'Intel Based Mac' Rumor Roundup...

[zoltamatron]

Keep 'em both

I think that if ANYTHING is going to happen tomorrow, Jobs will outline a plan of co-existence between the two processors. I can't possibly see Apple dumping the PPC platform, there is just too much vested in it. So much software on our side relies heavily on AltiVec that everything would take a gross performance hit to switch to x86.

I think that Apple is going to roll out a line of Intel based macs that run OSX and Apple's software suite ported to x86 (a fairly easy port when dealing with the same OS) and offer some kind of very tight Windows integration, perhaps even a dual booting machine. I think this serves two purposes:

1. Gives switchers no reason not to switch, the computer will run all their old apps. Plus it will run OSX, which a lot of PC users drool over. The vast majority of what Windows users desire is what comes with the OS (iTunes, Dashboard, etc.) not the third party stuff.

2. Gives IBM a kick in the butt to get their chips going. Apple is still a huge customer for them and I don't think that they would say "piss off Apple, we're giving everything to the xBox." IBM wants to keep the Mac business and this gives Apple some leverage to say "Hey, consumers would rather run crappy ports of Mac software on Intel hardware than deal with the expense and sluggishness of your PPC hardware. What are you going to do about that?" This is going to level the processor playing field a great deal.

I can only say this: It will be a long time before I will buy an Intel based Mac. There would have to be some very compelling performance numbers of apps like Logic Pro before I would consider running an Intel machine. If the PPC line really lost ground then there would be no reason not to switch, but given the high demand for PPC Macs because of the pro software that runs on them, the PPC is going to have a long time dying.

-z

 

[LaMerVipere]

Friends, it's a great day to be an Mac user.

I don't understand how people could be sad about what's transpiring here. It's huge. It's monumental. It's good for business. It's going to create some fantastic products for all of us to buy for years to come!

 

[MacTruck]

Anybody know what this is about? I did a search on Apple for x86 and this came up.



"As a computer scientist, you believe in operating system and architecture diversity. So does Apple. In fact, we ensure that our software is portable by maintaining a current build of our Darwin open-source operating system for the x86 architecture. And when it comes to training your students, Mac OS X just makes sense. When students learn open standards, they learn skills they can take to any platform."

 

[rendezvouscp]

I think that reality is finally setting in for me. I've been dreading the news, but I think I'm finally adjusting. My only "holdback" is that Apple better make this damn easy on us, and I don't want anything to change except specs. But I think that's asking too much.
-Chase

 

[StkhlmSyndrm23]

Well with tomorrow's WSJ article this is a done deal. I guess we'll have all the details to follow tomorrow. This sure as hell is going to be exciting, though. And thank brilliant humanity for QuickTransit.

I'll go so far as to say that the end of the Microsoft era is in sight, and it's so poetically beautiful that Intel is going to help slay the dragon.

This is precisely why I am and love to be a Mac user...these kind of crazily bold things and innovations or adoptions of awesome new technology (like QuickTransit) could never come from anyone else.

 

[iMeowbot]

Someone posted this over at the Ars forums.

I'm just the messenger! don't shoot!

I'm expressing doubts. Although I've long thought that something along these lines would be cool, Apple would do a better job of putting the correct symbols on their own registered trademarks.

 

[ArizonaKid]

My only "holdback" is that Apple better make this damn easy on us, and I don't want anything to change except specs. But I think that's asking too much.
-Chase

This is a risk, but big risk pay off, and i for one am willing to support Apple through this change. Other operating systems could not compete with MS because they lacked a install base. Apple has one.

Apple always changes, guess I am getting used to it. But what is the other option, a OS that doesn't change in 5-6 years. lol

 

[admanimal]

I think that Apple is going to roll out a line of Intel based macs that run OSX and Apple's software suite ported to x86 (a fairly easy port when dealing with the same OS) and offer some kind of very tight Windows integration, perhaps even a dual booting machine. I think this serves two purposes:

Apple is never going to release anything that is specifically made to allow you to run Windows or Windows apps on your Mac. This is not to say that theoretically Apple couldn't sell an x86 computer which a person could then choose to install Windows on...but they aren't going to make it easy for you.

Other companies may provide solutions for this, but Apple will not.

 

[JGowan]

Well, we'll all know soon enough. I think (if this is true) that we're about to see a BEST ACTOR Tony-calliber performance from Steve Jobs onstage tomorrow. We will see his certain spin of how this is going to revolutionize Apple as a company and how Apple computers will be 1000% better.

