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.
'Intel Based Mac' Rumor Roundup...
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If Steve Jobs gets up on stage tomorrow and really does announce a to all these developers a switch to Intel in the future...isn't that like saying to those developers "everything youve done in the past few years and everthing your working will now be useless? lol Can you really see that happening? 
Hi
That's actually my impression. This rumor goes way back. I believe, that someone got a wiff of it again, published it [again], and since it would [hopefully] push IBM to stop being an @$$, they allowed it to continue but [Apple] knowing well that it isn't true.toaster_oven said:
My thought for today (although probably someone else had this one already...)
IIRC, not too long ago, IBM stated that they wanted to "open source" the 970. I don't remember the details, and I'm too lazy to look them up right now, but...
Technical issues aside for a moment, Apple switching to Intel has to be one of the biggest marketing disasters ever. Everything Apple has touted in the past, from the "megahertz myth" to the "fastest computer in the world" is suddenly going to be perceived as, well, wrong. The other guys actually had the better chip design. The hoops Apple would have to jump through in order to dissuade that interpretation given a switch to the formally inferior Intel isn't going to be easy, if even possible at all.
And what about tomorrow's WWDC? Have the developer's been given any advance notice of this? (WSJ and cnet's "sources"?) I couldn't imagine being in a developer's shoes, paying a lot of money to attend what looks like a big Tiger love fest, then sitting down for the keynote and have a bomb like this dropped on my lap. Where's the love? lol
Which brings me to my speculation of the day. What if Intel called Apple and said, "You know that open source announcement IBM made about the 970? Well, we're in. We are going to start developing chips based on IBM's open source spec, maybe even make some improvements to it. You guy's interested?"
Fast forward to the WWDC. Apple announces that Intel is going to contribute to the design of the G5 and build chips based on that design. (Recall Apple's modern open source heritage.) Job's further states that Apple will use whomever provides the best, fastest, most affordable 970 chip, be it IBM or Intel (or Freescale?)
Like AMD and Intel's competition today for x86, Apple can say that, for the first time, they have choice. Several of the most respected technologists in the industry will vie for the CPU slot in Apple's circuit boards. At the end of the day, everyone wins.
IIRC, not too long ago, IBM stated that they wanted to "open source" the 970. I don't remember the details, and I'm too lazy to look them up right now, but...
Technical issues aside for a moment, Apple switching to Intel has to be one of the biggest marketing disasters ever. Everything Apple has touted in the past, from the "megahertz myth" to the "fastest computer in the world" is suddenly going to be perceived as, well, wrong. The other guys actually had the better chip design. The hoops Apple would have to jump through in order to dissuade that interpretation given a switch to the formally inferior Intel isn't going to be easy, if even possible at all.
And what about tomorrow's WWDC? Have the developer's been given any advance notice of this? (WSJ and cnet's "sources"?) I couldn't imagine being in a developer's shoes, paying a lot of money to attend what looks like a big Tiger love fest, then sitting down for the keynote and have a bomb like this dropped on my lap. Where's the love? lol
Which brings me to my speculation of the day. What if Intel called Apple and said, "You know that open source announcement IBM made about the 970? Well, we're in. We are going to start developing chips based on IBM's open source spec, maybe even make some improvements to it. You guy's interested?"
Fast forward to the WWDC. Apple announces that Intel is going to contribute to the design of the G5 and build chips based on that design. (Recall Apple's modern open source heritage.) Job's further states that Apple will use whomever provides the best, fastest, most affordable 970 chip, be it IBM or Intel (or Freescale?)
Like AMD and Intel's competition today for x86, Apple can say that, for the first time, they have choice. Several of the most respected technologists in the industry will vie for the CPU slot in Apple's circuit boards. At the end of the day, everyone wins.
good feeling
Well, when i first heard this rumor, i got chills down my spine. I couldn't belive it, i mean i just switched a year ago...
Today when i got back from a 3day trip and read all 18 pages of rumors, and checking all links, i calmed down.
You know why?
