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
Remember...
For all of you worriers out there remember, Steve's reality distortion field will be in full effect. I'm sure you'll be just as sucked in this time as you were before.
By the end you'll be saying "PPC what? Give me those new Intel chips!"
It's still Apple, it's still OS X, what more do you want?
Isaac
For all of you worriers out there remember, Steve's reality distortion field will be in full effect. I'm sure you'll be just as sucked in this time as you were before.
By the end you'll be saying "PPC what? Give me those new Intel chips!"It's still Apple, it's still OS X, what more do you want?
Isaac
This is so exciting!! It makes up for there being no hockey this year
I'm going with the hope that Intel is making PPCs...
I can dream...
I'm going with the hope that Intel is making PPCs...
I can dream...
soldat said:
The amount of lunacy on this board is reaching new heights.
"Off the shelf components"? Where do you shop? Apple has more than a few ASICs on its mobo, and the other chips aren't exactly available to hobbyists eiher.
Mac-Xpert said:
Umm, yes they do. Many many many Linux boxes are either dual boot with windows, or you can actually run windows programs inside of Linux. Once again, OS X is secure enough that windows crap won't affect it. Once again, you need root or admin privledges to change anything of importance in OS X. The whole emulation thing is a bit of a wild card at this point, but fear of viruses and mal ware is NOT a reason to worry about x86.
Isaac
wow...this is like watching a thriller in the theater except the picture's gone and you can only read the subtitles.....
Not likely I'm sure if this gets official the the WWDC thread will get some spectacular negative ratingisaacc7 said:
I have posted this elsewhere, and gotten no feedback...
The IBM/Freescale offerings are late in coming, but, quite frankly, look fast, and more advanced, architecturally. The reason all the console makers (including u$oft, for crying out loud) are moving to the PPC platform is because it's just plain better than anything Intel could offer, and cheaper to boot. There's zero reason why IBM can't or won't do some wonderful things for Apple before the year is out, and FreeScale is slowly, but surely, ramping up to provide low-power, high GHz, even dual-core processors that could easily to be integrated into Apple laptops (the 7448 is a plug-and-play drop-in replacement for the 7447A), that will make Powerbooks and iBooks competitive with PentiumM. The future of PPC is very, very bright. The cost of switching architectures, in terms of developer pain and an absolute nosedive in sales of current PPC-driven models, will be enormous. Apple won't realize tangible benefit from this switch for a few years, if ever.
So why in the holy f**k is Steve doing this??
My only answer is that he's pissed. Simple as that. IBM hung Apple out to dry on some speed promises, and, shock-of-shocks, they're paying more attention to u$0ft and Sony, who, by the way, are bigger, and probably making more money for IBM off of the Xbox360 and Cell than Apple ever could do for them. Steve doesn't like egg on his face. Steve doesn't want to share a platform space with Microsoft, who is clearly looking to make their own digital hub space in the PPC market (right where the Mini would get its arse kicked). I say: Steve-O is mad as hell, and he's not going to take it anymore, even if this move makes less-than-zero sense from a financial or strategic perspective. He's taking his marbles and leaving the game. Period. And he's counting on the Mac religionists to cover his a$$ on this one, like they always do, like they did in the 68k-to-PPC switch. The platform agnostics fled in huge numbers back then, but Apple was able to hold on to the Mac-o-holics, and milk that money cow with the usual b.s. about PPC superiority.
Now he can't claim that's Apple's special benefit, A) because IBM hasn't jumped when Steve says how high, and B) IBM is jumping pretty hard for u$oft and Sony, who will make them plenty more cash.
Steve will claim IBM let Apple down. That's bull. Intel had no less trouble moving to 90nm, and another platform leap on the PPC side will restore parity, or even superiority, as it's proving more-than-capable of in the game console market. It's just that Apple's not a top priority. Why Intel would be any more accomodating, in Steve's mind, I haven't a clue, but he's known to get pretty irrational when he's irate, so kicking-and-screaming, we will be dragged to wherever Steve is King.
You folks with me on this? It's nutty; but so is Steve. And what else makes more sense, when you really study the roadmap? I'm at a loss, when considering the more rational perspective. Fact is, Apple is letting the PPC platform down...but only a little. Because it no longer needs Apple.
