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
As I said, i am pretty sure that the IBM chip is cheaper than the Intel chip. It has been posted many times before. So we are talking about a raise, not a cut.Mr Maui said:
Okay, I've read a large portion of this thread and I wanted to make a few points about this whole thing.
1. Calm down. Processors are not what they used to be a computer. A lot of the hardest work our computers do anymore is offloaded to some other subsystem. 3D and video come to mind. Changing out the processor really isn't that big of a deal, especially for Apple.
2. For those you screaming about "dual boot" Windows and Mac machines, dream on. The processor != the computer. These machines might be running Intel procs but the chipset, BIOS and a number of other things will probably change.
3. On that note, for those of you that think we might see more programs from the Windows world come over to Apple (games come to mind), dream on. It's "easy" to translate binary (like "Rosetta" or even back in the day when Alphas used "FX!32" to run WinNT programs compiled for Intel boxes). The harder part is dealing with differing APIs. Until there is a DirectX compatibility layer or an identical API for OS X, don't plan on too many programs coming Apple's way from the Windows world.
4. However, programs like VMware and things like WINE may have a shot at running on these new Apples. Low level stuff. This could be a good thing. This is speculation on my part.
5. One word: PCIe. This is a *good* thing.
6. For those of you whining about having "just bought" a G5, stop whining. The computer didn't get slower. It didn't change. It works. It's not going to be any slower or faster tomorrow than it is today. You had no problem paying for it yesterday, why should today be any different? Thought I'm not positive, I'm pretty sure we'll see "fat binaries" for a while. It's not like Apple is just going to dump the people who buy the G5s that are the generation JUST PRIOR to their x86 replacements.
"Rosetta" is there so the new x86 machines can run older, possibly unsupported or undeveloped software and software that hasn't made the transition yet. Some people asked, "What about the PPC people?" The software is ALEADY THERE for the PPC and during the years of transition we're likely to see fat binaries that run on both. Your G5 will run software made for the next few years. Likely Apple will support them longer than the aging architecture will. Seriously, no big deal. The newest OS X isn't supposed to run on a G3, you know? Time will kill the G5s. It's the nature of the beast in the computer world.
They're already doing fat binaries! The G5 is 64-bit and the G4 is 32-bit. While a G5 can run the 32-bit software, a G4 cannot run the 64-bit stuff. So, some binaries contain the compiled stuff for both.
Furthermore, so far as I understand it it's the laptops that'll see these new procs first. Your Power Macs are still nice. If you paid X number of dollars for them yesterday and were happy, you still should be. The G4/G5 resell values might drop, but I doubt it'll happen too much. The computers aren't getting any weaker. The software will still be available.
7. All the "evil empire" nay-sayers, are you people insane!? IBM was *the* evil empire and had a tighter stranglehold on the PC world than Microsoft and Intel combined back in the early days. It's not like Apple is replacing some kind, benevolent company with a dictator. We're just switching from one blood sucking corporation to another. I'll take the latter simply because supply won't be an issue again for Apple. Intel covers multiple markets and as such their processors will continue to develop without Apple having to push.
8. Microsoft has nothing to do with Intel. All references to Bill Gates are pointless.
9. Viruses!? Spyware!? These have NOTHING to do with a processor shift. Those are Windows problems and NOT Intel problems. My laptop (a 1GHz Pentium III running Gentoo Linux) has not virus problems. Why? It's not running *Windows.*
10. Apple is a company. Making money is what they do. I think some of us idolize them a little too much because they seem like the "opposition to Microsoft." This is a double edged sword in that sometimes ideals give way to money and market BUT it also means that if Apple wants to STAY in business they're not going to commit suicide. Business-wise this is a GREAT move. It's gonna be bumpy during the transition, but no more bumpy them supply problems and processor suppliers dragging their feet.
11. Finally, Apple is a PLATFORM. Most of us are using it because of OS X, not because we love G4s or G5s. Apple has an image they have to maintain if they want to stay in business. Intel or IBM inside, the machines will continue to be stylish, sleek and "just work."