Looking at Apple products, the one thing common is they have kick ass looks and have high quality. This is because Apple care about inovation. And i dont think they will change a bit if they go from IBM to Intel/AMD. I think they will still kick ass!
What do you think?
Well, when i first heard this rumor, i got chills down my spine. I couldn't belive it, i mean i just switched a year ago...
Today when i got back from a 3day trip and read all 18 pages of rumors, and checking all links, i calmed down.
You know why?
Looking at Apple products, the one thing common is they have kick ass looks and have high quality. This is because Apple care about inovation. And i dont think they will change a bit if they go from IBM to Intel/AMD. I think they will still kick ass!
What do you think?
Actually far from it for a vast majority of developers... in fact it could allow developers to make more money by selling upgrades to existing products. For many developers products it wouldn't be much more then a recompile away.MacSA said:
It is not like Apple is switching from Mac OS X to Windows... (again not trying to say the rumors are true, I don't know).
So basically its stupid to buy a Mac before 2006?
If the rumors are true, and Apple will start the transition to Intel in mid-2006, would it be dumb to buy any Mac without the Intel chip, meaning you'd be left behind when everything is switched to Intel chips after the transition ends?
Like for example, is an IBM processor like running Mac OS 9... with limited ability as far as programs go? And instead of just having to upgrade to Mac OSX, you'd have to upgrade your entire processor to Intel for most programs to work?
Hopefully I'm missunderstanding this, because this would totally suck because I was planning on buying a PB for college in the fall of 2006.
If the rumors are true, and Apple will start the transition to Intel in mid-2006, would it be dumb to buy any Mac without the Intel chip, meaning you'd be left behind when everything is switched to Intel chips after the transition ends?
Like for example, is an IBM processor like running Mac OS 9... with limited ability as far as programs go? And instead of just having to upgrade to Mac OSX, you'd have to upgrade your entire processor to Intel for most programs to work?
Hopefully I'm missunderstanding this, because this would totally suck because I was planning on buying a PB for college in the fall of 2006.
Off the wall
Well I've been following these threads most of the day, and the sway and opinion is quite bizzare, but interesting some of the best debate and non-aggresive on the most part.
Perhap Apple and Intel will be working together, along with Sony and HP and allowing OS X on HP and Sony machines running PPC, the only confident way to secure this would be massive levels of chip production, ie via intel.
Tomorrow will bring some intresting times I hpe, who knows
Well I've been following these threads most of the day, and the sway and opinion is quite bizzare, but interesting some of the best debate and non-aggresive on the most part.
Perhap Apple and Intel will be working together, along with Sony and HP and allowing OS X on HP and Sony machines running PPC, the only confident way to secure this would be massive levels of chip production, ie via intel.
Tomorrow will bring some intresting times I hpe, who knows
This is a HUGE misconception. Developers would only need to simply recompile their programs, and they'd be set (if Apple doesn't have any type of emulation).MacSA said:If Steve Jobs gets up on stage tomorrow and really does announce a to all these developers a switch to Intel in the future...isn't that like saying to those developers "everything youve done in the past few years and everthing your working will now be useless? lol Can you really see that happening?
If Apple can increase marketshare by switching to x86, then it will increase profits for developers, which is a good thing.
Even driver software would probably only need a recompile, because they don't utilize assembly-level code, it's all high level API's. The only problem for developers switching to x86 would be little/big endian issues (the way bits are stored in memory) and Altivec code, which is really only for the big multimedia developers. All the small shareware apps would take a few minutes to get ready for the x86.
Could be the PB is driving the change.
Saw this on zdnet.
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-5731417.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed
Notebooks are outselling Desktops (no surprise to anyone here, I'm sure).
I think the inability to put the G5 (or mobile varient thereof) into the PB was it for Apple. Even the 7448 and upcoming dual-G4 from Freescale are too little, too late.
I expect the PB to be one of the first changes to the x86 platform (when Yonah comes out).
The PM's will probably see the 970MP in a refresh next year and that'll be it for the Moto/IBM Apple years.
