Macintosh Moving to Intel Processors [Updated]

[sithlord]

I think todays news is a welcome event, if your local pizza chain screwed up your order enough you would switch to someone else as well.

My only concerned is what happens between today and next year. I want to get my wife a new iBook and have been waiting for an update. I beginning to wonder should I get the last FreeScale proc or wait for the first round under Intel.

Questions, questions, questions.

 

[Spazmodius]

Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmm, everyone is stomping on Intel and YET they only have an over 80% processor market dominance...

If market dominance had anything to do with quality, then no Mac fanatic would be stomping on Microsoft, now would they?

 

[admanimal]

I'm assuming it will be some sort of chip put on the logic board?

Yeah I'd imagine there are several hardware options they could go with.

 

[mandis]

What the heck does he mean cooler!? ANy one who can read knows that the prescot core is the freakin hotest core on the market right now. Thier 90nm fab is junk.

Does Apple think that people will just ignore the fact that all of thier benchmarks are showing that thier G5's are faster than INTEL machines????!!!!!!

Horay for hotter running, slower, inferior, but in large quantity procs.

Why not buy a Dell running OSX. Oh you like the fansy case? How cute.

They think their pretty os is what sets them apart. Screw that!!!!!! I am a computer graphics proffesional and i dont care what os i work in as long as i have the best performance i can get out of the programs i need to use.

Say good buy to dual proc systems. P4s dont run in dual mode. What about dual core? Intels dual core sucks!!!!!!

AMDs dual core owns them in every benchmark. And gess what they run COOLER and consume LESS POWER than intel could ever dream of.

You think the Xeons are going to save the day. I got news for you. AMDs singal core opterons kick the crap out of the xeons. But it doesnt end thier . Becasue at this point nothing is faster than TWO DUAL CORE OPTERONS! Thats FOUR proccessors in ONE workstaion.

And if you have the money you can buy yourself an EIGHT DUAL CORE OPTERON Workstaion/Server from Iwill,THat is SIXTEEN CORES owning any multithreaded app you throw at it. It also runs SLI ( two Graphics cards).

Do your reasearch and you will find that the only thing that intel has is good marketing. And a butt load of fabrication facilities.
Yey you can get you slower, hotter, and all around inferior yet nice looking dell/rotten apples sooner

I couldn't have said it better. The current line of Intel chips is **** in comparison to AMD. No doubt about it. I only hope that apple allowes OSX 10.5 (Leopard) to run on amds. Otherwise i'll have to switch back to windows XP64. Hmmm I've missed 3DstudioMax...

 

[ObsidianIce]

Actually, there is a developers guide that specifically mentions that OpenFirmware will not exist on Intel Macs. (I was wrong about this myself before)...but that's not to say something else won't exist.

hmm, so there's going to be no open firmware. So then the real question is how do you make it so that it won't work on a PC? Pretty much anything done through software can be broken with time, and i can see people wanting to hack it..and then it will be all over. It will be a hardware dongle like Logic

 

[whatever]

What the heck does he mean cooler!? ANy one who can read knows that the prescot core is the freakin hotest core on the market right now. Thier 90nm fab is junk.

Does Apple think that people will just ignore the fact that all of thier benchmarks are showing that thier G5's are faster than INTEL machines????!!!!!!

Horay for hotter running, slower, inferior, but in large quantity procs.

Why not buy a Dell running OSX. Oh you like the fansy case? How cute.

They think their pretty os is what sets them apart. Screw that!!!!!! I am a computer graphics proffesional and i dont care what os i work in as long as i have the best performance i can get out of the programs i need to use.

Say good buy to dual proc systems. P4s dont run in dual mode. What about dual core? Intels dual core sucks!!!!!!

AMDs dual core owns them in every benchmark. And gess what they run COOLER and consume LESS POWER than intel could ever dream of.

You think the Xeons are going to save the day. I got news for you. AMDs singal core opterons kick the crap out of the xeons. But it doesnt end thier . Becasue at this point nothing is faster than TWO DUAL CORE OPTERONS! Thats FOUR proccessors in ONE workstaion.

