How have they betrayed us all? It's still a Mac, and we won't even have to buy new software. I think this is inspired. I'd take a Dual Core 4 Ghz P4 over my Dual 2.7 Ghz PPC G5 any day.Macmadant said:Apple have betrayed us all never again will i use a mac and no more will they be as pc users flock to buy osx for pentium 4s
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
wdlove said:
Yes, and the transition doesn't seem too complicated, particularly with the apparent ease of converting existing software from PPC -> intel, fat binaries, and translation - if you can't do the conversion.
I'm really looking forward to it.
A bright new era.
hmmm...cooler and faster...like the sound of that. but i thought intel processors run hotter?! the choice to use intel has to be tied to future projects (like video store) and not just that IBM has been sitting on its a$$ for these last couple years. intel inside doesn't bother me that much...
Negatives:
-Apple's arguments (MHz myth, etc) can now be used against it
-I just generally like IBM more than Intel
-I'm not a big fan of x86
Positives:
-More powerful mac's
-(Hopefully) Cheaper Macs
-I'm not sure about this one, but wouldn't this mean that porting software from PC to Mac would be somewhat easier? if so: More software, more games, etc
I'm personally mixed, but I think it'll be an overall good move for apple... I just need to find out more... NOW!
-Apple's arguments (MHz myth, etc) can now be used against it
-I just generally like IBM more than Intel
-I'm not a big fan of x86
Positives:
-More powerful mac's
-(Hopefully) Cheaper Macs
-I'm not sure about this one, but wouldn't this mean that porting software from PC to Mac would be somewhat easier? if so: More software, more games, etc
I'm personally mixed, but I think it'll be an overall good move for apple... I just need to find out more... NOW!
Thats right!buryyourbrideau said:i think that everyone is over reacting
osx will STILL be osx and all thats changed is that you are going to have a chip that runs cooler and faster
how could you not be happy
I think this is GREAT!
Apple will most likely be producing complete harware/software pakages so we won't see much difference.
Macmadant said:Apple have betrayed us all never again will i use a mac and no more will they be as pc users flock to buy osx for pentium 4s
get over yourself.
ibm said they could supply apple with chips; they couldn't and suffered the same glacial development pace of motorola. PPC is a great chip that will continue to be offered for OS X users for years to come. apple represents such a small customer for ibm they have no incentive to spur development.
this time next year, apple will have the option to sell both PPC and X86 based macs. in fact 10 years from now apple will still have that same option. should IBM or motorola make some massive breakthrough next year there's nothing preventing apple from using those chips, likewise intel.
i suspect we'll see PPC and X86 platforms co-exisint for some time; centrino laptops, pentium n/d mac minis, G5 servers...
this is a good, maybe even great thing for apple customers.
I have a couple of questions about the whole thing:
1. Did the resale value on all of our computers just get hacked in half?
2. What about Altivec inhanced programs?
3. What about Apple software purchases? Will buyers get rebates or discounts when we buy updated x86 versions?
4. Will we get cheaper computers now?
1. Did the resale value on all of our computers just get hacked in half?
2. What about Altivec inhanced programs?
3. What about Apple software purchases? Will buyers get rebates or discounts when we buy updated x86 versions?
4. Will we get cheaper computers now?
Fortune favors the brave, Apple has done what it should have done years back, ditched Motorola and IBM. Does it not speak volumes that Apple have offered nothing for two years, 3Ghz G5 is still not here 18 months on from when it was promised, Powerbooks are stagnated with ANCIENT technology, the Mac Mini was just a cheap Mac full of all their dated crap. The only good news Apple has these days is iPod and even that is starting to flounder.
This was a decision that needed taking and I for one applaud the Apple board for having the balls to take it.
This was a decision that needed taking and I for one applaud the Apple board for having the balls to take it.
why is everyone so surprised?
As I said over a year ago major EDA software companies (Cadence, Mentor, Synopsis) were abandoning the powerpc platform and shifting super tool applications to x86/AMD64 mind you this started to happen before AMD released their 64-bit stuff.
The question wasnt if it was going to happen, it was when it was going to happen. The so called G5 powerbook comes closer now except that it will use a Pentium-m based CPU.
As I said over a year ago major EDA software companies (Cadence, Mentor, Synopsis) were abandoning the powerpc platform and shifting super tool applications to x86/AMD64 mind you this started to happen before AMD released their 64-bit stuff.
The question wasnt if it was going to happen, it was when it was going to happen. The so called G5 powerbook comes closer now except that it will use a Pentium-m based CPU.
I only have two concerns--current Mac sales, and how long companies decide to ship fat binaries to support PowerPCs. I want to keep my recently purchased iBook G4 for at least a few more years.