Honestly, I think in five years we'll all look back and view this as a great move. Apple will finally have something more than 5% of the PC Market.
The really interesting question: Will Apple allow HP to dual-source? I can't imagine that Apple would permit clones--but Apple/HP do have a relationship.
The only problem is (as everyone under the sun has noted) the transition. I was in the market for a new PB, but if (or rather when) they annouce the change, I think I should stick with what I have until they release the new Yonah-based x86 PBs.
Cheers,
T
P.S. Wow, no rumours about WWDC and now big rumours.
Saw this on zdnet.
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-5731417.html?tag=zdfd.newsfeed
Notebooks are outselling Desktops (no surprise to anyone here, I'm sure).
I think the inability to put the G5 (or mobile varient thereof) into the PB was it for Apple. Even the 7448 and upcoming dual-G4 from Freescale are too little, too late.
I expect the PB to be one of the first changes to the x86 platform (when Yonah comes out).
The PM's will probably see the 970MP in a refresh next year and that'll be it for the Moto/IBM Apple years.
Honestly, I think in five years we'll all look back and view this as a great move. Apple will finally have something more than 5% of the PC Market.
The really interesting question: Will Apple allow HP to dual-source? I can't imagine that Apple would permit clones--but Apple/HP do have a relationship.
The only problem is (as everyone under the sun has noted) the transition. I was in the market for a new PB, but if (or rather when) they annouce the change, I think I should stick with what I have until they release the new Yonah-based x86 PBs.
Cheers,
T
P.S. Wow, no rumours about WWDC and now big rumours.
VanNess said:
I defiantly hope this is what Steve is going to say...this would mean competition for faster PPC chips which would never be a bad thing for apple
Heres to hoping :crosses_fingers:
What about the average consumer?
My point of view on the whole situation is a pretty selfish one. How is this going to affect me? I'm not a pro user by any stretch of the imagination. I surf the web, type documents, listen to music, and edit photos. The reason I switched to a Mac three years ago was because it did everything I wanted to do and it did it very easily. (Plus the G4 iMacs looked damn cool.)
Unfortunately for all you technical pro type guys there are more people like me than there are of you, and I think that is where Apple is trying to gain ground. They are looking for viable alternatives to increase their presence. With the success of the iPod, they think they have a perfect opportunity to cash in on the buzz.
My question to all of you is, if Apple does switch to x86 chips will it change the way OSX looks or acts? My guess is probably not that much. Plus, for a big change like this a huge company like Apple will have contingency plans to make things run smoother. They are much smarter than some seem to give them credit for. Perhaps they have learned from their past mistakes? Or perhaps this is a bunch of BS and we will be surprised with dual core G5's tomorrow. I for one am very excited to see what happens.
My point of view on the whole situation is a pretty selfish one. How is this going to affect me? I'm not a pro user by any stretch of the imagination. I surf the web, type documents, listen to music, and edit photos. The reason I switched to a Mac three years ago was because it did everything I wanted to do and it did it very easily. (Plus the G4 iMacs looked damn cool.)
Unfortunately for all you technical pro type guys there are more people like me than there are of you, and I think that is where Apple is trying to gain ground. They are looking for viable alternatives to increase their presence. With the success of the iPod, they think they have a perfect opportunity to cash in on the buzz.
My question to all of you is, if Apple does switch to x86 chips will it change the way OSX looks or acts? My guess is probably not that much. Plus, for a big change like this a huge company like Apple will have contingency plans to make things run smoother. They are much smarter than some seem to give them credit for. Perhaps they have learned from their past mistakes? Or perhaps this is a bunch of BS and we will be surprised with dual core G5's tomorrow. I for one am very excited to see what happens.