And if you have the money you can buy yourself an EIGHT DUAL CORE OPTERON Workstaion/Server from Iwill,THat is SIXTEEN CORES owning any multithreaded app you throw at it. It also runs SLI ( two Graphics cards).

Do your reasearch and you will find that the only thing that intel has is good marketing. And a butt load of fabrication facilities.
Yey you can get you slower, hotter, and all around inferior yet nice looking dell/rotten apples sooner

So, you really think that Apple and Intel are planning on using current Intel chips in 2006? Interesting. Apple talked about the future of Intel CPU's, their roadmap. You make it sound as if Apple will be putting 286's into the future Macs. This is a true partnership. Expect to see a new chip, launched by Intel just for the Mac. Just like they did back in the day for IBM. Apple is not trying to make a fancy PC clone. They're trying to make the 2006 model Mac. For all we know these new Mac could be using the 64bit Alpha chips (http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/cn102797.htm).

Whatever!

 

[fgdn17]

To clarify, no nontrivial OS can run on any processor with just a recompilation. And whatever this thing is that may have been able to run on a DEC ALPHA in 1992, I'm guessing OS X doesn't share all that much code with it at this point.

I said the KERNEL....it can be compiled to run on ANY PROCESSOR...

developed at Carnegie Mellon by them DEC and MIT as I recall...

do some research and you'll see that MAC OSX Kernel is the same MACH KERNEL(although a later version) that ran on ALPHA OSF/1 - Digital UNIX
TRU64 UNIX/etc...do some homework!!!!

 

[leftbanke7]

hmm, so there's going to be no open firmware. So then the real question is how do you make it so that it won't work on a PC? Pretty much anything done through software can be broken with time, and i can see people wanting to hack it..and then it will be all over. It will be a hardware dongle like Logic

I know what they could do:
If somebody tries to put it on a non-Apple PC, during the install, Steve Jobs will appear on the screen shaking his head. They will use shame to thwart hacking.

 

[kirk26]

hahahahahahaahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ok, I'm done. Too funny. Seriously, this is one of the business decisions made by Apple in many years. Good job.

 

[wildworldofspor]

stating the obvious: conflict of interest

I wonder how this will affect the cpu race as MS and Intel have been bed buddies for quite awhile. Given Microsofts history and monopoly they can ensure apple does not get the latest and greatest or make too much inroads (which would threaten the windows monopoly) by puting a hurting on intel by wooing its manufacters (dell hp,etc garbage) to AMD. I mean what do you think intel will do, pamper dell or pamper apple? MS can make sure intel pampers, dell,etc thus ensuring its continued monopoly. Only way apple could fight that would be to open up OSX to other hardware...in which it would end up like windows junk because it has to work with a bazillion components. I would think AMD would have been the better choice.

Anyways while this eventually looks good I have a feeling a few more years down the road MS will stomp this plan and you'll all be doing the tango again.

 

[Furrybeagle]

All I can say is I better get equal support for both Intel and PowerPC until I get a new system. Which will probably be in 2007. Hopefully if Apple can keep the porting process verys simple, then we won't have to worry, even for developers of freeware software (Adium) and big corporate developers (Adobe, Microsoft). I don't know about you but I'm feeling ery screwed right now having this new computer.

Guess we'll just have to wait and see....and hoard PPC computers!

 

[jouster]

...we are upset because we have to go through yet another complete overhaul of all software and hardware to keep using an up-to-date mac....For once I would like to buy a mac and keep it for yrs

If you're planning on keeping it for years, it wouldn't be up to date anyway.

 

[admanimal]

hmm, so there's going to be no open firmware. So then the real question is how do you make it so that it won't work on a PC? Pretty much anything done through software can be broken with time, and i can see people wanting to hack it..and then it will be all over. It will be a hardware dongle like Logic

Yeah, it's always hard to make something really unbreakable, even if its in hardware. But I'm sure apple will make sure that it's at least difficult enough so that anyone serious about using an Apple won't be able/want to do it.