Other than that, I'm still shocked. It will be weird using OS X and not thinking, "There's a PowerPC chip running all this." Really, we're at the point where processors matter less and less, and software APIs like Cocoa are what's most important, so it really doesn't matter what chip is running your OS X.
I'll get used to the idea of an Intel chip inside. I'm sure Apple will demand high quality specs, and we end-users won't even notice the difference except having 3.0+Ghz PowerBooks at a cheaper price.
They should keep the PowerMac/PowerBook names. I never realized they had anything to do with the Power chips running them. I just thought they were cool-sounding names.
Other than that, I'm still shocked. It will be weird using OS X and not thinking, "There's a PowerPC chip running all this." Really, we're at the point where processors matter less and less, and software APIs like Cocoa are what's most important, so it really doesn't matter what chip is running your OS X.
I'll get used to the idea of an Intel chip inside. I'm sure Apple will demand high quality specs, and we end-users won't even notice the difference except having 3.0+Ghz PowerBooks at a cheaper price.
They should keep the PowerMac/PowerBook names. I never realized they had anything to do with the Power chips running them. I just thought they were cool-sounding names.
i dont mind
to be honest hundreds of people working together in a company such as apple will make a decision based on what is best for their customers. If a switch to intel meant that the mac platform grind to a halt or if it was a self destructive move for apple then the hundreds of consultants that work for apple would have clocked on. Im pretty stupid, but im with apple's every decision!
Jay
to be honest hundreds of people working together in a company such as apple will make a decision based on what is best for their customers. If a switch to intel meant that the mac platform grind to a halt or if it was a self destructive move for apple then the hundreds of consultants that work for apple would have clocked on. Im pretty stupid, but im with apple's every decision!
Jay
ok, i want to try to make things clear, does this mean you will be able to buy osx and use it on a pc? does this mean that it will be more susceptible to viruses? does this mean changing anything other than whats inside the box? does it mean we can run windows applications on osx?
answers please
NOWWWWW
answers please
NOWWWWW
For me - it is really good news and that's because:
- if I buy a Mac today it will be supported for many years
- if I buy a Mac next year or in two years I can run all my today apps on it
- Intel is the biggest chip/CPU supplier on the planet and Apple will not fall behind again.
To sum up - me happy
- if I buy a Mac today it will be supported for many years
- if I buy a Mac next year or in two years I can run all my today apps on it
- Intel is the biggest chip/CPU supplier on the planet and Apple will not fall behind again.
To sum up - me happy
Lost independence...
It's unfortunate, I think, that IBM has been unable to meet the roadmap. It is highly unfortunate that they were unable to develop a low power, adequately performing G5 for mobile computing.
The biggest issue is the loss of distinction between Wintel/x86/AMD, etc users and PowerPC users. I know that it is somewhat artificial, given that upon moving to a platform independent OS Mac has had the ability to run on x86 architecture for a long time.. however, this just makes us all together in one pool... x86 users.. running different OSs.
I just think that running on a different chip makes a huge difference.. at least, to me.. philosophically. Maybe it's just me, but now I feel like I'm walking in Microsoft's shadow... It makes me feel like I'm using cheap, shoddy equipment. I just can't shake the feeling that the same chip that is running in some POS DELL is RUNNING IN MY BELOVED MAC. And for those of you who are pointing out all the shared components such as hard drives, graphic cards, etc. Foo to you. The chip is the soul of a computer.
It's unfortunate, I think, that IBM has been unable to meet the roadmap. It is highly unfortunate that they were unable to develop a low power, adequately performing G5 for mobile computing.
The biggest issue is the loss of distinction between Wintel/x86/AMD, etc users and PowerPC users. I know that it is somewhat artificial, given that upon moving to a platform independent OS Mac has had the ability to run on x86 architecture for a long time.. however, this just makes us all together in one pool... x86 users.. running different OSs.
I just think that running on a different chip makes a huge difference.. at least, to me.. philosophically. Maybe it's just me, but now I feel like I'm walking in Microsoft's shadow... It makes me feel like I'm using cheap, shoddy equipment. I just can't shake the feeling that the same chip that is running in some POS DELL is RUNNING IN MY BELOVED MAC. And for those of you who are pointing out all the shared components such as hard drives, graphic cards, etc. Foo to you. The chip is the soul of a computer.
That would be just like Steve. He knows how to make an impact, and he knows how to lessen an impact. Seems like a smart move on his part if he did "leak" it early. Much of the "shock had worn off by the time the keynote hit today. I must say I am disappointed that no upgrades of any sort were announced, although not highly expected anyway.mac-er said:
- Status