well we have to only wait 18 mre hours until we find out if this is jsut an utter load of poop, as for me i am taking a long napy and my alarm is set for 10 am....the suspence is killing me
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
I'll buy that...Sounds much more appealing and plausable than the majorities cry for an imminent transformaton of Macs to Dell machines. Reading some of these post I could have sworn I was on a Windoze fan site.bmicallef said:
I dont think this is a bad Idea at all. I am a PC guy however. I just happen to own an iBook.
I think using Intel would be awesome because they are an outstanding chip maker. And I dont think they would just use Pentium 4 Processors or whatever. I am sure they would design a new chip for Apple.
It could save lots of money, and produce faster chips. I dont think its all bad. Its not like you will have to run windows. YOu mac heads will still have your controlled hardware enviroment and your OSX.... so I dont see what all the fuss is about.
I think using Intel would be awesome because they are an outstanding chip maker. And I dont think they would just use Pentium 4 Processors or whatever. I am sure they would design a new chip for Apple.
It could save lots of money, and produce faster chips. I dont think its all bad. Its not like you will have to run windows. YOu mac heads will still have your controlled hardware enviroment and your OSX.... so I dont see what all the fuss is about.
Mac used to be big in the science community. Those who weren't scared off by the 68000 -> PPC will be gone by the PPC ->x86.TrenchcoatJedi said:
You would be surprised how many science appl based on OS 9 still running at universities.
Mac_Freak said:
I used to have a job where I would tech support around 70 PowerMac G5's every day. They were still running a system image of 10.2.8 until 10.3.6 came out and support was good enough for Protools, FCP, DVD studio Pro, Quark, Adobe CS, MAYA and MATLAB to run without disasterous results.
ThinkSecret's scared s***less
So, now it's in The New York Times as well.
So we've got:
Wall Street Journal
NY Times
C|Net
ZD News
AP News
The Inquirer
and various rumour sites.
But NOT ThinkSecret. That's SO strange. I think they know but are scared s***less because of the problems they are experiencing with Apple as of late.
If this turns out to be a dud some seriours news outlets have more than eggs on their face.
So, now it's in The New York Times as well.
So we've got:
Wall Street Journal
NY Times
C|Net
ZD News
AP News
The Inquirer
and various rumour sites.
But NOT ThinkSecret. That's SO strange. I think they know but are scared s***less because of the problems they are experiencing with Apple as of late.
If this turns out to be a dud some seriours news outlets have more than eggs on their face.
Just imagine how they will react on a PPC -> x86 transition... people will move over to Wintel instead. Ok, it is buggy and virii ridden... But you will be able to run the same app for many years.Mac_Freak said:
Hell, you can run old Dos programs from early 90 on a XP today....
iBunny said:
I think for most (including myself) the bigger problem is if our software no longer works on Intel based Macs. Not to mention the lifespan of our current hardware becomes cut very short.
Yeah, I was planning on buying an iBook and now I won't, until the Intel based ones come out (here's hoping he has some to show off, but I doubt it).
Anyway, this move to Intel is a bad thing. Not because Intel is bad, per se (it's just the processor - it'll still be an Apple designed machine with OSX).
No, it means that douchebag John Dvorak was right about something. You think he's been spewing crap before, wait til he gets a right guess under his belt.
Anyway, this move to Intel is a bad thing. Not because Intel is bad, per se (it's just the processor - it'll still be an Apple designed machine with OSX).
No, it means that douchebag John Dvorak was right about something. You think he's been spewing crap before, wait til he gets a right guess under his belt.
Dr.Gargoyle said:Just imagine how they will react on a PPC -> x86 transition... people will move over to Wintel instead. Ok, it is buggy and virii ridden... But you will be able to run the same app for many years.
Hell, you can run old Dos programs from early 90 on a XP today....
I could not agree more. The PC platform is stable, Apple appears over the years to be all over the place. If Longhorn is user friendly, fast and stable, Apple will be saying good-bye to practically every user left.
I see where they are showing a store having 10% off on different products right now. Powerbook, iBook, and Mac Mini is included in that offer. I will go on a limb and say Pentium M's will be installed in those starting tomorrow. Compatibility will be handled by emulation for now. The results should be a laptop or Mini with as much or almost as much performance as the G4, but with more room to grow. Apple will try and market this as a real improvement going from the old fashioned and slow PowerPC platform to the modern and high tech x86, so even if emulation slows it down a bit, people will be sold on it being more modern and having more speed in the future.
What would happen to apple G5 hardware ?!
I am wondering what would happen to all apples G5 based mac's (e.g latest powermac and iMac) if it would really switch it's processors to intel ? would G5 be obsolete ? if apple just upgraded the powermac and imac last month or so. wouldn't it be crazy for apple to change it's mind and dump IBM now ? IBM dual core Prossesors are going to be in the Game consoles from Sony PS3 and Xbox from microsoft . and probably Nintendo .
My point is . Why would apple update it's hardware now when it intend to switch to intel ?