 

[jimbobb24]

WOW

Lots of negativity in this thread

Well I for one am excited. Anyone who has any doubts should really watch the keynote.

The Keynote is a theatrical performance. In a week or two some developers will slip out some real data on how things are going. Someone will run some benchmarks of their software compiled both ways on both systems. Other useful stuff. The keynote is marketing, not deep technical assessments. Think Steve is going to get up and say, "This really sucks, but IBM is not doing the G5 anymore so we need to jump to Intel, and we are scared as heck but hope you guys will stay with us."

 

[admanimal]

For all we know these new Mac could be using the 64bit Alpha chips (http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/cn102797.htm).

Whatever!

Intel may have something sort of new for Apple, but it will definitely use Intel's current x86 architecture, because that is what the Universal Binary format will support, according to the developers guide.

 

[ObsidianIce]

hahahahahahaahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ok, I'm done. Too funny. Seriously, this is one of the business decisions made by Apple in many years. Good job.

ahem that would be good Jobs

 

[rlreif]

HERE HERE

A couple of my posts from the other thread since there actually appear to be some rational people in this one ..

Brilliant.
couldnt have stated it all better myself... thanks-

-ry

 

[fgdn17]

So funny how the tides have changed. Last week the PPC was the best cpu in the world. Now to go with the apple flow intel is the best. Geez its sickning.

last week PPC was the best CPU in the world only to those who didn't have a clue you meant.. .right??

 

[MacTruck]

Here is the reality. Apple is all mindset not anything else. People buy macs because they are a break from the heard lot and don't like rank and file. With this intel switch macs are just pcs with a different os. If I wanted that I could use linux. (please I don't want to hear go use linux). If apple wanted to do its community right it would give those of us that just purchased a mac recently a trade in program or something. Keeping things secret right until the end is bad business and pisses alot of people off. I garantee nobody that just purchased a system feels good about this. I had my sights on the new dual dual core 3ghz G5. Had money set aside and everything now I have to wait 2 freakin years for something better? Oh my god.

Apple is no longer think different, its think the same. If they wanted to do right they would make osx work on dells and thinkpads but that will never happen without massive hacks and then every os update will kill the hacks.

The mindset is gone. Apple is not the same anymore. Its a struggling lying company just trying to make a buck, its not a revolution. Many people use computers all day long and your computer is part of you like your car is. People who say that the computer is just a tool are fooling themselves. If so then following that phylosophy everyone would be driving the cheapest car out there because hey its just a tool, gets you from point a to b right. That is not how people really think. So, we wait for yrs now, and hope that apple is still kicking. Its a sad day.

 

[rockthecasbah]

I cannot say how i feel, but im leaning more towards the positive. The keynote really showed how beautifully OSX runs on a current build pentium 4, imagine 2 years when consumer macs run it! Deep in your hearts, you must admit, these last 2 years have been terrible for IBM performance wise. Apple had to make a move and made the right one for their portability / power management concerns.

Here's to 2007!!!!!!

 

[ObsidianIce]

I wonder how this will affect the cpu race as MS and Intel have been bed buddies for quite awhile. Given Microsofts history and monopoly they can ensure apple does not get the latest and greatest or make too much inroads (which would threaten the windows monopoly) by puting a hurting on intel by wooing its manufacters (dell hp,etc garbage) to AMD. I mean what do you think intel will do, pamper dell or pamper apple? MS can make sure intel pampers, dell,etc thus ensuring its continued monopoly. Only way apple could fight that would be to open up OSX to other hardware...in which it would end up like windows junk because it has to work with a bazillion components. I would think AMD would have been the better choice.

Anyways while this eventually looks good I have a feeling a few more years down the road MS will stomp this plan and you'll all be doing the tango again.

Honestly i would say that it's not as big a deal as you think. Yeah it's the OS..but intel is selling chips...that go in computers and guess who is the number 1 PC seller and what kind of chips they use? Bottom line their market share is big, i don't think Microsoft is gonna be able to lean on Intel and say don't give Apple this..cause MS would be hurting themself as well..what are they gonna do? Make it so Windows doesn't work on an Intel chip?

