'Intel Based Mac' Rumor Roundup...

[sord]

one last reply, and I need to go to bed:

if this does happen....

will we break the macrumors record for number of posts in one thread? How 'bout we do a little pool on how many pages it's gonna be?

My vote: HELLA

I dunno, it may be so shocking and terrible that it only gets 1 page and MacRumors dies off. Its of course possible but I love my MacRumors and my IBM and Moto processors (yes I still like my G4 even though I have a G5) so lets hope we get new IBM PPC dual core dual processor PowerMacs and PowerBooks

EDIT: single processor PowerBooks with dual core, didnt mean for the confusion that may exist

 

[madmaxmedia]

Maybe, but how will it look a year from now? This will only be sustainable if intel is making ppc-like chips for apple, imo.

Why, the sole reason why the stock went up on that rumor was that Apple was going to switch to Intel x86. If the rumor had been Intel PPC that would not have had the same effect...

 

[tjwett]

Historically, Apple makes most of its money on hardware.

That being said there's no reason that Apple couldn't decide to try to beat Windows or even coexist with Windows on the PC platform... but so far, no one has been able to (OS/2, NextSTEP, BeOS).

there's linux, but it's not a commercial product.

arn

this is a good point. i hold BeOS very high up and have a huge respect for it. even to this day, it does things that are not possible in any other OS, and with extremely modest hardware requirements. having said that, OS X is pretty darn BeOSified as of Tiger. certainly due to all those ex-Be programmers now working at Apple. Spotlight and the metadata system was designed by the very same guy who designed the Be File System. but like you said, no one has been able to play ball (commercially) with Windows on the PC. Tiger has a whole lot of WOW features that could certainly draw a decent crowd. but whether or not they'll fully adopt Mac OS or just use it as a novelty is another story. the other question i have to ask is; will all those Windows users who are accustomed to using warez, cracks and the like actually cough up and pay for OS X, assuming it could indeed run on any beige box? i have to say that i doubt it. the pessimist in me is having visions of spyware, hacks, cracks, and virii becoming an actual concern in the future. heh, maybe good old BeOS will be the safe haven afterall.

 

[~Shard~]

Hmm, so if the Intel rumors are true and there is a bit of a backlash from die-hard Mac/PPC fans, will the existing G5 machines increase in value? Will people want to own a non-Intel Mac more than an Intel one, and will the G5s become a hot commodity as the G5s slowly become unavailable?

 

[philips]

If this is not a rumor, then finally IBM/Motorola/friends are accepting what became the fact: they cannot produce (with such volumes) produce relatively well performing and at the same time cheap CPU.

PowerPC is great, but M$ doesn't support it, so there is no volumes. And it looks bad in their books. And it looks poorly on benchmarks.

Most striking in this story is choice of Intel as CPU supplier. AMD made great paces now, but they still choose Intel - traditional quality king (right now with somewhat outdated technology). I wonder what Intel had offered them - hope not Pentium IV.

So then IBM will stop trying to make chips for market it never was - desktop / low-end workstations - and more or less drop PowerPC production. (Well, embedded PowerPC 440* will live, as a FreeScale's PowerQuicc family).

IBM out, Intel in. Honestly it looks more to me that Jobs is preparing company for his resignation.

P.S. Hm. Two other versions of rumor were: i. Intel will be supplier of chips for iPods (ARM/XScale) ii. Intel based addition for X Serve product line. Both of this rumors make much more sense from pov of what Jobs have said in past. I guess we'll know tomorrow.

 

[admanimal]

I would agree with the Intel Mac launch of an ibook on Monday as well. The will have to kick out something quick to keep people loyal. If so I am buying one. It will be interesting.

There is no way this is going to happen. If it does, there are going to be tons of very unhappy new Intel iBook owners who are unable to run any 3rd party (at best) apps. And while many people have pointed out the potential PPC emulation schemes, I guarantee you that none of them could have been implemented to perfection in such a short time (I dont think Apple could have been planning this for long). If the CNet article is in fact accurate, their timetable is probably accurate as well.

 

[MacTruck]

Why, the sole reason why the stock went up on that rumor was that Apple was going to switch to Intel x86. If the rumor had been Intel PPC that would not have had the same effect...