12. Don't get your hopes up about building your own Apple from off thhe shelf components. Nothing, aside from binary compatibility and a processor, is going to change. Nothing.
13. One more thing, while I think about it. Initially, I wondered, "Why not AMD?" I mean, if you're going to x86, they have the upper hand technology-wise right now. (That and I run AMD in most of my PCs.) Intel is seady as a rock and AMD can be up and down. One more thing, it's not all about speed, it's about supply. Intel is huge. Intel isn't going anywhere. Going with AMD wouldn't solve a lot of Apple's other worries outside of speed.
14. PC fanboys have nothing to brag about after this. Neither side can try to pass their hardware off as "faster." It won't matter. It'll be PURELY about the user experience now and I think that will help Apple, not hurt them. Hell, they're already running the same video subsystems as PCs. They run SATA, PCI, DDR SDRAM, etc. Not Apples will have the same speed and ALL of the refinement. How is this a bad thing?
-----
That's what I've got to say on the matter. I'm still going to get a 12" PowerBook in a month or two. I'm actually hoping the resell value drops so I can score a relatively new one for cheap. Doubtful, but it'd be nice.
While I don't see this happening, I'm hoping there is no "Intel Inside" sticker showing. Ironically, out of all this... that's my biggest worry/peeve.
1. Calm down. Processors are not what they used to be a computer. A lot of the hardest work our computers do anymore is offloaded to some other subsystem. 3D and video come to mind. Changing out the processor really isn't that big of a deal, especially for Apple.
2. For those you screaming about "dual boot" Windows and Mac machines, dream on. The processor != the computer. These machines might be running Intel procs but the chipset, BIOS and a number of other things will probably change.
3. On that note, for those of you that think we might see more programs from the Windows world come over to Apple (games come to mind), dream on. It's "easy" to translate binary (like "Rosetta" or even back in the day when Alphas used "FX!32" to run WinNT programs compiled for Intel boxes). The harder part is dealing with differing APIs. Until there is a DirectX compatibility layer or an identical API for OS X, don't plan on too many programs coming Apple's way from the Windows world.
4. However, programs like VMware and things like WINE may have a shot at running on these new Apples. Low level stuff. This could be a good thing. This is speculation on my part.
5. One word: PCIe. This is a *good* thing.
6. For those of you whining about having "just bought" a G5, stop whining. The computer didn't get slower. It didn't change. It works. It's not going to be any slower or faster tomorrow than it is today. You had no problem paying for it yesterday, why should today be any different? Thought I'm not positive, I'm pretty sure we'll see "fat binaries" for a while. It's not like Apple is just going to dump the people who buy the G5s that are the generation JUST PRIOR to their x86 replacements.
"Rosetta" is there so the new x86 machines can run older, possibly unsupported or undeveloped software and software that hasn't made the transition yet. Some people asked, "What about the PPC people?" The software is ALEADY THERE for the PPC and during the years of transition we're likely to see fat binaries that run on both. Your G5 will run software made for the next few years. Likely Apple will support them longer than the aging architecture will. Seriously, no big deal. The newest OS X isn't supposed to run on a G3, you know? Time will kill the G5s. It's the nature of the beast in the computer world.
They're already doing fat binaries! The G5 is 64-bit and the G4 is 32-bit. While a G5 can run the 32-bit software, a G4 cannot run the 64-bit stuff. So, some binaries contain the compiled stuff for both.
Furthermore, so far as I understand it it's the laptops that'll see these new procs first. Your Power Macs are still nice. If you paid X number of dollars for them yesterday and were happy, you still should be. The G4/G5 resell values might drop, but I doubt it'll happen too much. The computers aren't getting any weaker. The software will still be available.
