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...

skellener said:
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! :D :D :D
Click to expand...

I think that'd freak everyone out (at least, everyone that has been following the rumors). How awesome would that be though! I mean, I can totally imagine Steve doing something like that tomorrow, but I have a feeling that it's going to be "Wee we are."
-Chase
 
MacTruck said:
Does this mean that Sonnet and the rest will make an x86 processor upgrade for G4 powermacs? That would be cool.

I am really wanting to put osx on my Thinkpad T42p.
Click to expand...

Highly unlikely. The Mac's main board interacts with the CPU in a very different manner from Intel main boards.
 
Not looking forward to my tonsillectomy tomorrow at 8 am PST :(

*sigh*

Right as the anesthesia starts to wear off and the liquid vicodin kicks in, I'll have no idea whats being announced :(
 
mulletman13 said:
Not looking forward to my tonsillectomy tomorrow at 8 am PST :(

*sigh*

Right as the anesthesia starts to wear off and the liquid vicodin kicks in, I'll have no idea whats being announced :(
Click to expand...

Ouch :( Good luck w/it! And don't worry, just keep yourself away from anyone who knows the truth and then watch the feed and it'll be like finding out fresh when it happened :)
 
My girlfriend/future wife works at Intel and has a bunch of stock so the real question is, if these rumors are true in any capacity, what happens to Intel stock? Am I going to be a rich man tomorrow? :D
 
iMeowbot said:
By the way, I don't think I've seen this one mentioned here: a lawyer's CV.
http://pview.findlaw.com/view/3340942_1?&channel=CCC

It's not likely gonna be an Intel PowerPC....
Click to expand...

Terrific find!!! I hope for his sake that no one at Apple is reading this thread. (Then again, Apple will be plenty busy suing the Wall Street Journal, CNET, et al.) (I'm kidding of course.)

It seems now like it's not a matter "if" but "when" and "how." I can't wait for the keynote tomorrow to see exactly what's in store. I was at first not thrilled about the thought of eventually having to buy an Intel machine, but I'm not a big IBM or Motorola fan either, so I suppose I'll get used to it. And hopefully thanks to Transitive I won't have to do so in the too near future. :)

Bregalad said:
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.
Click to expand...

We read it here first...and last. :D
 
FAT is in

At first I was feeling abandoned by Apple, and then realized, wait a sec!

Apple is not switching to x86 exactly.
Apple is going to make the CPU architecture irrelevant by abstraction.
One only has to look as far as the old FAT binary from the NeXT.

Something like this is a Holy Grail of computing: Think of Java.

Steve will tell the seeming masses of developers that all you have to do is compile your application to a *FAT* binary type, and OSX will do the rest.

The underlying CPU doesn't matter.... in that way, Apple can pick the best product for the task, be it server, mobile, etc, etc.

-Wyrm
 
LaMerVipere said:
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!
anim_beer.gif
Click to expand...

You mean Tiger, right? lol
 
I still maintain that these are all rumors. They have plagued the Mac community for at least 10 years now. This has come up before every keynote Steve Jobs and his predecessors have made. There are no facts to substantiate any of it. The only fact is that Steve Jobs will announce the truth tomorrow. Anything before then is complete BS. :cool:
 
the_wallcrawler said:
My girlfriend/future wife works at Intel and has a bunch of stock so the real question is, if these rumors are true in any capacity, what happens to Intel stock? Am I going to be a rich man tomorrow? :D
Click to expand...

You may see a jump, but probably not for the long term / next couple of years. At least going off just Apple for a boost.

Intel already has over 85% market share. The PowerPC chips represent 2% market share. Apple stock should be the bigger beneficiary.
 
Wyrm said:
At first I was feeling abandoned by Apple, and then realized, wait a sec!

Apple is not switching to x86 exactly.
Apple is going to make the CPU architecture irrelevant by abstraction.
One only has to look as far as the old FAT binary from the NeXT.

Something like this is a Holy Grail of computing: Think of Java.

Steve will tell the seeming masses of developers that all you have to do is compile your application to a *FAT* binary type, and OSX will do the rest.

The underlying CPU doesn't matter.... in that way, Apple can pick the best product for the task, be it server, mobile, etc, etc.

-Wyrm
Click to expand...

Maybe they are going to make an iMac Shuffle, where every time you turn it on, it uses a different CPU architecture.
 
I'm beginning to believe it now

Well the more I read on this subject the more I am convinced that in a matter of hours Mac will be X86.

This is MacOSXrumors:

'The initial revelator of the information is said to be IBM itself. IBM representents are also said to have confirmed the information after being contacted by the press for comments, late this week. By the way, the Wall Street Journal as well as The Inquirer published further confirmation of these rumours during the week-end. The Inquirer also added that Apple would keep the option of using AMD’s chips as well'
 
1) Awesome news.