The IBM/Freescale offerings are late in coming, but, quite frankly, look fast, and more advanced, architecturally. The reason all the console makers (including u$oft, for crying out loud) are moving to the PPC platform is because it's just plain better than anything Intel could offer, and cheaper to boot. There's zero reason why IBM can't or won't do some wonderful things for Apple before the year is out, and FreeScale is slowly, but surely, ramping up to provide low-power, high GHz, even dual-core processors that could easily to be integrated into Apple laptops (the 7448 is a plug-and-play drop-in replacement for the 7447A), that will make Powerbooks and iBooks competitive with PentiumM. The future of PPC is very, very bright. The cost of switching architectures, in terms of developer pain and an absolute nosedive in sales of current PPC-driven models, will be enormous. Apple won't realize tangible benefit from this switch for a few years, if ever.
So why in the holy f**k is Steve doing this??
My only answer is that he's pissed. Simple as that. IBM hung Apple out to dry on some speed promises, and, shock-of-shocks, they're paying more attention to u$0ft and Sony, who, by the way, are bigger, and probably making more money for IBM off of the Xbox360 and Cell than Apple ever could do for them. Steve doesn't like egg on his face. Steve doesn't want to share a platform space with Microsoft, who is clearly looking to make their own digital hub space in the PPC market (right where the Mini would get its arse kicked). I say: Steve-O is mad as hell, and he's not going to take it anymore, even if this move makes less-than-zero sense from a financial or strategic perspective. He's taking his marbles and leaving the game. Period. And he's counting on the Mac religionists to cover his a$$ on this one, like they always do, like they did in the 68k-to-PPC switch. The platform agnostics fled in huge numbers back then, but Apple was able to hold on to the Mac-o-holics, and milk that money cow with the usual b.s. about PPC superiority.
Now he can't claim that's Apple's special benefit, A) because IBM hasn't jumped when Steve says how high, and B) IBM is jumping pretty hard for u$oft and Sony, who will make them plenty more cash.
Steve will claim IBM let Apple down. That's bull. Intel had no less trouble moving to 90nm, and another platform leap on the PPC side will restore parity, or even superiority, as it's proving more-than-capable of in the game console market. It's just that Apple's not a top priority. Why Intel would be any more accomodating, in Steve's mind, I haven't a clue, but he's known to get pretty irrational when he's irate, so kicking-and-screaming, we will be dragged to wherever Steve is King.
You folks with me on this? It's nutty; but so is Steve. And what else makes more sense, when you really study the roadmap? I'm at a loss, when considering the more rational perspective. Fact is, Apple is letting the PPC platform down...but only a little. Because it no longer needs Apple.
Going way out on a limb, mind you...as in I have no idea.Dr.Gargoyle said:help me interpret that. Does it mean that the OS could be CPU independent?
You may be right that Apple may be heading towards this concept.
I notice the one that CmdrLaForge linked did not contain all the 86 variants.
Without some research, no idea how many Applo chip sets there are, but my guess is more than shows.
We do know that Unix/Linux runs on just about anything these days.
Looking at the Mac OS X's underpinnings, maybe that is the long term goal of Mac OS X.5 and up. That is run on a variety of chip sets that meet certain criteria.
Well the Keynote will be starting soon...anticipation! Arg!
Edit: Then again, Apple may just being prudent in case they do need to switch at some future date -- as in not today or two years from today.
Sushi
Mac-Xpert said:
Fair enough, good response.
I would still think that running windows software (ala WINE or even in an emulated environment, like VMWare/VPC) would leave the core OS fairly safe. I do still run LOTS of windows software on my Linux box using WINE (which is working pretty well these days, even for games) and I don't have any issue with viruses.
I would LOVE to be able to run WINE on OS X, and I hear that the PPC hardware is the only thing holding it back. ...I also hear that Sarge is supposed to go stable today, which is completely off topic, but still exciting
Our plan is to keep the forums open during the keynote, if all goes well. Discuss what you hear and enjoy the keynote!
Note: Don't repost the news that appears at macrumorslive.com. Presume that other forum members are seeing it. And rules against one-word posts and other spam remain in effect.
Note: Don't repost the news that appears at macrumorslive.com. Presume that other forum members are seeing it. And rules against one-word posts and other spam remain in effect.
