Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

'Intel Based Mac' Rumor Roundup...

Didn't want to make a new Fourm but i think .Mac will get updated becuase on apples site it says ".Mac will be undergoing scheduled maintenance from 10:00 AM to 12:00 PM PST on Monday, June 6th. During this time iDisk will be intermittently unavailable. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Last Updated: 6/03/2005"

Probobly a boost in storage. They better gmail gets 8 times that storage.
 
Cheap-Chopstix said:
Let me be the first one (or one of the first ones) to say that this is gonna be one big hoax... I don't think apple will throw away millions of dollars they have put into the G series processors and dump them so quickly. the G5 hasn't even matured yet. If it does happen ... "Hell has frozen over!"
Click to expand...

It's not the G series. It simply means that this is the 5th generation of the PowerPC. 601, 603/604, PPC 740/750, PPC 74XX, and PPC 970
 
MacTruck said:
ThinkSecret has a mole or is close to the Apple campus and hears everything. They know believe me. They just are'nt saying anything.
Click to expand...

Another spin on this could be that ThinkSecret knows that the reported switch to Intel is bogus, but does not want to report what really will be announced on Monday! If TS knew that the switch is for real, it would be very easy for them to just regurgitate this info.
 
Wyrm said:
What Steve could present that might get developers interested is the return of the FAT binary type for a compile target. This way he could say the CPU architecture will be invisible, and oh btw, we could start using Intel chips alongside PPC.... does this sound like reasonable spin?
Click to expand...

Maybe... I was thinking about this as I was running. The most plausible explanation for Transitive's claims in my mind is that they are talking about fat binaries on all platforms that have sort of a "processor independent" set of code and a "processor dependent" set of code, with the latter being each program's native binary component, which runs at full speed, and the latter being the fallback which is designed to play on Transitive's base layer. I just don't see any kind of layer being feasible which takes existing binaries and meets their claims.

BTW, not to nitpick, but I think it's "fat binary" and not "FAT binary." The "fat" in this phrase has nothing to do with File Allocation Table -- the binary is "fat" in the sense that it contains multiple redundant sets of code. :)
 
How will Apple advertise their computers after announcing this switch?

"The new Powerbooks, featuring blazing fast G4 processors."

shrug.gif
 
Should I Buy an imac if the switch turns out true?

I was planning on buying a 20" imac very soon, and with the possible transition, I'm not sure what to do. Will I be at a disadvantage in a few years with the "old IBM processor," or will I be at a disadvantage if during the next year the transition will leave me with OSX (and it apps) emulated (and then eventually recompiled)?

I can hold out - but I was waiting for a while for the imacs to upgrade, and they finally have - and now I'm not sure whether to buy...

Please give me your suggestions!

Thanks in advance
 
If this does happen, and apple announces say a date by which at least one of the models will be released with intel proc.(or unveils one tommorow) it could be expected that there will at least one model on the apple store which will plummet in price, could be some very good bargains.

Anyone want to take bets on which model will be first?
 
jmkcp said:
I was planning on buying a 20" imac very soon, and with the possible transition, I'm not sure what to do. Will I be at a disadvantage in a few years with the "old IBM processor," or will I be at a disadvantage if during the next year the transition will leave me with OSX (and it apps) emulated (and then eventually recompiled)?
Please give me your suggestions!
Click to expand...
If they are setting up to switch or not... buy it. You will not be hung out to dry.
 
FoxyKaye said:
If Apple is switching to Intel solely for performance gains, then why would it start phasing in Intel hardware in its low-end systems first?

Something's not adding up here, I just can't put my finger on it...
Click to expand...

Well, it actually makes perfect sense if you think about it. Today, right now, the Intel offering is slightly faster than the IBM offering. Throw in whatever performance hit you are going to have from emulation / compatibility layer, and it will either be on par or slightly slower to introduce an intel based top end mac.

However, lets say you do the same thing on a low end mac. Currently topping out much lower, well below 2ghz. Slap a 3ghzish Intel chip in, for the same price. Subtract your 20% performance hit from emulation / compatibility, you still have a 2.4ghzish low end mac. Its a big speed boost, with faster fsb's and architecture to boot. When you can make a similair jump on the top end, phase that in as well. Also, by then more stuff will be native, making things run at full speed.

In other words, native stuff will run much faster on a new low end mac, but even legacy stuff under emulation will still be faster than it is now. It is a win win situation for the low end!