If true... I see no reason to not buy current systems... the simple fact is PPC based Mac would out number "Intel" based Macs for several years.johnbro23 said:
No not at all... again PPC based Macs would out number "Intel" based Macs for several years. As a result developers would ship products compiled such that they could run either on a PPC based Mac or an "Intel" based Mac without the user caring. Mac OS X 10.4+ supports "fat" executables, used currently for 32 / 64 bit optimized executables (man lipo).johnbro23 said:
How much is the CPU of the total cost of a Mac? I doubt there would be any huge difference.admanimal said:
A few quick points:
Intel is not interested in making PPC's. Microsoft LEFT intel for a reason, they wanted to own the chip design and farm out production to Cheaper fabs. Intel does not equal cheaper fabs. Intel will not get a bulk or part of the sales on the next gen consoles. I am fairly confident Microsoft went to Intel first and foremost for its next gen console. Intel had a leg up at that point, if they wanted the business that badly, they would have it. End of story. Why lose it there, go in a huge roundabout way to get it back? Makes Zero sense. Also note, all these "badass" Next gen consoles are much closer to embedded CPU's than to a G4/G5. They are dumbed down and highly optomized, not much different than the powerpc's that most likely run your car.
Anyone who says they will stop using a mac if it has an X86 chip / Intel chip (Some people even contradict themselves by saying it would be ok if it were an intel chip, but NOT x86?!), whatever. Thats about the stupidest statement one can make. If that is what you base your computer purchase's on, then you need some serious help.
Another point is that most likely the leaks are not coming from the "apple" side, but from the Intel. That would explain the lack of info through normal apple outlets.
To anyone who thinks this is a "ploy" to get at moles, or a way to tell IBM they are not happy with their performance. Hello, this is the real world, with big boy company's, with real people. Do you not think SJ can't get on the phone with IBM and express displeasure with their performance? Do you think he has to do it in a way like this? He is IBM's CUSTOMER. He can call them, and express displeasure, and say "Fix it, or im gone". He does not need to create elaborate ruse's etc. Don't think that he has not confronted IBM and motorola. It has happened.
Whether this happens or not is still in the air until tommorrow.
However, if it does, (and it looks likely based on some VERY trustworthy sources putting their necks on the line), you had better believe Apple has done everything POSSIBLE to make the transition seamless and smooth. Will sales tank? Possibly, but anyone who believes that a major corporation has no idea in these things had better reconsider. They probably have simulations down to the DAY of what will happen sales wise / etc. Don't think they don't.
Intel is not interested in making PPC's. Microsoft LEFT intel for a reason, they wanted to own the chip design and farm out production to Cheaper fabs. Intel does not equal cheaper fabs. Intel will not get a bulk or part of the sales on the next gen consoles. I am fairly confident Microsoft went to Intel first and foremost for its next gen console. Intel had a leg up at that point, if they wanted the business that badly, they would have it. End of story. Why lose it there, go in a huge roundabout way to get it back? Makes Zero sense. Also note, all these "badass" Next gen consoles are much closer to embedded CPU's than to a G4/G5. They are dumbed down and highly optomized, not much different than the powerpc's that most likely run your car.
Anyone who says they will stop using a mac if it has an X86 chip / Intel chip (Some people even contradict themselves by saying it would be ok if it were an intel chip, but NOT x86?!), whatever. Thats about the stupidest statement one can make. If that is what you base your computer purchase's on, then you need some serious help.
Another point is that most likely the leaks are not coming from the "apple" side, but from the Intel. That would explain the lack of info through normal apple outlets.
To anyone who thinks this is a "ploy" to get at moles, or a way to tell IBM they are not happy with their performance. Hello, this is the real world, with big boy company's, with real people. Do you not think SJ can't get on the phone with IBM and express displeasure with their performance? Do you think he has to do it in a way like this? He is IBM's CUSTOMER. He can call them, and express displeasure, and say "Fix it, or im gone". He does not need to create elaborate ruse's etc. Don't think that he has not confronted IBM and motorola. It has happened.
Whether this happens or not is still in the air until tommorrow.
However, if it does, (and it looks likely based on some VERY trustworthy sources putting their necks on the line), you had better believe Apple has done everything POSSIBLE to make the transition seamless and smooth. Will sales tank? Possibly, but anyone who believes that a major corporation has no idea in these things had better reconsider. They probably have simulations down to the DAY of what will happen sales wise / etc. Don't think they don't.
