'Intel Based Mac' Rumor Roundup...

[ZLurker]

This WWDC looks like is going to be one of those events you will remember for a very long time.
I just wonder how I will think looking back on this?
I fear the worst...

Im actually glad to be apart of the Mac community. We have so much to gain or lose, with our small market share. Owning a Mac becomes a part of who you are.
Its the same with Nintendo. I remember when Nintendo announced their N64, WITH CARTRIGDE! Everyone else went cd! One major misstake can change the course entirelly. And this time i think im on the winning side and Microsoft is going down!

 

[groovebuster]

BTW... saw your signature... did you try out

http://www.lyx.org/

???

groovebuster

 

[iGary]

Let me ask a question....and no, I'm not sorting through 1500 posts to find it...

If this is true, would Intel be developing a chip based on OS X architecture, or would OS X have to be retooled to work with an Intel chip?

 

[ZLurker]

yup, sums it up pretty well...
I work with game theory

What kind of research do you do?

Edit:
Cool, we might even be sitting in the same building at work

 

[zelmo]

Let me ask a question....and no, I'm not sorting through 1500 posts to find it...

If this is true, would Intel be developing a chip based on OS X architecture, or would OS X have to be retooled to work with an Intel chip?

My guess is that OS X would be re-tooled to run on an x86. There's not much incentive for Intel to create a new chip or to license the PPC from IBM, when the Mac has such a small market share.

I know you're anxious (we all are), but I think this will work out alright, iGary.

 

[iGary]

My guess is that OS X would be re-tooled to run on an x86. There's not much incentive for Intel to create a new chip or to license the PPC from IBM, when the Mac has such a small market share.

I know you're anxious (we all are), but I think this will work out alright, iGary.

Yeah, I'm not too thrilled about this if it comes true - at all. Guess I'll throw on the iPod for 4 hours and wade through 30 pages of text on the exciting Virginia Coast.

 

[rashdown_online]

This WWDC looks like is going to be one of those events you will remember for a very long time.
I just wonder how I will think looking back on this?
I fear the worst...

I share your concerns.

The thing is, if it's going to happen, it's going to happen.

It's a very difficult strategic move. However, being (loosly) based on Darwin BSD, this could be (if true) the most prominent Linux distribution out there.

The combination of Steve Jobs, Jon Ive, the Linux community, the Apple community, and the fact that (I might offend a few people here) Joe Public wont know any different (they just see: iPod, iTunes, that MAC looks nice - does it run Word?), COULD mean this is a Spring Board for the wider, more aggressive, proposition to the business and consumer desktop solution.

With cheaper components available to Jon Ive, he'll have more budget to play with to produce some fantastic hardware (both consumer and power user).

Don't get me wrong, I totaly LOVE my G4 P/Book, and have doubts about a move to Intel. But that is what I love about the technological world. It's fast changing. And those who embrace the change with open eyes and open minds have fun. Those who don't, don't (my mum for example, still hasn't got to grips with the combination of the Sky remote and the DVD remote!!!).

At the end of the day, people use there devices for different reasons. But the underlying core is the important thing. I for one will never jump BACK to a Windoze OS (at home) after embracing OS X. The usability and aesthetics of the PowerMac, Powerbook, iBook, etc, are down the Jon Ive's team (which is Apple - not Intel). The whole Apple team make Apple, Apple.

Pro users are probably, quite rightly, concerned. But do you think a company who's majority user base is "Pro Users" are going to introduce a new road map if they thought it would cripple it???

Maybe by introducing x86 there are some incredible new devices on the way?

Maybe OS X is going to be multi-archictecture complient (old NT4 style) - Yes there are problems with this, but the design team at Apple are GOOD!!!

Who knows?

For me, I'm enthusiastic about this (as well as scepitcle without having an understanding of the medium/long term business strategy). As it encourages a "posibility" thought process, where the technology industry (by this, I refer to consumer computing) has become stagnent.

I'm more worried abot the day Steve Jobs and Jon Ive turn round and say: "right, I'm off to sit on my big boat and spend the rest of my days chillin' out drinking beer and listening to Bob Dylan"

Anyway, It could all just be a fabrication. Apple may have had a chat with Intel about putting in an Intel based WiFi access point, configure to utilise IRAP 802.1X in Steve's new extension, 'cause Steve was too busy preparing his Keynote speach introducing the new G5, dual core power book and Quad, dual core Power Mac

We'll see at 6pm BST (10am PST)

 

[Cooknn]

I wonder how much re-tooling would be necessary to get OS X to run on Intel... After all, it ran on Intel fine in it's previous life as NeXTSTEP. Plus you've got Darwin under the hood which runs on Intel today. From Wikipedia (BTW, thanks iGary for the heads up on Wikipedia in another thread).

