Or simply because people really can't wait for SSD prices to (finally) get lower (bringing the iPod Touch to a more reasonable price while waiting for bigger SSD capacity).
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 Entering Solid State Drive Market
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Or simply because people really can't wait for SSD prices to (finally) get lower (bringing the iPod Touch to a more reasonable price while waiting for bigger SSD capacity).
Based on what?!
My thoughts exactly. I guess he "trusts" AMD and Motorola. For some reason, apparently it matters who manufacturers the processor (you know, they're watching).
Bring out the tin foil
(JK, RogersHat ;-))
My thoughts exactly. I guess he "trusts" AMD and Motorola. For some reason, apparently it matters who manufacturers the processor (you know, they're watching).
Bring out the tin foil
(JK, RogersHat ;-))
Apple is probably wary of Intel. I mean who else can Apple move to? If Intel decided to charge Apple more for parts what can Apple do? Sue?
I still think Apple should have designed their own CPU with IBM's help and found a fab to make the parts for them. Yes it would require more engineering, but then they would own the ip and can do whatever they want. I think that Intel can screw Apple over much worse than Apple could screw them over.
Ah, yes. They have no choice. Just like when we on the PowerPC. What makes you think that their products is not running on non-intel processors?
LOL, that wouldn't lock them into a given product even more, if they chose to co-develop a processor.
AMD can barely sustain itself. Adding Apple to the mix sure wouldn't help. VIA, lol, nothing else needs to be said there. Hmm who else makes X86 chips? I think that is it. For non-X86 chips there are probably lots of choices, but if any of them were any good why didn't Apple go there before going X86?
It locks them into the design for as long as they want to use it, but they can pay any fab to produce the part. I mean do you think MS owns the fabs that produces Xenon or XenosLOL, that wouldn't lock them into a given product even more, if they chose to co-develop a processor.
? Float around and find the best prices. They can't really do that with Intel. It seems to me like Apple needs Intel more than Intel needs Apple.Would a PPC or MIPS cpu be vastly superior to Intel's? Sure, but the development costs would only be spread out over Apple's sales, not the whole planet's. I'd love a 3GHz 4-core R10k myself, but the Intel deal is a hundred million a year Apple doesn't have to spend developing and upgrading its own cpus.
It was never about "good", it's about development costs. A MIPS R10k is way better than an x86, but it would probably cost an easy hundred million in year in development costs for initial design and periodic improvement. It was a sound financial decision to stop fighting the pack and join it instead.
Maybe so, but besides the cos of developing as other people have suggested, don't kid yourself: Apple is one of the biggest manufacturers and taker of Intel-chips. They're a huge customer for Intel. And not only directly, but they're good for their "image". Why else would they release the chip for the Airbook a little earlier (the one SJ & co claim Intel "shrunk because Apple wanted it like that" and the rest of the BS).
Ah, yes. They have no choice. Just like when we on the PowerPC. What makes you think that their products is not running on non-intel processors?
LOL, that wouldn't lock them into a given product even more, if they chose to co-develop a processor.
Rememmber that day when jobs revealed the intel mac =O and told everyone that macs have been runing intel chips for a hella lonmg time
Yup. That was my thought. After that "episode" I doubt very much they're locked-in to Intel.
This "MIPS > x86" or "Power > X86" hogwash is totally subjective, so don't claim otherwise. The fact is that IBM just couldn't compete with Intel for Apple's processor needs. Although Power6 looks awesome maybe for high-end servers, Intel provides a whole range of regularly updated processors for the whole spectrum of systems, from server Xeons to low power laptop chips to (future) ultra low power MID/UMPC processors; and all of these at great prices due to their volume of manufacturing. IBM just cannot compete with that.
Now, assuming AMD can catch back up, there will be healthy competition in the market and Apple will continue to benefit from their risky decision to move to x86. Intel has been firing on all cylinders since the day Apple announced the switch and Apple has the market share to prove it. I mean holy crap, Apple can't even keep up with Intel. The first Intel macs were Core Duo, Then Core 2 Duo, Now 1st revision of Penryn, then in the summer we'll see faster Penryns with new platforms and then in the fall you'll see Nehalem which is an entirely new native quad core (and 6-core for MP servers) architecture.
You also can't discount the impact that the ability to bootcamp/virtualize Windows XP has had with potential switchers. I would guess that the ability to run windows has increased the amount of switchers by at least 30% or more.
Both Apple and Intel are making money hand over foot, and are not really tied to each other. However, it would seem to me that Apple is indeed more dependent on Intel than Intel is on Apple. Why? Because Intel currently supplies chips to virtually every PC maker out there, Apple is just another one of its (bigger) customers.
Thinking of this reminds me of the little fight eBay and Google had. Anyone else remember?
Also, Intel entering the SSD market is good, as Intel likes to refresh its products very very fast, then lowering the prices of previous generations (which are really only a few months old). Competition from Intel could possibly speed up the rate at which the prices drop.
so how long before we see intel solid state drives in apple machines? as in the mbp or mb as an option possibly...
It's about time SSD's become mainstream. I can't wait until the prices drop as low as they are with the current HD technology...
Then the 32 gig iP's and 64 gig iPT's could be a realistic release in the very near future. It would be great if they arrived in June with the expected 2 gen iP.