__________________
I am wondering what would happen to all apples G5 based mac's (e.g latest powermac and iMac) if it would really switch it's processors to intel ? would G5 be obsolete ? if apple just upgraded the powermac and imac last month or so. wouldn't it be crazy for apple to change it's mind and dump IBM now ? IBM dual core Prossesors are going to be in the Game consoles from Sony PS3 and Xbox from microsoft . and probably Nintendo .
My point is . Why would apple update it's hardware now when it intend to switch to intel ?
__________________
Would you mind if I try some of that stuff you're smoking?Abercrombieboy said:
I would completely prefer an Intel manufactured PPC, but the odds of that happening are pretty slim.iBunny said:
iBunny said:
THANKYOU... at least someone else can see that.
Like I said before, the Power architecture is now "open".
it could be good
cheaper cpu's and cheaper chipsets may me cheaper powerbooks and powermacs. Apple will do something to make sure that OSX still only runs on their hardware, and as long as it OSX running, I'll be happy. I can't remember the last timed I really *cared* what processor was in my laptop, as long as it was running OSX.
cheaper cpu's and cheaper chipsets may me cheaper powerbooks and powermacs. Apple will do something to make sure that OSX still only runs on their hardware, and as long as it OSX running, I'll be happy. I can't remember the last timed I really *cared* what processor was in my laptop, as long as it was running OSX.
My money is on Intel doing something with Apple's portable line, or perhaps the rumored tablet PC.
Dual-core quad G5's might help keep the IBM relationship going. Won't make surfing the web any faster, but it might chew up more video rendering per minute (or any other super-intensive computations). Average users would see no improvement, but people who actually push their hardware might.
If they DO decide to use Intel for PMs, I stand with those who believe that it would NOT be with X86 chips, but with some sort of licensed PPC design using AltiVec/MMX or whatever else they decide to call it.
There is no way every Mac developer is going to be forced to start over from scratch again. C'mon, people! Where is the urgency? Apple is siiting on a Titanic-sized BOATLOAD of cash from iPods. They could afford to buy IBM more time to get the G5 right. Where is the fire? What would cause them to abandon everything? Is Gates making a play to buy them out?
This sounds more like a poison-pill than a well-considered plan of action. Either that, or a well-orchestrated intimidation campaign to get Big Blue moving on G5 improvements.
Dual-core quad G5's might help keep the IBM relationship going. Won't make surfing the web any faster, but it might chew up more video rendering per minute (or any other super-intensive computations). Average users would see no improvement, but people who actually push their hardware might.
If they DO decide to use Intel for PMs, I stand with those who believe that it would NOT be with X86 chips, but with some sort of licensed PPC design using AltiVec/MMX or whatever else they decide to call it.
There is no way every Mac developer is going to be forced to start over from scratch again. C'mon, people! Where is the urgency? Apple is siiting on a Titanic-sized BOATLOAD of cash from iPods. They could afford to buy IBM more time to get the G5 right. Where is the fire? What would cause them to abandon everything? Is Gates making a play to buy them out?
This sounds more like a poison-pill than a well-considered plan of action. Either that, or a well-orchestrated intimidation campaign to get Big Blue moving on G5 improvements.
MacRohde said:
CNN/Money as well:
http://money.cnn.com/services/tickerheadlines/for5/200506041843DOWJONESDJONLINE000528_FORTUNE5.htm
Abercrombieboy said:
A version of Windows?
User-friendly?
Fast?
Stable?
Oh lordy, I love these boards at times like this, everyone truly goes nutty. As if getting a different (and likely, faster) processor is going to be the end of Apple.
Whatev'
Check this out: http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.php/archive/apple_may_launch_a_mobile_device_with_intel_inside/
I know it's not about processors, but it could mean something.
I know it's not about processors, but it could mean something.
Fender said:
I am not smoking anything...sorry I don't use drugs so don't insult me. If Apple is jumping the PowerPC and heading to the x86 just like this, who is to say in 4 or 5 years they won't get pissed at Intel and make another jump. Who can keep up with that? They already made one from 68K Macs to PPC, whereas the PC's have been stable with x86. I am not going to argue, with everything I read, x86 is much more modern and much faster, I just think that the consumer wants to buy a computer that won't become a paper weight in a year or two.
No one has seen Longhorn...it just might match Tiger and if it does, it would be a much safer purchase then a company that throws out everything and starts over every few years. Think...they threw out the Apple II and went with the Mac. Then they threw out the 68K Macs and went with the PowerPC. Then they threw out the Mac OS and went with Mac OSX...now they are throwing away the PowerPC and going with who knows what...I think Apple is smoking something because they can't keep their focus on something for more then a few years at best.
Do you know where this hurts the most...The BUSINESS AND EDUCATION market. They cannot afford to throw it all out and start over everytime Apple gets a new wild idea. I wonder why Apple has lost so much education business over the years. This will only loose them more. I PROMISE that.
I am not against improvement and progress but in the PC and Windows world it is gradual and a HUGE importance is put on compatibility so schools, government and businesses can keep up. Apple just continues to throw out and start new.