 

[fgdn17]

Early 70's?? You are confused.

"Let's all do the time warp again!"

Maybe you meant mid to late 1980's, yes?

no..they were developing around 1973 timeframe...maybe YOUR CONFUSED...

Apple I
Codename: ?

CPU: MOS Technology 6502

CPU Speed: 1 MHz

FPU: none

Bus Speed: 1 MHz

Data Path: 8 bit

Onboard RAM: 8 kB

Maximum RAM: 32 kB

VRAM: 1 kB

Maximum Resolution: 60.05 Hz, 40x24 char

Power: 58 Watts

Introduced: April 1976

 

[OutThere]

Alright...all thoughts on how the software will be able to be recompiled for the Mactels, this is going to be ****. Apple is going to pull the same **** they did last time they transferred...from OS 9 to OS X...once the majority of their line runs on x86 they will abandon the PPC architecture, tell the rest of their customers to get with the ball game and move on.

Apple has introduced a new factor, a system that's not a "real" mac and not a "real" PC, meaning there will be no software for it. Professionals will not move to Mactels because the major software companies will be extremely slow to produce software for them...Don't try and bring up the argument that Apple says it will be very easy to transfer to the new platform....no matter how simple it is it is very complex for a software company to halt current production, re-build their major apps (see Adobe) and roll out a completely new line, while still trying to maintain back-compatbility with different systems (Apple intends to work with both IBM and Intel...)

This entire process will be a NIGHTMARE...happy progressive Intel-types be damned, I have no objection to the type of hardware that is underneath it all, but I do object to the fact that this is ultimately going to crush Apple. I'm crushed to see a company that I always held in great esteem falling...and they will fall...into the pits of history.

This means that I will not be buying another Mac until they really figure out their game plan....I was planning on giving $2500 to Apple for a shiny new PM this summer....but I guess that they do not want to sell computers any more, since PPC will be utterly obsolete when they introduce the nightmare.



Good bye Apple...it was nice when you thought different.

 

[HelloKitty]

Well..for me, I can't believe this rumor really came true. I can't believe that Apple really decided to terminate using PowerPC, the product that it claimed to have better performance, and once made it so powerful.. I saw the key note today, and as far as I remember, SJ didn't mention much about better performance for using Intel processors, not like he used to when Apple first came out with G3 or G5 processors. Does future machines really run faster if switched to Intel processors than on PowerPC?

I'm really confused why Apple doesn't want to use PowerPC. To my understanding, IBM seems to always has better cutting edge CPU technologies than Intel and AMD (please correct me if I'm wrong). IBM might be a little ignorant on Apple due to it's small market share, but does switching to Intel solve this problem? I mean, take the G5 for example, it worked so good and promising in 2003, but look what happens now? Can SJ promise that the same situation won't happen again??

Moreover, Intel is a bigger company than IBM, what makes SJ think that Intel will be more willing to do business with Apple? What makes SJ think that Intel will have more devotion on Apple than IBM?

Or the answer is, Apple is tired of the pressure of having to delivering faster machines than their PC counterpart, and simply wants to break even by switching to Intel?

Well..for me, it's probably not that bad, since we might be able to see cheaper machine coming out (with higher performance for the same price). But I guess we won't be able to see a Macintosh that outperforms other WinTEL machines in the future.. I'm disappointed by IBM, honestly..I really hope that the alliance between Apple and IBM can hold..

It's just too bad....

 

[jared_kipe]

I think the best thing this does to me is what it does to the low end powermac line.

Think about it, if you KNEW that you could buy just the dual 2.7GHz processor in a year for much less than the thousand $$ separating the Dual 2.0, then why would you get the dual 2.7 now? Exactly, upgradability! As long as they use standard chips (and hopefully standard graphics card support) then it means me, sitting here on my gen 1 dual 1.8GHz would, wouldn't be pining away for the dual 2.7, but instead for the dual 2.7ghz cpu (no more daughter card).

EDIT: and might I say, this is a busy busy little thread we have here.