Currently Darwin runs on both Apple's PowerPC architecture and on the Intel architecture, though the latter only has very limited driver support.

 

[nomore]

I wonder how much re-tooling would be necessary to get OS X to run on Intel... After all, it ran on Intel fine in it's previous life as NeXTSTEP. Plus you've got Darwin under the hood which runs on Intel today. From Wikipedia (BTW, thanks iGary for the heads up on Wikipedia in another thread).

Well... Darwin is just one very small component (well collection of servers) of a whole. They also have to port the whole Carbon and Cocoa and Quartz etc... plus every little program they have. And there will be core components that will have to be completely rewritten for a different achitecture for applications which use more hardware specific libraries such as Activity Monitor and Disk Utility.

 

[Dr.Gargoyle]

If OS9 won't be supported, we will keep using those Macs until they died. We just don't have money to switch. I don't think any people will switch to Mac in our department under this situation. Actually, I told this news (or rumor?) to a student today. Well, I was almost be killed instantly because I helped her to switch three months ago!

We do need to handle large data set for our researches. While the HPC needs two weeks to finish the job, G5 takes only 5 days. We never try on PC though, since we don't believe it won't lockup for so long...

I can relate to everything you talk about. I think that the money issue is what is going to kill Macs in science... No dept will put money from their very tight budget into the Apple platform if they are going through with the PPC -> x86 transition.

 

[Dr.Gargoyle]

Im actually glad to be apart of the Mac community. We have so much to gain or lose, with our small market share. Owning a Mac becomes a part of who you are.
Its the same with Nintendo. I remember when Nintendo announced their N64, WITH CARTRIGDE! Everyone else went cd! One major misstake can change the course entirelly. And this time i think im on the winning side and Microsoft is going down!

I really hope you are right an I am wrong... you have no idea how much I wish that.

 

[Skull Leader]

Here we go...

Welcome to the world of "Wintel" and "MacIntel". We will have to wait and see if this is a good thing or bad thing...could be either, who can tell.

I almost wonder if this means Apple is admiting defeat in the platform wars...that can't look good in the short run...but if we end up with better Macs as a result it may be the best available option.

 

[Omen88]

Maybe it's been mentioned before, but I'm too lazy to look in such a long thread.

Intel lets Aopen design a mac mini look-a-like (rip-off). Why the hell would they do that, when later on the macs will contain Intel processors anyway (including the mini from the c-net article)?

Maybe Apple is pissed off at Intel and lets such a rumor loose, and then at WWDC says in your face intel. And keep that crappy Aopen look-a-like, cause that's the closest you will get to getting in a mac.

And then 3.5Ghz G5's with some Cells... now that would be some news.

 

[Mr. Anderson]

If it looks like a mac, and works like a mac, and runs my mac software, then I don't care who makes the chip inside. Period.

And add to that - if its faster than a PowerPC I'm even happier....

In the end, it shouldn't make a difference what the CPU is, but Intel might also mean it will be cheaper.....

D

 

[Dr.Gargoyle]

BTW... saw your signature... did you try out

http://www.lyx.org/

???

groovebuster

Thanks, but I have tried that. It didnt work out for me. I need something that I don't have to tweak. I am currently using scientific work place in VPC. Thye use to have an app for Mac, but after the 680x0 -> PPC transition they stoped selling Mac versions.
I wouldn't mind paying up to $200 for an app that worked properly without downloading all kinds of add ons. I use my computer for work, the less I spend on tweaking the app the better.

 

[Omen88]

Thanks, but I have tried that. It didnt work out for me. I need something that I don't have to tweak. I am currently using scientific work place in VPC. Thye use to have an app for Mac, but after the 680x0 -> PPC transition they stoped selling Mac versions.
I wouldn't mind paying up to $200 for an app that worked properly without downloading all kinds of add ons. I use my computer for work, the less I spend on tweaking the app the better.