Exactly. Apple on Intel is a huge money maker and that is why stock prices went up. People in business know this. This opens up a whole new path for apple and the money will be ten fold.

 

[~Shard~]

There is no way this is going to happen. If it does, there are going to be tons of very unhappy new Intel iBook owners who are unable to run any 3rd party (at best) apps. And while many people have pointed out the potential emulation schemes, I guarantee you that none of them could have been implemented in such a short time (I dont think Apple could have been planning this for long). I think if the CNet article is in fact accurate, their timetable is probably accurate as well.

The other issue with this is that presumably, if Apple is going to make such a bold move and move to Intel right away, these new chips should be noticeably better than the existing G4s. As a result, the iBook would not be the first machine to get such a chip, as it would make it more powerful than the PowerBook line.

I'm still expecting iBook revisions Monday or Tuesday, but I doubt they'll be Intel. If anything, new Intel chips will be going into the PowerBooks to give them a significant upgrade, and the existing PowerBook line will simply become the new iBook line.

 

[iMeowbot]

Dude, it's the Inquirer, they're not quite at the same level. Seriously though, I'm not saying this Intel rumor isn't true, and that The Inquirer hasn't picked up on something as well, but I definitely don't think their article warrants "official confirmation" - it's The Inquirer after all... seriously...

Yeah, but this is the Inquirer, not the Register. Charlie Demerjian even put his name on this one; for the less solid stuff, the writers over there submit anonymously.

 

[MacTruck]

There is no way this is going to happen. If it does, there are going to be tons of very unhappy new Intel iBook owners who are unable to run any 3rd party (at best) apps. And while many people have pointed out the potential PPC emulation schemes, I guarantee you that none of them could have been implemented to perfection in such a short time (I dont think Apple could have been planning this for long). If the CNet article is in fact accurate, their timetable is probably accurate as well.

Yeah, maybe not with the ibook but perhaps the powerbook. And perhaps adobe and many others will anounce their new OSX Intel products on monday as well. You know if OSX for Intel is ready on monday then all the pro apps will be compatible or have new versions ready with free upgrades for people who bought them recently.

 

[Caudor]

Right, the key issue ... if true

I think the big key here is that Transitive Technologies thing, Apple would have to have something up its sleeve to even consider such a major move. For the sake of speculation, let's assume that Apple can get the rumored 80% performance running PPC code in emulation on Intel. Well, I think a Pentium M-based PowerBook is going to run faster with that than a G4 PowerBook anyways. And the desktops will be roughly close enough during the transition period.[/b]

You are right. If the rumor is true, this will likely be the compatibility layer that will smooth out the migration process and allow use of current apps at a reasonable speed.

I suspect we'll see a demo of this running on Monday.

 

[w_parietti22]

Think Secret claims their sources have not provided them with any information. Perhaps Apple has singled out the source an intentially kept them in the dark. Oh, they are so busted!!

Or maybe Apple didn't realease anything and some person acted as an Apple exuctive and told cnet and wall street journal.

I'm not believing anything from these rumor mills until I hear it from the one and only Steve Jobs.

 

[admanimal]

The other issue with this is that presumably, if Apple is going to make such a bold move and move to Intel right away, these new chips should be noticeably better than the existing G4s. As a result, the iBook would not be the first machine to get such a chip, as it would make it more powerful than the PowerBook line.

I'm still expecting iBook revisions Monday or Tuesday, but I doubt they'll be Intel. If anything, new Intel chips will be going into the PowerBooks to give them a significant upgrade, and the existing PowerBook line will simply become the new iBook line.

Yes that is a good, even more straightforward counterpoint to the idea that Intel iBooks could be announced Monday....although after that what I said applies to an Intel Powerbook as well.

And you bring up another interesting fact...iBooks do need to be updated soon. Definitely before school starts again. So what can Jobs do on Monday? Announce they are switching to Intel and then say oh by the way here's some new IBM PPC based iBooks that I think you should buy in the mean time? I guess if anyone can pull that sell off, Steve can, but it makes me think that something is fishy here.

 

[MacTruck]

Or maybe Apple didn't realease anything and some person acted as an Apple exuctive and told cnet and wall street journal.

I'm not believing anything from these rumor mills until I hear it from the words for the one and only Steve Jobs.