On the top end, it would be either a lateral move or a slight downgrade. Apple does not want to start things out on that foot.
 
bozs13 said:
Speaking of which, (totally off the subject but who cares) I could write a 20 page essay on how underpaid teachers are. :)
Click to expand...

Well you could start with the state of South Dakota which is 51st (including Washington D.C.) in teacher pay. It is my choice to teach here because I love the state. I dislike the lopsided state and local politics however. When one party has a 2/3+ majority and no one will stand up and challenge them that is what happens. I will stop with that comment however, because this is not the political discussion boards and I don't want to get in trouble.

Whatever happens we will make it through the battle! I lived through the war in Iraq with the South Dakota National Guard, so I think I can make it through this one!
 
slackpacker said:
Come to LI N.Y. Where our school system is corrupt. Teachers a drivin BMW's and purchasing Million dollar homes.
Click to expand...

Down in FL they're making scrap compared to your teachers. Even the guys sweeping the subways make like $20 an hour. I remember seeing the ad on one of the subway trains when I visited last Christmas.
 
Phase IV said:
Another spin on this could be that ThinkSecret knows that the reported switch to Intel is bogus, but does not want to report what really will be announced on Monday! If TS knew that the switch is for real, it would be very easy for them to just regurgitate this info.
Click to expand...

Hello? The New York Times headline says: "Apple plans to switch from IBM to Intel for Chips." John Markoff -- their Apple reporter -- wrote the story.

Despite what the red-state propoganda machine tells you, the New York Times reports news. It doesn't report rumors. You're going to feel silly tomorrow when Steve-o makes it official.
 
Porchland said:
I agree with the conclusion that Apple will thrive but for a different reason: Mac isn't all about the processor.

Mac is about iLife.
Mac is about Dashboard.
Mac is about Final Cut Pro.
Mac is about super thin form factors.
Mac is about brushed aluminum.
Mac is about Safari.
Mac is about Photoshop (the way God intended).
Click to expand...
Mac (Apple) is about OS X IMHO. BTW, isn't Photoshop Carbon? If it was the way God intended it would be Cocoa, correct? ;)
 
I really do think that something big will be going down. It could be an Intel based PowerPC solution or a x86 based system. Both will win for Apple in the long run.
As much as I love the idea of running OSX on my AMD 64 5000+ SLi system, I don't actually think it would feel right. Macs are meant to be different and special. Its been my dream to own a Mac since I first saw a G3 and should I be able to afford it I would run out and get one straight away, I find the little Apple badge to be the height of fashion and I really really want a Mac Mini. Its only the cost and the fact that my PC can do everything that I want plus gaming right now that puts me off.
I'm very much an expert with PCs and Windows yet I really do now consider recommending Macs, particularly Minis to 'the average buyer' that I know - i.e. student girls who don't really know much about computers. They can get a mac and be happy because they're so easy to use and more importantly, they look good.
Not a single PC based company has been able to create anything that even remotely looks as nice as any of the Macs (current imac excluded). Macs are special, Macs are fashionable. Macs are easy to use. Whatever happens, it should stay that way.
 
Porchland said:
Hello? The New York Times headline says: "Apple plans to switch from IBM to Intel for Chips." John Markoff -- their Apple reporter -- wrote the story.
Click to expand...

Markoff is good, he was the guy that broke the story on the internet worm back in the 80s, which led to the feds busting RTM.
 
Abercrombieboy said:
Well you could start with the state of South Dakota which is 51st (including Washington D.C.) in teacher pay. It is my choice to teach here because I love the state. I dislike the lopsided state and local politics however. When one party has a 2/3+ majority and no one will stand up and challenge them that is what happens. I will stop with that comment however, because this is not the political discussion boards and I don't want to get in trouble.

Whatever happens we will make it through the battle! I lived through the war in Iraq with the South Dakota National Guard, so I think I can make it through this one!
Click to expand...

Oh no. I've never been in the military. Will sissies like me make it through the great PPC -> x86 switch of 2005?
scared2.gif
 
SPUY767 said:
That's a genuinely foolish thing to say. Apple does believe in fair play, but they want to make sure that it is fair. Apple also has confidence in their customers, something that the Wintel crew can only have wet dreams about. Apple has never, and will not in the foreseeable future use any kind of artificial copy protection. <snip> Apple knows that 80-90% of its users will pay for legal ownership of the operating system, where I'd say MS gets maybe 60% of home users.
Click to expand...
Part of me agrees with you that it was foolish. Part of me doesn't. Apple has, for a considerable time, attempted to stop people putting the Mac OS on non-mac machines. Originally they used specific ROM chips, though I'm not sure if they do that today.