This guy could sell a snakeskin wallet to a guy who was just cobra-bitten.

JGowan

PS. Wow... I never seen two threads in a row to eclipse 1000 posts. I just had to be a part of this.

 

[aznsal612]

Oh. And sorry to double post, but my girlfriend just said the switch is on the news. If it's spreading like wildfire to this magnitude...I'm gonna be a sucker and believe it. I don't ever remembering hearing macrumors stuff all over the news and on tv as well.

 

[Bregalad]

It still doesn't make sense

There is only one possible explanation for the Apple moving to Intel x86 story: Steve Jobs is quitting as CEO of Apple. You read it here first.

 

[MacTruck]

After Jobs tells all of us about the intel switch and everyone is like auggghhh, he will then anounce the twilight zone kicker, if you have purchased a dual 2.3 G5 or a 2.7 G5 or a 20" imac then you are already running the OSX Intel version and those processors are Dothan Pentium Ms with 2mb cache.

BAM!

Then he says, how you like em? Ewww burn.

 

[nsjoker]

w00t

i don't see how any mac loyalist could be upset over this... this is great news. i can't wait for the exact roadmap of how this will all work out. there might be a few bumps in the road at first, but i'm sure in the end it'll be worth it.

 

[ArizonaKid]

Link To Article

I am being redundant...but over 1000 post anyway.

I posted a full PDF download of the WSJ article on Monday. Hope you all enjoy. This probibly isn't legal...but oh well.

I'll wait till they ask me to take it down.

June 6, 2005 WSJ Article

ENJOY

 

[duke49er]

Get a grip

People...people...please...

First of all: Apple is not switching to Intel; Intel is switching to Apple.

Second: If the collaboration is in fact going to occur then what makes you think that they would use the x86? They could come up with something else you know?

If the announcement is going to be made tomorrow then how long ago do you think they made the decision? Certainly not last night. These things take time and as such I am sure they have been working on all (or at least most of) the problems that everyone is bringing up here. Running OSX on different hardware will not be simple "emulation" like I've read 10561089 times in this thread, that is just ridiculous!

Everyone here is assuming that they will make the announcement first and THEN consider all the issues, I refuse to believe that this is the case. I think that they will consider the issues first and THEN the'll make the announcement. If they will make the announcement monday morning then I'm sure that everything has already been worked out.Steve may have made bad decisions in the past but he's wiser now and he's certainly not stupid.

So get a grip.

 

[nightshift]

2. Gives IBM a kick in the butt to get their chips going. Apple is still a huge customer for them and I don't think that they would say "piss off Apple, we're giving everything to the xBox." IBM wants to keep the Mac business and this gives Apple some leverage to say "Hey, consumers would rather run crappy ports of Mac software on Intel hardware than deal with the expense and sluggishness of your PPC hardware. What are you going to do about that?" This is going to level the processor playing field a great deal.

I really like IBM and I wish they would continue being the primary supplier of chips to Apple, but IBM is not going to be going "OMG, we lost Apple! We need to change our business practices right now!". The console business is a HUGE deal. PS2 shipments have reached 90 million in around 6 years. That's roughly 15 million per year on average (obviously with more shipments in the later years). Xbox is 20 million+ in about 5 years. GameCube is 20 million+. Even if the market does not expand and Nintendo or MSFT does really poorly, that's over 20 million processors per year at the very least. Considering that an average generation lasts 7 years or more producing the same exact chip (which would get easier to manufacture as time progresses), IBM is going to be raking in the dough.

Apple ships roughly 1 million computers in recent quarters. Let's be generous and say that half of those are G5s. That's about 2 million processors for Apple a year. It's an order of a magnitude difference. Even if Sony manufactures the majority of Cell processors, IBM still has about 8 million processors to make since MSFT and Nintendo do not have the ability to make them. Now Apple's G5s also require constant improvement and advances in technology. That's a lot of costs to IBM.

IBM is not the one that's hurt at all, and if I were in their shoes, I wouldn't care about Apple that much either. It's just simple business, and don't think for a moment that Apple, IBM, or Intel is making their products just for the fun of it. Steve Jobs understands this and if the Intel rumor pans out, he made it because of a business decision, not out of some personal spite for an ill-advised comment.

 

[bousozoku]

Keep this thread on-topic please.