Yeah, could have been a plant so that the mole is revealed. Boy that apple mole is BALLSY!

 

[MacTruck]

YO APPLE MOLE


Reveal yourself and become famous.

 

[Marianco]

Apple can lock out any computer except Macs

First: Mac OS X is licensed only to run on Apple Hardware. Thus anyone using it on other hardware runs the risk of getting sued by Apple's Lawyers. Also, users won't get any support, such as for patches, because third-part PC makers run the risk of getting sued by Apple's lawyers for copyright infringement for using Mac OS X on their machiens. Therefore, it will be very difficult to obtain support from third-party PC makers.

Second: Apple can add internet activation, which makes it difficult for non-Apple hardware to get upgrades, patches, etc., or even start Mac OS X. Apple can put in IDs on each Mac making it difficult to activate non-Mac computers.

Can someone clear this up for me...
With all the talk of having to emulate and recompile programs for x86 chips such as Intel, I'm starting to wonder something.
Does this mean that OSX would run on any x86 based chip, or would Apple be able to (effectively) lock out any computer except for Apple computers using an Intel chip?

 

[VanNess]

They could do it either way... but presumably, Apple would create their own proprietary hardware. So that you could NOT run OS X on any PC. You'd have to buy a "Mac"

arn

One the many problems with a switch to Intel CPU's is that its going to open up a Pandora's box no matter how Apple implements it - if this story is true.

Let's pretend for a moment that Apple has all the technical/legal/licensing/financial details worked out so that Intel can manufacturer a custom PPC chip based largely on the capabilities of the present G5. Let's assume for a moment that Apple has already engineered a solution for developers to migrate their apps effortlessly and painlessly to the new Intel based Mac hardware. You won't even know there's been any change...

All in all, it sounds great...but there's a problem, and that problem is that you now have "Intel Inside." No matter how Apple engineers it, everyone (the press, stock analysts, and so on) will be constantly hammering Apple to port to x86, simply because Apple is now - for the first time - doing business with Intel (for CPU's). To paraphrase that famous line: "You ain't seen nothing yet."

And when Apple refuses - and they will - they are going to get roasted for it in the press, from stock analysts, and from just about anyone inside and outside the industry now that Intel is a major partner of Apple. All of the goodwill thats been generated by the iPod, OSX Panther, OSX Tiger and so on is going to be lost in a blue screen of death as Apple is criticized right and left for refusing to port to x86 in light of the new Intel "deal." It doesn't matter how technically sound Apple's reasons are, the majority will simply not have the patience to listen or understand (assuming they would be capable of understanding in the first place - some of the journalists and analysts who write about Apple are unbelievably stupid regarding tech issues, ironically). All of the great Tiger press of late that's been saying "now's is the time to switch to Apple" is going to be replaced by another dreary, hackneyed round of "Apple is just a closed end system...too expensive...not enough apps...questionable game FPS. lol

Everyone has already seen the number of posts so far hoping for an OSX x86 port, without a shred of knowledge what Apple's specific intentions are with Intel (if any) or Apple's plans for an Intel CPU based platform, if they actually exist. All that matters to these folks is that Apple is going to do business with Intel. Enough said. Where's my x86 port?

If this rumor..err story turns out to be essentially true, I predict dark times ahead lol.

 

[Marianco]

Steve and Apple

First of all, why can't Apple just design a motherboard that takes 4 PowerPCs, then uses dual-core PowerPCs? Add to that SLI-capable dual graphics cards. You will then have something faster than most PCs which are dual CPU or dual-Core.

Also important to note is how much egg will be on Jobs' face as he announces this move. He has for so long put intel down as being slow. This is really unbelievable.

 

[balconycollapse]

Magic Bullet

I like to compare this to an article by Paul Graham about having something the competition doesn't have (in his example essay he speaks of using an oddball programming language to baffle competitors). In PowerPC Apple had something the competition didn't have. Now the competition is wanting it too with all this Cell and G5 for gaming systems. If Apple made the switch to x86 they would not only have access to everything the competition has but also maintain the edge of things that you can only get with a Mac by keeping it closed and using objective c a quirky language unix underbelly . So you still buy Apple hardware, the chips are as good or better then the competition, which is made moot because its all about software adn apple has the absolute best. Now though joe gamer can pick up a copy of whatever hit game was quickly made mac compatible because of the x86 platform. The only other thing I can athink is apple will do like they did in the early 90s with the performas that had DOS capability and could run windows because of the x86 chip inside. Maybe like some safe virtual pc environment.