""Fast forward to the WWDC. Apple announces that Intel is going to contribute to the design of the G5 and build chips based on that design. (Recall Apple's modern open source heritage.) Job's further states that Apple will use whomever provides the best, fastest, most affordable 970 chip, be it IBM or Intel (or Freescale?)""
Now tell me again .... why Intel would put one iota of time or money working on a COMPETING CPU ARCHITECTURE ?????? Why would they do this ???? Doing so would indicate that Intel had some doubts about the future of their baby - x86.
NO WAY - Intel is in the "cat-bird" seat with 85% of the WORLD market share for PC processors. I worked there for a long time - its x86 central !! - get a grip on reality.
If Apple goes to x86 its a good thing for Intel - but make no mistake that Intel has the upper hand in any deals made - they have the market share and the machine top make millions of chips.
Now tell me again .... why Intel would put one iota of time or money working on a COMPETING CPU ARCHITECTURE ?????? Why would they do this ???? Doing so would indicate that Intel had some doubts about the future of their baby - x86.
NO WAY - Intel is in the "cat-bird" seat with 85% of the WORLD market share for PC processors. I worked there for a long time - its x86 central !! - get a grip on reality.
If Apple goes to x86 its a good thing for Intel - but make no mistake that Intel has the upper hand in any deals made - they have the market share and the machine top make millions of chips.
tdewey said:
Thats because every joe blow builds their own desktops.... practially imposible to build a laptop at home.
Let me whip up a new powerbook in a few hours from spare parts from newegg.... ahhahahhahh..
It takes a few hours just to replace a HD on an iBook.
Suppose Apple made sure that you didn't have to repurchase all your software to make the transition. Then buying a PPC Mac now when Intel was coming later wouldn't be much different than buying the current PPC model when a faster PPC model was coming later. The key is that what you buy now must not be useless later, except in the sense than any computer you buy now will be outperformed by new models.johnbro23 said:
Bad_JuJu said:
Intel builds CPUs. There is a huge drawback with the x86 architecture, and INTEL CEO has even said that, if you want a secure PC, buy a Mac. Doesn't this make sense? They might aswell build ppc for apple. I think they are bound to move away from the x86 platform within 5years anyway.
G5=no new powerbook solution intel x86 with emulation? NeXT
http://daringfireball.net/2005/06/see_you_intel
Emulation
Software emulation of the PowerPC instruction set on x86 processors, with acceptable performance, still strikes me as completely unfeasible. But what if Im wrong?
MacRumors.com, for example, points to a company called Transitive Technologies, whose slogan is: Our software allows any software application binary to run on any processor / operating system.
And, as pointed out by Christopher Ong on the MacJournals-Talk mailing list, Transitives board chairman is Peter van Cuylenburg, who according to his biography on the Transitive web site was the president and COO of a certain company called NeXT Computer in 1992.
With a fast enough emulator, the transition to x86 could be just as smooth as the 680x0-to-PowerPC transition a decade ago.
http://daringfireball.net/2005/06/see_you_intel
Emulation
Software emulation of the PowerPC instruction set on x86 processors, with acceptable performance, still strikes me as completely unfeasible. But what if Im wrong?
MacRumors.com, for example, points to a company called Transitive Technologies, whose slogan is: Our software allows any software application binary to run on any processor / operating system.
And, as pointed out by Christopher Ong on the MacJournals-Talk mailing list, Transitives board chairman is Peter van Cuylenburg, who according to his biography on the Transitive web site was the president and COO of a certain company called NeXT Computer in 1992.
With a fast enough emulator, the transition to x86 could be just as smooth as the 680x0-to-PowerPC transition a decade ago.
CubaTBird said:one more day... when will the keynote be available? and will it be shown off in 1080dpi? mmmm.... lol
Apple usually makes it available right on their site shortly after the Keynote is finished. You won't have long to wait to watch it after it is complete, unless they decide to change things this year for some reason.