7. All the "evil empire" nay-sayers, are you people insane!? IBM was *the* evil empire and had a tighter stranglehold on the PC world than Microsoft and Intel combined back in the early days. It's not like Apple is replacing some kind, benevolent company with a dictator. We're just switching from one blood sucking corporation to another. I'll take the latter simply because supply won't be an issue again for Apple. Intel covers multiple markets and as such their processors will continue to develop without Apple having to push.
8. Microsoft has nothing to do with Intel. All references to Bill Gates are pointless.
9. Viruses!? Spyware!? These have NOTHING to do with a processor shift. Those are Windows problems and NOT Intel problems. My laptop (a 1GHz Pentium III running Gentoo Linux) has not virus problems. Why? It's not running *Windows.*
10. Apple is a company. Making money is what they do. I think some of us idolize them a little too much because they seem like the "opposition to Microsoft." This is a double edged sword in that sometimes ideals give way to money and market BUT it also means that if Apple wants to STAY in business they're not going to commit suicide. Business-wise this is a GREAT move. It's gonna be bumpy during the transition, but no more bumpy them supply problems and processor suppliers dragging their feet.
11. Finally, Apple is a PLATFORM. Most of us are using it because of OS X, not because we love G4s or G5s. Apple has an image they have to maintain if they want to stay in business. Intel or IBM inside, the machines will continue to be stylish, sleek and "just work."
12. Don't get your hopes up about building your own Apple from off thhe shelf components. Nothing, aside from binary compatibility and a processor, is going to change. Nothing.
13. One more thing, while I think about it. Initially, I wondered, "Why not AMD?" I mean, if you're going to x86, they have the upper hand technology-wise right now. (That and I run AMD in most of my PCs.) Intel is seady as a rock and AMD can be up and down. One more thing, it's not all about speed, it's about supply. Intel is huge. Intel isn't going anywhere. Going with AMD wouldn't solve a lot of Apple's other worries outside of speed.
14. PC fanboys have nothing to brag about after this. Neither side can try to pass their hardware off as "faster." It won't matter. It'll be PURELY about the user experience now and I think that will help Apple, not hurt them. Hell, they're already running the same video subsystems as PCs. They run SATA, PCI, DDR SDRAM, etc. Not Apples will have the same speed and ALL of the refinement. How is this a bad thing?
-----
That's what I've got to say on the matter. I'm still going to get a 12" PowerBook in a month or two. I'm actually hoping the resell value drops so I can score a relatively new one for cheap. Doubtful, but it'd be nice.
While I don't see this happening, I'm hoping there is no "Intel Inside" sticker showing. Ironically, out of all this... that's my biggest worry/peeve.
boy. watching the performance of tiger on that Intel crappy processor.... man. It looks pretty pretty nice. Snappy. 
Well...
I think I have an idea of how the Japanese Submariners felt at the end of the Second World War. Surfacing to find their glorious Emporer had surrendered and they would not be allowed to die honourably.
I really enjoyed these forums the past couple of years. But this is the end of it for me. Wow, it suddenly feels like such a waste of time...
I think I have an idea of how the Japanese Submariners felt at the end of the Second World War. Surfacing to find their glorious Emporer had surrendered and they would not be allowed to die honourably.
I really enjoyed these forums the past couple of years. But this is the end of it for me. Wow, it suddenly feels like such a waste of time...
vassillios said:
but they don't want them to become the next Dell. Just like in the music industry when the little band that could finally gets some radio airplay, half of their fanbase stops listening to them and says they 'suck' because they 'sold out'. It is all about being trendy and on the edge of the mainstream. People CRAVE being different and if you taks something that they like and joe blow next to them starts praising it, they will drop it like a ton of bricks and go to the new "alternacool" thing. It is a lose/lose situation with that percentage of the fanbase and Apple knows this. they are willing to forsake that percentage for the greater good of the company.
Businesses exist to make money, to build up your indie ego!!
jamesW135 said:ah the only thing i am realy worried about is are they going to put those stupid Intel inside stickers on the Macs?