 

[mduser63]

Thanks for summarizing all the rumors (past and present) surrounding the Apple/Intel rumors, Arn. As for my take on the whole thing, I don't feel like it's a good thing, but I'll wait to hear details before I really know I guess. Unless they do something to ensure a VERY smooth transition for both older applications, and applications currently being sold for PPC, I don't see how it can be anything but bad for their existing user base.

The fact that WSJ is reporting it is what really makes it hard to believe that the rumors are not true. If it turns out on Monday that Steve Jobs announces a dual-core G4 or G5 PowerBook, as well as assuring everyone that Apple is not switching to Intel, WSJ (and others) are going to have lost a lot of credibility. It's not like they're reporting this as being based on rumors. Reading the articles, it sounds like they're just about 100% sure of what they're saying. Also, it's currently the top story on wsj.com, they're not keeping it low or anything.

 

[admanimal]

First of all, why can't Apple just design a motherboard that takes 4 PowerPCs, then uses dual-core PowerPCs? Add to that SLI-capable dual graphics cards. You will then have something faster than most PCs which are dual CPU or dual-Core.

Throw some steaks on that baby and you've got a party!

 

[iMeowbot]

"THE RUMOURED APPLE MOVE to x86 is true, the INQIORER has gotten independent confirmation of this."

No other news source has said that.

The WSJ said that they had independently confirmed it as well.

 

[~Shard~]

Yeah, but this is the Inquirer, not the Register. Charlie Demerjian even put his name on this one; for the less solid stuff, the writers over there submit anonymously.

Very true. Nonetheless, I'd rather read and trust my copy of WSJ than the Inquirer any day...

Yes that is a good, even more straightforward counterpoint to the idea that Intel iBooks could be announced Monday....although after that what I said applies to an Intel Powerbook as well.

Understood. I just thought that was relevant in terms of the iBooks specifically.

And you bring up another interesting fact...iBooks do need to be updated soon. Definitely before school starts again. So what can Jobs do on Monday? Announce they are switching to Intel and then say oh by the way here's some new IBM PPC based iBooks that I think you should buy in the mean time? I guess if anyone can pull that sell off, Steve can, but it makes me think that something is fishy here.

It's all in the timing. If Apple is going to (for some reason) announce the move to Intel, but that it will take place in 2 years' time, and that the G5s, etc. will still be around for a while, then maybe this wouldn't be as big of an issue.

As has been said many times already, we'll find out Monday! I can't wait for the Jobs keynote...

 

[madmaxmedia]

One the many problems with a switch to Intel CPU's is that its going to open up a Pandora's box no matter how Apple implements it - if this story is true.

Let's pretend for a moment that Apple has all the technical/legal/licensing/financial details worked out so that Intel can manufacturer a custom PPC chip based largely on the capabilities of the present G5. Let's assume for a moment that Apple has already engineered a solution for developers to migrate their apps effortlessly and painlessly to the new Intel based Mac hardware. You won't even know there's been any change...

All in all, it sounds great...but there's a problem, and that problem is that you now have "Intel Inside." No matter how Apple engineers it, everyone (the press, stock analysts, and so on) will be constantly hammering Apple to port to x86, simply because Apple is now - for the first time - doing business with Intel (for CPU's). To paraphrase that famous line: "You ain't seen nothing yet."

Um, Arn's post isn't even talking about Intel PPC. He's actually specifically referring to Intel x86, the point being that even if Apple switched to x86 it doesn't mean you could install Mac OSX on a Wintel box. There is still additional proprietary hardware (mainly ROM) that would only allow Mac OS to run on Mac hardware.

 

[SpamJunkie]

In light of the switch to x86 what I want is an agreement with Intel that Apple gets first access to all the newest processors. It's unlikely, but if, for example, Powermacs had 4ghz Pentiums in them for 3 months before Dell could even buy them I'd feel a little better.


PS - that apple/intel hybrid logo is brilliant.