Spam/off-topic posts are not appreciated or necessary.

 

[GregA]

Running OSX on different hardware will not be simple "emulation" like I've read 10561089 times in this thread, that is just ridiculous!

Have we been reading the same thread? I've seen a couple of people talk that way, but that's it.

Talking about Transitive emulation is about having OSX software run on x86 without recompilation. This means several things:
1. OSX still gets recompiled. No way is that being skipped!
2. Existing apps run straight away. Recompiled are even faster.
3. Fat binaries can have 5-10% unique code for PPC or x86, and the rest (speed insensitive) can be common code for whatever processor.
4. OSX x86 binaries could also run on PPC.

Everyone here is assuming that they will make the announcement first and THEN consider all the issues, I refuse to believe that this is the case.

People are enthusiastic. Why not? This is something important to people. There is a LOT of guesswork going on - that's why the issues are being spoken about - to support or cut down ideas. I don't think anyone's saying Apple wouldn't have considered all angles to whatever they announce.

We often read what we believe into what others say. Whether that's us discussing, or WSJ being told "Apple is going to use Intel Chips" and assuming that means x86. Still, maybe they were told it explicitly, or have assumed correctly. Who knows!?

 

[Alasta]

If it's true that Apple will be using x86 architecture with QuickTransit, then I don't see why we have to wait 1 - 2 years before these products start rolling off the production line.

As I've already mentioned in this thread, the Powerbook (and, to a lesser extent, the iBook) need significant upgrades now, and there is no reason to believe that any PowerPC processor will be able to deliver anything suitable for at least six months. With this in mind, why wouldn't Apple get to the drawing board and have a Pentium-M notebook ready for sale by the end of this year?

I'm currently waiting for Apple's notebook lines to get a significant performance boost and, as soon as that happens, I'll be buying one regardless of what's under the hood.

 

[skellener]

CNET is reporting rumor and speculation, NOT FACT. Didn’t Apple sue the last group that did that? There is not one fact stated in the article. Ther are no confirmations in the article by any party. It is all rumor until we hear from Steve tomorrow. I hope CNet gets a big bunch of egg on their face. It all smells of a BS media frenzy to me.

 

[VicMacs]

me too

I'm currently waiting for Apple's notebook lines to get a significant performance boost and, as soon as that happens, I'll be buying one regardless of what's under the hood.

me too... I've just had enough of these G4's .... and I'm a mac-cored guy but if the g5 isnt near a powerbook, then get something else thats fast in there... and make it fast

 

[fitinferno]

There is only one possible explanation for the Apple moving to Intel x86 story: Steve Jobs is quitting as CEO of Apple. You read it here first.

Haha, I was going off about this news like a crazy person to my best friend (also a Mac user). He just wasn't understanding any of it and looking at me like a crazy person saying all he heard me saying was "Doom, doom, doom."

And this was the conclusion I had drawn after all the thinking. Maybe Steve-o is announcing his newly planned retirement! Because I just could not see good 'ol Steve springing this news after all of his demonising of Intel...

It's definitely not going to happen...there's no way he'd leave a switch this big to a newbie Apple CEO...but still...it did make for an entertaining thought.

 

[GregA]

Um, just wanted to get in and ask something before this thread goes past 100 repl... okay, 200... alright, 1000 max r...forget it. Imagine the thread if it's actually true.

Anyway, question - when is the keynote happening? I read that it starts 10am PST, but aren't you guys up there on DST now, so it's PDT? I'm trying to work out the difference, it's right on 3.30pm Monday here right now (EST, Australia, GMT+10).

Pretty sure it's 3am Sydney time. So if you do want to get up in the night, wait till 5am and hear the results.

Personally I'll not lose any sleep, despite my interest in what they'll say

ps. The way we follow this is SO like following a sport. Favourite teams, betrayal if a player swaps to another code, talking about the game and what's going on, and staying up to watch a match.

 

[skellener]

It will be funny tomorrow when Steve says something like "Apparently we are moving to Intel based computers according to CNET News"... pause ..."Well we're not." Then he moves right along into, "Now let me show you how cool our new iTunes 4.9 is with built-in Podcasting support" and that's the last you'll hear about it!

 

[imnoah]

I hate to burst your bubble....

Someone posted this over at the Ars forums.



I'm just the messenger! don't shoot!

.... but this wasn't written by Apple's marketing people. No way.