So why not use Fairplay instead of an artificial hardware device? (again assuming they still do that). In my eyes, for it to be foolish, it would have to reduce their sales. Now, losing any sales to the 10-20% of users who don't pay are probably not high on Apple's list. The 80-90% of users who do pay are going to be able to run their software no matter how Apple protects it. So the issue is losing some of their paying customers because they don't approve of having copyprotection built in - and this is a very real danger.

Personally, I think that if copyprotection is improved there should be a drop in the price of the software (after hearing many companies say they could offer it cheaper if it wasn't for pirating). I think that is fair. But enforcing copyprotection and not discounting would make me an unhappy customer.

BTW - what do you mean "they want to make sure it's fair"?
Greg
ps. The Australian and Sydney Morning Herald are Reuters and Associated Press respectively, they're not confirming it independently.
 
Spanky Deluxe said:
I really do think that something big will be going down. It could be an Intel based PowerPC solution or a x86 based system. Both will win for Apple in the long run.
As much as I love the idea of running OSX on my AMD 64 5000+ SLi system, I don't actually think it would feel right. Macs are meant to be different and special. Its been my dream to own a Mac since I first saw a G3 and should I be able to afford it I would run out and get one straight away, I find the little Apple badge to be the height of fashion and I really really want a Mac Mini. Its only the cost and the fact that my PC can do everything that I want plus gaming right now that puts me off.
I'm very much an expert with PCs and Windows yet I really do now consider recommending Macs, particularly Minis to 'the average buyer' that I know - i.e. student girls who don't really know much about computers. They can get a mac and be happy because they're so easy to use and more importantly, they look good.
Not a single PC based company has been able to create anything that even remotely looks as nice as any of the Macs (current imac excluded). Macs are special, Macs are fashionable. Macs are easy to use. Whatever happens, it should stay that way.
Click to expand...

If its only going to be a chip change, then the feeling will still be there. If Apple announces Mac OS X will run on any chip I would be shocked! I still think it will be a controlled setup, same design's with intel chips instead of IBM/Moto chips.
 
TorbX said:
Listen; american 5th grade fat McDonalds-kidz has nothing to do with this tread. This is about Apple possibly humpin' with Intel, okay?
Click to expand...

Tread? Are we talking about Michelins now?

You really impress me with your comments. Too bad your comments sound like they are coming from a very uneducated person. I have discussed the switch to Intel and now I am tired so I will leave for the night and come back tomorrow to see what happens. Thanks to all of you who stood up for me and we will make it through this. TorbX, I am glad that you were not with me in Iraq watching my back. I am off to surf the net for something that will take my mind off of this.
 
amac4me said:
Wow ... what an awesome discussion thread ... I wonder what we'll be discussing 24 hours from now!!!

:)
Click to expand...

How lame the new 2-button mouse is...and why for some reason it needs an Intel CPU in it.
 
Such As?

Porchland said:
Hello? The New York Times headline says: "Apple plans to switch from IBM to Intel for Chips." John Markoff -- their Apple reporter -- wrote the story.

Despite what the red-state propoganda machine tells you, the New York Times reports news. It doesn't report rumors. You're going to feel silly tomorrow when Steve-o makes it official.
Click to expand...


Red states like, say, Georgia? :D

Questions of political bias aside, I agree that the NYT is solid as far as factual news items go. They wouldn't run it if it wasn't a certainty (or darn near). I'm really interested to see. I think, looking at the opinion and commentary you can pretty much boil it down to three possibilities:

1. Intel is going to somehow crank out PPC chips (this seems remote to me...if IBM has no interest in pushing the architecture to please Apple, then why would Intel?)

2. Apple really is going to move to x86 and they have a kick-ass transition plan

3. Intel and Apple are making some new entertainment box and the sources are not tech-savvy enough (or simply don't know enough) to differentiate between that and a "switch" to Intel chips.
 
bozs13 said:
sure, hehe

It will be much easier to compare windows and OSX systems since a similar chip will most likely be used. I find that the hardware architecture in macs is far supperior which means data does not need to travel as far as it does on a dell or hp etc. which = Apple faster
Click to expand...
Much more PC (like Apple will be as from tomorrow)
:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back