contribution of low market share to Mac safety is over-rated (I think there are things about OS X that make it harder to write effective viruses), there are proof-of-concept viruses that demonstrate ways of attacking OS X, and there are likely many thus far undiscovered vulnerabilities in OS X (though I would argue that there are probably far fewer than in Windows). Antivirus software and firewalling are just good sense.
 
virus1 said:
so does this mean somone can just rip the mac os off one of these macs and install it on thier pc? because that chip they discribed isn't there yet, i don't see why not. if this is true, it will only be a matter of days untill we see OS X for pc floating around the bittorrent sites.

Edit: Ha.. nm.. im a dumbass

actually if it gets out on the net it'll likely be picked up by hackers who will want to try and get it to work on their systems. if that happens, i'd guve it a week or 2 b4 a crack becomes available.
 
IBSNOWEDIN said:
Anyone planning on getting a mactel, should start reading more on PC hardware websites so that they will know what they are getting in the future, and understand it better.


That is the lowest end intel chipset in intel's line, it is the same thing that Dell puts into their lowest end intel PCs! that is why it only cost $999.


Intel will make a custom chipset for them but not a motherboard, all generic intel boards are made by Foxconn. If i was apple i would be looking towards DFI, MSI, or ASUS motherboard makers which make some in creditable motherboards with lots of custom goodies. Also i would be calling up nvidia asking them if they can develop an intel chipset for the mac(which they already do for the PCs) becuase atm they are the BEST and highest quailty motherboards around Specially the nforce4, nothing can touch it.

That is what i would do.


there is an intel chipset from nvidia, but the issue is that it's not intel's stuff, just intel compatible. per the agreement, intel wants apple's $ and not for it to go to anyone else. ;)
 
Dr. Dastardly said:
This raises a question I have been running around in my head for a while. A pointless question but one I want answeared none the less. Will the new boards be green or remain blue. I know no one knows but do all boards HAVE to be green. I had no idea how sick I am of green boards until I saw the inside of a Powermac for the first time with lucious blue boards *drool*.

blue, magenta, purple, black, orange... do some research, PC mobos from 3rd party vendors for the DIY and modders markets, have all kinds of cool colors.
 
You're missing something.

ryanyogan said:
1) This move in no way is going to affect Apples market share! This is basically the same as BMW coming out with a new, improved engine and has nothing to do with the end of MAC. It is about time Mac's will have a bit of industry standard, including top notch parts that are new technology. Lets face, I don't care what you say these p4 chips can smoke the G5's in almost every aspect!

2) Apple is not going to support your mac so that you can run windows on it and be virus free. If you decide to run windows on it, you are "hacking" it and they will not support this, yes it can be done however you are on your own. Just as if you want to install linux on your iPod, or linux on your PS2 it can be done but isn't supported. Enough about installing windows on your mac already.

1) I agree, exept for the part about market share. I think it will dramatically increase Apple's market share as Windows users can enter the Mac world without risk. I know MANY Windows users who drool over Apple laptops. If they could run Windows and Mac OS there would be no question what they would buy.

2) Here you're very wrong. No, Apple won't do that, but someone else will. There will be Windows for Mac packages from third parties that repartition your hard drive, download the latest drivers, and install/maintain antivirus software. Because of the limited number of configurations Macs have, it will be a lot easier to test the entire line with Windows. I maintain that Macs will be the most stable and prettiest Windows boxes on the market.
 
Pre-G5 days

insanelygreat said:
After a day of work on the Dev machine, it's become obvious that not only is this transition going to be smooth as silk, but it's probably one of the best decisions Apple has made. After years of hearing how much better the IBM processors are, it's quite a shock to see what the intel processor can actually do.

It must have been painful for Steve to see a 2.2+ Ghz Macintel in the Marklar lab back when PowerPCs were stuck at 1 = 1.25 GHz, even knowing the G5 was on the way.
 
JW Pepper said:
... the FSB is only 800mhz yet the processor is 3.2ghz so why isn't the FSB 1.6ghz? Is this an Intel drawback or are they deliberately sandbagging?

The FSB is 800 MHz because the memory is effectively 800 MHz. The FSB is also 64-bit bi-directional.

The PPC970 (in the high end PM) is also using 800 MHz memory, so Intel isn't "sandbagging" as much as Apple is "over-hyping" a bus that's under-utilized because it's running faster than the memory controller in the Northbridge.