2) Apple will have to significantly lower prices on systems because they can't hide behind the stigma of the G5 chip. Only the most die-hard Mac fan would pay $2999 for a 3.6GHz Intel-tosh with 512MB of ram and a so-so video card, when they could get a tricked out 3.6GHz PC for about half that. We're gonna be comparing Apples to apples if it's Intel's chips being used, and it's going to be extremely hard to explain to 90% of the users out there why a computer with identical specs costs so frickin' much more.

3) A Windows compatibility mode, a-la VPC or Classic Mode that allows people to run Windows apps would create a lot of crossover users. That is, IF and ONLY if the price is right. I would love to be able to use a Mac at work using 3D applications, but I can't because it's so poorly supported.
 
admanimal said:
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.
Click to expand...

How about Microsoft Virtual PC? Seems like the job of emulating an Intel processor just got A LOT easier for them. It should run Virtual PC with very little trouble.
 
I was attempting to fall asleep but couldn't, and then it struck me didn't that latest WSJ article from tomorrow say something like some of the new Intel-based Macs would have the ability to run Windows programs more efficiently than Windows, or did I just imagine that? I don't know. But on the subject of computing Holy Grails, I thought that QuickTransit seemed like enough of a Holy Grail. I think by the time Steve is done selling us on this tomorow we'll all be in awe, especially if he pulls some Mactel machines out of his hat for us to see in real life using QuickTransit (which, at this point I am going to say I am expecting).
 
Abercrombieboy said:
How about Microsoft Virtual PC? Seems like the job of emulating an Intel processor just got A LOT easier for them. It should run Virtual PC with very little trouble.
Click to expand...


The thought of this makes me very excited. I think we can pretty much count on running windows on the new macs very fast.
 
Make it good Apple

Late on the night before WWDC, I've been sitting in front of my computer for a couple of hours reading three different mac message boards, trying to wrap my head around what looks now to be a sure thing. Macs running on Intel chips.

I was totally dismissive of the rumors that came up a couple of weeks ago. The Wall Street Journal was on crack, I thought. As it became apparent that there was something to their story, I fell into a stage of denial. "Apple wouldn't do this," I thought. "There is no way they are going to make such a big change, just when OS X has reached maturity." I was looking forward to a few years of enjoyment on a stable, productive, and efficient platform. Revolutionary emulation technologies aside, this is something that will shake up the Mac world for years.

On the hardware side, I'm feeling a bit of relief. There is a clear way forward now. No more worrying about how the portables have hit a performance wall, and the Powermacs are still behind their 3.0 GHz goal.

10 hours until we all know for sure...
 
Abercrombieboy said:
How about Microsoft Virtual PC? Seems like the job of emulating an Intel processor just got A LOT easier for them. It should run Virtual PC with very little trouble.
Click to expand...

Sounds reasonable to me...I'm just saying Apple won't do anything themselves.
 
Tire of Complaints

I just don't understand all the complaints with moving to x86. With the Centrino, and new dual mobile processor coming, Intel has shown a commitment to mobile computer technology.


If somebody can answer this question, I'll shut up.
WHAT FUTURE MOBILE PROCESSOR HAS IBM OR FREESCALE COMMITTED TO?

If anyone can answer that, I'll bow down and call you Master...because the answer is nothing.

Let me support Intel
1) Proven to commit to mobile computer technology
---What do you want, a weak, lame ass G5 mobile chip?

2) Ability to compete and exceed on the desktop platform.

What does IBM have? Cell? a chip that can't and won't be ported over for real computing use?

If anyone can honestly say they are happy with the performance upgrades of IBM then let me know, because I just think your crazy, and worse, without proof.
 
ArizonaKid said:
You may see a jump, but probably not for the long term / next couple of years. At least going off just Apple for a boost.

Intel already has over 85% market share. The PowerPC chips represent 2% market share. Apple stock should be the bigger beneficiary.
Click to expand...

If anything AAPL stock will take a dive this morning because of all of the uncertainty.
 
adam1185 said:
If anything AAPL stock will take a dive this morning because of all of the uncertainty.
Click to expand...

It didn't dive when the WSJ first noted this possibility a couple weeks ago, and there was way more uncertainty then....but the stock market is crazy so who knows.
 
admanimal said:
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.
Click to expand...

Rhapsody red box was specifically designed for this purpose, XP or even Linux would run in osX just as classic is doing for us now. The ideal world would be to dump classic, run osX on intel with all native apps running on some sort off hardware emulation or recompile on the fly and XP as a classic environment. All i hope is DELL will also be selling osX boxes, really i am. :eek:
 
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