The only reason those stickers are put on is because is for 2 reasons and they both involve $$$$ --- does't everything
1 -They get a slight discount on the Intel parts if the put the stickers on
2 -They gey a larrge chunk of $$ to use for advertising - as long as the ads have Intel inside and ----- Bong bong Bong bong bong
BTW I could really use a good bong hit today -- anyone got one going ?????
Questions
1. Given that Darwin is Open Source, how will Apple prevent clones to run Mac OS X? What does that mean for their hardware sales?
2. The G5 runs hotter than Intel (but is faster). But the G4 is not EOL yet and it runs way cooler/more efficient which is important for laptops and minis (many wintel laptops ae noisy beasts). Does this mean Freescale has failed to provide the 7448? Des this mean Apple is going to leave servers ad desktops behind and concentrate on laptops and minis? They can't given he demands of stuff like HD.
3. What prevents Apple from having multiple architecture? NeXT has at one stage support for m68k, hp-pa, sparc and i386 (as well as m88k in the labs) and any application would run on all architectures without emulation (binaries were in fact "fat" bundles of many binaries, the OS loading the right version). XServes could still run PPC versions of Mac OS X.
4. Windows emulation will improve drastically in speed. The end of Office:Mac?
1. Given that Darwin is Open Source, how will Apple prevent clones to run Mac OS X? What does that mean for their hardware sales?
2. The G5 runs hotter than Intel (but is faster). But the G4 is not EOL yet and it runs way cooler/more efficient which is important for laptops and minis (many wintel laptops ae noisy beasts). Does this mean Freescale has failed to provide the 7448? Des this mean Apple is going to leave servers ad desktops behind and concentrate on laptops and minis? They can't given he demands of stuff like HD.
3. What prevents Apple from having multiple architecture? NeXT has at one stage support for m68k, hp-pa, sparc and i386 (as well as m88k in the labs) and any application would run on all architectures without emulation (binaries were in fact "fat" bundles of many binaries, the OS loading the right version). XServes could still run PPC versions of Mac OS X.
4. Windows emulation will improve drastically in speed. The end of Office:Mac?
VMWare Oppurtunity
The folks at VMWare allow you to run multiple operating system at the same time on Intel boxes. For example if you use Redhat Linux, you can also run Windows XP in a window within Redhat Linux.
Imagine having a Apple-Intel box, but still need Windows for one or two apps. You could run both operating systems side by side. This would be totally awesome.
The folks at VMWare allow you to run multiple operating system at the same time on Intel boxes. For example if you use Redhat Linux, you can also run Windows XP in a window within Redhat Linux.
Imagine having a Apple-Intel box, but still need Windows for one or two apps. You could run both operating systems side by side. This would be totally awesome.
cult hero said:
They were quoted as saying there is nothign preventing a person from loading windows on an intel based mac.
job said:
There's the fact that Apple has been burned before by relatively smaller companies who can't devote enough R&D money towards creating components specifically for apple's needs (ahem. Motorola?). Even though the Athlon 64 and its dual core brother are superior to the pentium 4 based chips, Intel spends more money on x86 R&D in a year than AMD's revenues for a year. In the long term, Intel has a better probability of coming out with the most advanced/fastest cpu. Also, Intel is probably giving Apple huge advertising bonuses if they play that intel inside blurb at the end of their mac commercials.
what about the 45nm processor comming out from IBm in a year or so and the e700 from freescale? i am pretty sure apple would have been good and happy with those.... dual booting windows and OSX is going mt make me cry
oh and the intel mac mini clone....try mac mini 2.0
oh and the intel mac mini clone....try mac mini 2.0
elmimmo said:
If you notice, I defended windows in a later post. It's not nearly as bad as people tend to say it is. WebCore, IMO is a bit different than Internet Explorer (which by anyone's accounts is insecure, and is running all the time, with no way to shut it off.)
I think it all comes down to the end user. One person's feature is another one's bloat.