Apple marketing has it's own "MHz myth" about FSB speeds (of course we don't mention the Powerbooks).
 
alexeismertin said:
Do you think the Mac will adopt PC things like DDR888, Dolby Sound, multiple SATA ports etc built into the motherboard?

Of course - Apple will be using the same CPU chips, and Intel will be making slightly modified mobos for Apple.

It would cost Apple *more* for the motherboards if they asked Intel to remove the goodies that the PCs get!

Imagine the whining if "Alienware's kerfuffle is running at 1066 MHz, and Apple's sandbagging with 800 MHz".... (And, BTW, high end systems like Alienware will be the PMi's (PowerMacintel) real competition, as well as the systems that HP and Dell call "workstations" instead of "desktops".)

ps: Many of those on-board SATA controllers from Intel and others include hardware RAID.
 
mnemonix said:
Ok I understand the marketing reasons behind the EDID chip (so don't give me a lecture on business practice), but morally, why is it different from DRM ? The evil music business now seeks to use hardware to control and limit how its customers can use the product they purchase while our beloved Apple seeks to... oh wait... exactly the same thing ? I have to say I loath the intentional crippling of technology for any reason.

I've been using Macs since the days of the Classic, but I don't seek a feeling of superiority or membership of an elite club via my ownership of an Apple manufactured box as some posters seem to (though the box IS superior without a doubt ;-) ), and will loudly applaud the first person to crack the protection and allow the Mac OS to run on any Intel box.

It is NOT necessary to use these tactics to remain profitable, and if it seems to be the case then it might suggest that there's something wrong with your business model - particularly in the light of emerging alternative paradigms such as OSS.


Well, actually, there is a difference between the media companies and Apple. There is a qualified "fair use" right to play CDs and DVDs you purchase on any hardware you like. This is the so-called "timeshifting," and "spaceshifting" you read so much about, and has be adjudicated in the courts, and even codified to some degree in the copyright laws. The DMCA makes all those rights harder to get at, and it is through the DMCA that the media companies use DRM to block legal licensees from space and timeshifting. That is why so many people are upset about the use of media companies employing drastic DRM measures.

On the other hand, Apple is not employing DRM to block customer's legal rights. It is using it to protect their Intellectual Property in a way that doesn't interfere with customers rights to use the product as intended. If Apple did not do this it would be negligent. It has a duty to prevent its product from becoming open to all. The fact this chip might artificially make running the Mac OS more expensive is a different matter. One, as a consumer, you must consider. But, to say Apple is crippling its hardware is not a true statement. The chip only ensures its software can only be installed on its hardware. That is a legitimate use of DRM.
 
SiliconAddict said:
1002-7375.gif


Price of new PowerMac + $5 for a can of spray paint.

Taping all those solder points, capacitors and transistors is gonna suck. :p
 
mainstreetmark said:
It's like the first look at your ugly newborn baby, knowing that everyone else is looking at it too, and hoping that one day, it'll shed it's ugliness and evolve into something great.


how true!
 
Scottgfx said:
ARGGGGGGGGGGGG! Stop with the inane car analogies!!!!!! Or at least find a new one.

Mac == Mattel Intellivision
Win == Atari 2600

Don't like that? How about...

Mac == Gouda Cheese
Win == Cheese Wiz

If anything, The Mac is a Honda or Toyota sedan and Windows is a Pontiac Aztec. ARGGGGGGGGGG! Now I'm doing it. Analogies SUCK!!!!!

I've always hated the Apple=BMW analogy too. I thought it was especially silly because I spent so much time picking up my buddy from the BMW service center in my Ford. Everyone I've known with a BMW spent a ton of time in the shop and eventually traded it in on something else because they were tired of how often they had to take it in for service. Seems like a really bad thing to compare your Apple to, unless you're trying to impress someone who only cares about style (most of them do look pretty good).
 
alexeismertin said:
Here's a blue motherboard:

http://uk.giga-byte.com/Motherboard/Default.htm


Do you think the Mac will adopt PC things like DDR888, Dolby Sound, multiple SATA ports etc built into the motherboard?


err and...

'GIGABYTE GA-8I955X Royal motherboard reaches RECORD BREAKING 1066MHz DDR II memory frequency'

Depends. The PowerMac (and Xserve) will probably use the P-M based Xeon when it transitions in 2007 as its a workstation. Whatever technology is available it'll use. I expect custom motherboards to fit the case.
 
I'm not quite sure why everyone is so interested in running windows on their macs. I cant wait for the switch to intel, because it means I'll finally have access to things like flash player and nvidia drivers on linux! (at least I hope!) yay!
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.