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.
Macintosh Moving to Intel Processors [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
So now...
Okay... I don't want to be whinning but if Photoshop "works normaly" but start up a bit slower on a P4 @ 3.3 GHZ, I wonder what's in it for me...
Okay... I don't want to be whinning but if Photoshop "works normaly" but start up a bit slower on a P4 @ 3.3 GHZ, I wonder what's in it for me...
ColoJohnBoy said:
...and Steve's charts show that a Dual 2.7Ghz G5 is 98% faster then the computer they are selling to developers right now. I honestly think Steve made that statement only to try and save what little sales they have left after today. No way will Apple throw a bunch of money into a dead platform. All development dollars from this point forward will be going to the Intel Apple PC's.
leftbanke7 said:
I don't know about everyone else, but I'll likely be buying a new Power Mac before the transition since I know Apple knows how to make software for PowerPC. If I wait until afterwards and buy an Intel machine, I'd be dealing with potential glitches and relying on software that works on an emulation layer. I just don't see it killing current sales...
Apple once away betray their own loyal users! They bite the hands who fed them. Well your hefty investments on Apple hardwares will be discontinue in merely a year! All of you seems to forget all these.
http://images.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/photoshop20050427.jpg
http://images.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/renderinghdv20050427.jpg
http://images.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/audio20050427.jpg
I suggest that anyone who felt they have been cheated by Apple misleading product information and roadmap should group together and file a class-action lawsuit. I certainly feel this way.
http://images.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/photoshop20050427.jpg
http://images.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/renderinghdv20050427.jpg
http://images.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/audio20050427.jpg
I suggest that anyone who felt they have been cheated by Apple misleading product information and roadmap should group together and file a class-action lawsuit. I certainly feel this way.
Dr.Gargoyle said:
Yes, analysts are predicting that this could hurt Mac sales, just as switching to the PPC did 10 years ago and switching to OSX did a few years ago.
Heaters in the Sahara? Don't know if it would be that bad...
Dr.Gargoyle said:
I can think of a few people. Mostly current Windows users.
I can understand why alot of the people here wouldn't want to buy a new Mac. But despite this announcement Macs are still better computers. I think the halo effect will hold strong and we will still get switchers.
My Dad wants to buy a mini, and I am still going to encourage it. He will have a better computer for the next couple years, then if he wants he buy a new Intel-Apple computer, he can at that time.
I dont really care...
Personally speaking, I didn't really care if Apple switched to intel on the basis that if i bought a computer today, it would still run, at max preformance, any upcoming version of Photoshop etc. What i did care about, didnt happen. Where's my new portable? It's been far too long... I wanted to buy one this month!.. And if i were to buy one now, i KNOW that very very soon there will be a far better "revolutionary" one. I may love Apple and more importantly, MAC OSX but i also love hardware.
More importantly, after Apple started comparing PPC to Intel, I don't know what to think anymore. I just want a new portable... a good portable.
cHEERS
Ini
Personally speaking, I didn't really care if Apple switched to intel on the basis that if i bought a computer today, it would still run, at max preformance, any upcoming version of Photoshop etc. What i did care about, didnt happen. Where's my new portable? It's been far too long... I wanted to buy one this month!.. And if i were to buy one now, i KNOW that very very soon there will be a far better "revolutionary" one. I may love Apple and more importantly, MAC OSX but i also love hardware.
More importantly, after Apple started comparing PPC to Intel, I don't know what to think anymore. I just want a new portable... a good portable.
cHEERS
Ini
I don't really mind, with the announcement of Rosetta. I said before, if the software still works, I'm fine with it. IBM *hasn't* been delivering (remember--we were supposed to be at 3 GHz some time ago). Since it all will work out, I still have faith.