MP
looking forward to the upcoming combined Intel/PPC release of Adobe products. Frankly Adobe just don't put out software that's buggy or slow enough for me of late.
Well, in the interest of having a machine for the long haul, I will not be upgrading until a couple of revisions of the Intel Inside Macintosh. Apple have a hard enough time upgrading the same processor. Can you imagine the issues the first Intel-Macintoshes might have? At first I was ready to abandon Apple for this ludicrous decision but with a little time and deep breaths I understand now that this could actually be a good thing. I just won't be buying a PowerPC based Macintosh since they will go the way of the 68040 based Macintoshes ultimately.
Enough is enough!
EXACTLY!!!
Give it up mac diehards! Throw your friggin zealotry out the window. It's this kind of mentality that guys like me, jiggie, mav, silicon addict, and many other users have had to counter since becoming mac users. You people don't help the mac platform move forward, you'd prefer it to stay behind to satisfy your anti-MS and anti-Intel vitriolic blathering nonsense! After the utter disaster of the G5, after putting up so long with the G4 Powerbook (which by the way, indicates we'll still be seeing G4 Powerbooks throughout 2005 and 2006), why do you people still dump your blinded faith in IBM, that bloated beauracratic monster that once tried to control the personal computer industry, the "big brother" as we once remember?
I can't believe you people are still arguing about this after all the let downs from IBM. This is a HUGE step ahead for Apple. And if it had been done years ago like it should have, we'd be in a much better position today. This kind of knocks Apple off its momentum after the succesful iPod, iBook, and iMac product lines. But that's ok, Apple will get back on that horse.
Better yet, Apple is will be riding on the back of an elephant named Intel. You people don't seem to understand the the massive appeal that Intel will create for Apple with its marketing. Mac will become the hottest platform and OS X will rock Longhaul and scare the hell out of the Redmond gang!
Three years from now there will no longer be arguments about why macs are slower than PCs. No more will we have to endure the same low-expectation comments of "why do you need a fast machine?" or "isn't it fast enough already" or "as long as it does what it's supposed to do, it's fine for me." Hardware won't be an issue in other words; it all will boil down to the quality of the OS! Take a hint! You think in that aspect Microsoft even stands a chance?!
Take all your snobbish, elitist, snide, minimalist, and effete mentality and stuff it down your garbage compactor. It's time for to Apple hit it big with OS X! It's time to move forward.
[breathing sigh of relief] Thank you!
SiliconAddict said:
EXACTLY!!!
Give it up mac diehards! Throw your friggin zealotry out the window. It's this kind of mentality that guys like me, jiggie, mav, silicon addict, and many other users have had to counter since becoming mac users. You people don't help the mac platform move forward, you'd prefer it to stay behind to satisfy your anti-MS and anti-Intel vitriolic blathering nonsense! After the utter disaster of the G5, after putting up so long with the G4 Powerbook (which by the way, indicates we'll still be seeing G4 Powerbooks throughout 2005 and 2006), why do you people still dump your blinded faith in IBM, that bloated beauracratic monster that once tried to control the personal computer industry, the "big brother" as we once remember?
I can't believe you people are still arguing about this after all the let downs from IBM. This is a HUGE step ahead for Apple. And if it had been done years ago like it should have, we'd be in a much better position today. This kind of knocks Apple off its momentum after the succesful iPod, iBook, and iMac product lines. But that's ok, Apple will get back on that horse.
Better yet, Apple is will be riding on the back of an elephant named Intel. You people don't seem to understand the the massive appeal that Intel will create for Apple with its marketing. Mac will become the hottest platform and OS X will rock Longhaul and scare the hell out of the Redmond gang!
Three years from now there will no longer be arguments about why macs are slower than PCs. No more will we have to endure the same low-expectation comments of "why do you need a fast machine?" or "isn't it fast enough already" or "as long as it does what it's supposed to do, it's fine for me." Hardware won't be an issue in other words; it all will boil down to the quality of the OS! Take a hint! You think in that aspect Microsoft even stands a chance?!