Hmm I don't really see why you would want a WYSIWYG latex editor. You provide the content and latex does all the rest. TexShop is fine for me on mac. But then again, such comments are not really helpful for you

 

[atzeX]

iPods use ARMs, Intel builds ARMs

so what?
Apple brings a new iPod, for video (music clips at first) and need some faster ARM CPUs for them. XScale goes up to 800MHz, should be fast enough for video.

iPod-processor-list:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/consumer_electronics/index.html

Intel builds ARMs:
http://www.arm.com/products/CPUs/families.html

 

[myapplseedshurt]

WRONG!! CHANGING PROCS WILL NOT MAKE THE BOX CHEAPER!!

Hey, God knows I would rather have AMD if we went x86, but the truth is that I want OS X, and will take it wrapped around any processor Apple deleivers. Personally, the thought of a Pentium M in a PowerBook just gets me tingly.

Benchmarks show that clock for clock against the new AMD 64, the Pentium M can hold it's own and even take the crown for fastest chip. Of course the same was always true also for the Pentium 3 to the Pentium 4. The P4 was a horrible chip and always has been. To my knowledge heat was the only reason the P3 left the market. But with new technology, and the Pent. M just being a revamped P3, it can really scream.

The new dual core version of the pentium M coming soon, called Yonah could take the crown as fastest chip when it comes out, and if I had to choose G4 from Yonah then I choose intel.

All you guys that are getting all upset about switching to intel, chill out. You bought an apple for OS X, not the 970 (unless you were upgrading of couse). No matter what processor is in our Mac, it will always be a Mac.

Plus we get PCI-Express and it is cheaper on us.

THE 970 CHIP IS A LOT LESS EXPENSIVE THAN ANYTHING AMD/INTEL OFFERS. YOU WILL NOT SEE CHEAPER BOXES!!!

 

[BillHarrison]

THE 970 CHIP IS A LOT LESS EXPENSIVE THAN ANYTHING AMD/INTEL OFFERS. YOU WILL NOT SEE CHEAPER BOXES!!!

Thats a rather innane statement. I have no doubt intel/AMD offer less expensive processors than G5's.

 

[Mr Maui]

I'm sure it's just coincidence.

After all, I don't think any company would intentionally want to announce something on a day when most people get sentimental about veterans and WWII.

Unless their goal was to start WWIII ... OSX vs Windows ... Jobs vs Gates ... Apple vs Microsoft. Almost sounds like a world war is starting in some of these threads.

 

[point665]

This is some f'n BS, cannot be happening... what about all of us who just spent alot on G5s? WERE NOT GETTING SUPPORT FOR THEM AS IT IS RIGHT NOW, we were sold faulty f'n machines and Apple is just going to switch to Intel?

Consequences..

 

[rendezvouscp]

Thats a rather innane statement. I have no doubt intel/AMD offer less expensive processors than G5's.

Nope, I'll look for some figures, but PPC chips indeed are cheaper than their Intel and AMD counterparts.
-Chase

 

[griz]

Will software vendors abandon the Mac rather than alter their code?

They already have the code running on x86. It would only need to be altered to work under Aqua. I'm no developer, but I'd guess it's far easier to get Windows (X86) Photoshop running under OSX on x86 than it would be to move between PPC and x86.

 

[beguegab]

A little more History of Intel and Apple.

Lets think back People, Intel back in the 90's made a RISC processor with no platform associated. They tried to get Microsoft to buy into the platform but Bill was not interested in going that route because of Open source developemnt practices. Gee I wonder why, probably that every Unix type of programmer can rip his stuff apart and redesign it without the bugs. However with this being said, it is not a full compatable RISC like IBM and Moterola, hence the recompile. Intel has never dropped the project because they invested a ton of money into it. Ever since Microsoft said they would never go to RISC they have been corting Apple to buy their chips, but by the time Apple would consider the chip set was to old and no longer able to compeate. Switiching to Intel would only give Apple one advantage and that would be the Mhz game. Intel is not faster just a higher clock speed.

Jobs already has a OS that runs microsoft apps remember NEXT? It was never incorporated into the X interface due to agreements with Macsoft(Soft PC), Now that Micorsoft owns them the agreement should be null and void. The real question is why is it not an option now.

Please remember that Mac is different than a PC due to the ROM. PC's ROM is software where Mac is Hardware, always has and always will be. That is why it is better, Faster, and eaiser to use.

 

[isaacc7]

Nope, I'll look for some figures, but PPC chips indeed are cheaper than their Intel and AMD counterparts.
-Chase

Maybe, but all of the supporting things are more expensive. If Apple goes with an off the shelf processor, it could also use off the shelf motherboards, controllers, video, etc. This is where the cost savings could come from. Not having to custom design everything will save tons.

Isaac