Not sure how many of you are Rush Limbaugh listeners, but he thinks that perhaps this change has something to do with the encryption or whatever that Intel chips have, effectively stopping piracy. He said he doesn't know much about the issue, but I know even less, and it sounded interesting. Thought I'd throw it out there
Not sure how many of you are Rush Limbaugh listeners, but he thinks that perhaps this change has something to do with the encryption or whatever that Intel chips have, effectively stopping piracy. He said he doesn't know much about the issue, but I know even less, and it sounded interesting. Thought I'd throw it out there
funfunfun said:
Cell is not more powerfull than any PC processor in terms of general computing...
http://www.overclockers.com/tips00746/
I really really hope you are correct I am wrong, but I am certain that it isn't so. You will never be able to sell one Mac to a business if they can't use Office. Office is the key. Besides you don't think that MS is going to sit idle and look at this happening, do you? The day MS suspects Apple is going to be a threat, Apple is dead. We have to be realistic about Apple. I love Macs and hope steve hasn't sold out completely. I am still in denial about this.SiliconAddict said:
E1Presidente said:
The CELL processor has been out for a while now. They've already shown it off at exhibits. It can decode 48 MPEG-2 streams at once, while scaling, performing tansitions, and other modifications without even breaking a sweat. I've read all the techpapers, its a brilliant CPU design, and will be so well scalable for applications you could see it in everything from cellphones to consoles to workstations. You are thinking about nVidia's blunder with the RSX chip not even being finished. They used dual SLI GeForce 6800 Ultras, please don't confuse CPU and GPU.
Xenon opened up a whole new can of worms in terms of security issues. AMD has been moving towards NX technology (No eXecute.) Intel will probably be licensing that technology as well in the near future.
i mean, we've been fed all the "G5 is faster than Pentium 4 in photoshop" stuff all the time, but most of us took it with a grain of salt. yes, PPC has been faster at some things, but overall, Macs have been getting killed speedwise for quite a while. Do you really want to see more G4 powerbooks? I don't.
Well , the fact that you might have a very very expensive door stop in two years time might have something to do with it.... I dont know just a hunch.quackattack said:
Mac loyalists will remain. Those who leave don't understand what the Mac really is and show that they never were loyal to the Mac. It is the OS not the chip. I've enjoyed PPC, and will reserve judgement on the Intel decision until the time comes (i.e. when the new computers start rolling out). Judging this decision at this time would be like judging Steve Jobs for returning to a failing company like Apple in 1997. And where are they now???cwedl said:
Besides, knowing Steve, he's left open the door to working with IBM in some fashion, if IBM should finally decide to get their act together.
alexf said:
I prefer the word destroy.
Of course, when the new Intel Mac PC's start rolling off the line, sales should be pretty good. If the iPod continues good sales, it should be able to offset the snail pace of hardware sales. WARNING...AAPL will probably be reporting quarterly losses soon. There will be fallout on for awhile from this announcement.
People. Stop and use the brain a second. Who gives a crap about what chip is in the bloody computer?!?! As long as X is snappy. As long as its stable. As long as it CAN run your old apps. Who cares?!?! I mean how many of you have pictures of the G5 CPU sitting next to your nightstand which you kiss goodnight every night? Its a bloody chip. If Apple can craft a box that is just as pretty as the current Mac systems who cares? God some of you guys really are being a bunch of babies. This isn't the end of the world. Its actually a new beginning. And IMHO a bright one for Apple as long as they play this right. My biggest concern was if Apple was going to have the tools ready to go at the announcement. WEll considering that they have had FIVE YEARS to fine tune it I would say that's a big HECK YES! Provide the tools. Provide the time. And provide the superior hardware and watch OS X for x86 fly off the launch pad.
Cue said:
Ding Ding Ding - WRONG
http://www.dynamism.com/r4/index.shtml
THAT's what a powerbook should evolve to. 9 hours battery life, widescreen all for 2399. Hell, if I didn't like my MAC so much, I would be tempted to buy that machine. It's exactly what I need.
Screen too small? How about a 12.1" widescreen, 2.29 pounds enhanced battery - 7 hours.
http://www.dynamism.com/r4/index.shtml
What some of you diehards don't realize is that there is a group of users - power users in a way - but business folk. Style, portability and battery life is whats important. A "slower" processor or a "less advanced chip design" mean jack **** to us. Face it, for email, word and web browsing you can get by with a machine from 3 years ago with no perceivable changes due to faster chips.
I'll use my 12" powerbook until 2006 and pick up the first Mac/Intel ultraportable the day it's released. And I could care less about what's inside running it.
- Status