Take all your snobbish, elitist, snide, minimalist, and effete mentality and stuff it down your garbage compactor. It's time for to Apple hit it big with OS X! It's time to move forward.
[breathing sigh of relief] Thank you!
Bad_JuJu said:
It *is* funny how this is a topic of concern the world over...from a post on MacBidouille:
All I can say is that Apple had better decide they don't need marketing money from Intel badly enough to put those stickers on the machines. On the box I could probably live with, but on a sexy white iBook? Never!
I think it's unfortunate in the short term.
Long term, I hope it makes things better, but having hope is a trait of most Apple customers I'd imagine.
It's sad to think IBM couldn't have pulled it off.
In the short term, Apple, having finite engineering resources, is going to be focused on the transition, rather than bringing out new cool-stuff. Just a guess, but somehow I can't see how this factor won't occupy the top spot of mindshare for a painfully long amount of time.
I just hope the curse of Apple doesn't affect Intel and AMD.... there's not much left.
So much for *thinking* different.
egads, now we are going to be stuck with an 8 bit processor that became 16, that became 32, that became 64, as opposed to a processor that was designed as a 64 bit one, yet started as a 32 bit one and then finally went back to 64... are x86 Apple machines going to support real mode?
-Wyrm
Long term, I hope it makes things better, but having hope is a trait of most Apple customers I'd imagine.
It's sad to think IBM couldn't have pulled it off.
In the short term, Apple, having finite engineering resources, is going to be focused on the transition, rather than bringing out new cool-stuff. Just a guess, but somehow I can't see how this factor won't occupy the top spot of mindshare for a painfully long amount of time.
I just hope the curse of Apple doesn't affect Intel and AMD.... there's not much left.
So much for *thinking* different.
egads, now we are going to be stuck with an 8 bit processor that became 16, that became 32, that became 64, as opposed to a processor that was designed as a 64 bit one, yet started as a 32 bit one and then finally went back to 64... are x86 Apple machines going to support real mode?
-Wyrm
no one will ever buy macs again, they will make osx for the x86 processor, and then no one will buy apple computers again, unless they significantly lower prices, very few people buy macs for the computer, more for the OS, and now that you can buy a $700 PC AND have osx, apple's only revenue will be the ipod and Tiger. but thats ok, cause i would love to use the dell inspiron witht the cool media center buttons with itunes and dashboard and stuff
undecided
ive been thinking about this all day trying to work out if its good or bad and ive come to the pretty simple conclusion (for myself).
its really bad for me as an individual. new powerbook, already old technology. i love and respect Apple but part of the reason i bought a Mac was that PC's were progressing so fast, thought i could relax in a steady stream of less hardware updates. ho hum
but for Apple and non-OSX users; its bloody fantastic. Steve gets his faster speeds, people crying that the dual 2.7ghz G5 is too slow for them should be happy, and i can convert my whole PC collection to OSX. so the family get a better computer experience all round.
this is very good for Apple, but not for people with OSX applications. but im sure developers will recompile for free. hopefully!
ive been thinking about this all day trying to work out if its good or bad and ive come to the pretty simple conclusion (for myself).
its really bad for me as an individual. new powerbook, already old technology. i love and respect Apple but part of the reason i bought a Mac was that PC's were progressing so fast, thought i could relax in a steady stream of less hardware updates. ho hum
but for Apple and non-OSX users; its bloody fantastic. Steve gets his faster speeds, people crying that the dual 2.7ghz G5 is too slow for them should be happy, and i can convert my whole PC collection to OSX. so the family get a better computer experience all round.
this is very good for Apple, but not for people with OSX applications. but im sure developers will recompile for free. hopefully!
Moxiemike said:boy. watching the performance of tiger on that Intel crappy processor.... man. It looks pretty pretty nice. Snappy.
Is there anywhere I can download the Keynote, because when I try to stream it, there just comes up "switching transports"
- Status