Macintosh Moving to Intel Processors [Updated]

[mkrishnan]

Did anyone catch whether Rosetta Stone will be provided to Tiger/PPC users so that they can run Intel binaries post-transition? I really only have two demands:

1) That Tiger/PPC development continue through end of lifecycle, and that all enhancements made for Tiger/Intel are also provided to us

2) That Rosetta stone allows PPC machines to run Intel binaries for at least some time to allow users to continue making use of PPC computers.

Given those two, if Apple can make an Intel-based iBook or PB that's as cute, as light, as small, has as long or longer battery life, and is faster, sign me up.

 

[FoxyKaye]

What if...

Two cents from reading MacWorld.com:

Jobs demonstrated a version of Mac OS X running on a 3.6GHz Pentium 4-processor equipped system, running a build of Mac OS X v10.4.1. He showed Dashboard widgets, Spotlight, iCal, Apple’s Mail, Safari and iPhoto all working on the Intel-based system. The system itself was not revealed.

This means, right now there is a version of Tiger that will load on to a stock PC. There can’t have been enough time for Apple to create new hardware just for WWDC, nor even insert any sort of ROM verification.

“Because more than the processor, more than the hardware, the soul of the Mac is its operating system,” said Jobs. “And we’re not standing still.”

So Apple wants a fully Intel-based lineup by 2007, and to release Leopard in time to go head-to-head with Longhorn. This quote interests me most because Steve has always said “we have better hardware.”

Adding everything up, I wonder if Apple is starting to position itself to get out of the hardware business, and if indeed by the time of Leopard’s release, OS X will be able to be installed on stock PCs? Imagine buying a Dell for $800 running OS 10.5 – I bet it would sink M$ like a stone.

Another possibility might be that Apple stays in the hardware business, but makes OSX available to all – HOWEVER, there would be extra incentives to purchase Apple hardware running OS X rather than a generic PC – I dunno, something magical about the hardware/software interface, design, or other factors…

Would Steve give up this kind of control? I wonder… We’re definitely in new territory now with Apple.

Of course, the question most on my mind is, “Should I still buy a new iMac?”

Should I?

 

[365]

Money in the bank

With 4 Billion in the bank, I'm sure they can ride a few bad quarters, the sales at the end of it will more than make up for it. I don't know if you whingers noticed but Apple aren't going anywhere fast at the moment.

 

[bosrs1]

EVERONE needs to calm down...

1. All your PPC based programs will still run on your future Intel Mac using Rosetta (which is invisible and seamless) so you won't have to rebuy anything.

2. Your current Macs haven't suddenly been obsoleted. They're still top of the line for right now. This is no different then if the G6 PPC had been announced.

3. Wintel Boxes like a Dell WILL NOT be able to run OSX. There are still proprietary aspects of OSX and Macs that will make it neccessary to have a Mac to run Mac OS

The world has not ended. If anything we're going to get more software, more peripherals, and faster machines...

 

[eVolcre]

Who the hell is going to buy an overpriced Powermac PC in a year or so when you can have a Dell at a fraction of the price and STILL run Mac OSX.

Umm, are we looking at the same keynote? Where was this said? It is STILL proprietary architechture. A 'dell' or a 'hp' PC will NOT run OSX!!

 

[russed]

lets hope this intel announcement is like the 3.0Ghz G5 powermac announcement!

 

[tortus]

Scientific Applications and the g5

I am just curious as to how Apple is going support the scientific community. The g5 processor is excellent in floating point computations thus making a favorite of research labs all over the world. Additionally, the 64 bit architecture and 8 gig cap per motherboard (on the higher end PowerMacs) provide massive data crunching power that you do not see in 32 bit pentium systems.

My guess is that we will be seeing a version of the Itanium processor in the Mac boxes. If this is the case, look out Mac Heads, for we are going to see some massive performance jumps especially if the Itaniums are dual core. I personally would have liked to have seen dual core Athlons in these machines, but Apple is mostly concerned with the road map of the future that Intel is probably able to give them.

 

[bosrs1]

I feel bad for my father, he spent about 4$k US half a year ago on his swich to OSX and a Powermac. the most, by an enourmous margin, that he's ever spent on a single PC purchase.

Guess who's going to get the blame for his investment turning into poo...

How has his investment turned to poo?

 

[Stella]

*IF* apple allows OSX to run on any PC, then apple will have to support all the different kinds of hardware out there.

Windows has enough difficulty with this.

The benefit of an Apple based PC will be guaranteed compatibility.

Two cents from reading MacWorld.com:

This means, right now there is a version of Tiger that will load on to a stock PC. There can’t have been enough time for Apple to create new hardware just for WWDC, nor even insert any sort of ROM verification.


So Apple wants a fully Intel-based lineup by 2007, and to release Leopard in time to go head-to-head with Longhorn. This quote interests me most because Steve has always said “we have better hardware.”

Adding everything up, I wonder if Apple is starting to position itself to get out of the hardware business, and if indeed by the time of Leopard’s release, OS X will be able to be installed on stock PCs? Imagine buying a Dell for $800 running OS 10.5 – I bet it would sink M$ like a stone.

Another possibility might be that Apple stays in the hardware business, but makes OSX available to all – HOWEVER, there would be extra incentives to purchase Apple hardware running OS X rather than a generic PC – I dunno, something magical about the hardware/software interface, design, or other factors…

Would Steve give up this kind of control? I wonder… We’re definitely in new territory now with Apple.

Of course, the question most on my mind is, “Should I still buy a new iMac?”

Should I?

 

[bosrs1]

I am just curious as to how Apple is going support the scientific community. The g5 processor is excellent in floating point computations thus making a favorite of research labs all over the world. Additionally, the 64 bit architecture and 8 gig cap per motherboard (on the higher end PowerMacs) provide massive data crunching power that you do not see in 32 bit pentium systems.

My guess is that we will be seeing a version of the Itanium processor in the Mac boxes. If this is the case, look out Mac Heads, for we are going to see some massive performance jumps especially if the Itaniums are dual core. I personally would have liked to have seen dual core Athlons in these machines, but Apple is mostly concerned with the road map of the future that Intel is probably able to give them.

That's exactly what will happen. Intel has 64 bit chips out and we'll be getting them. If anything this will leapfrog us over most PC users.

 

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

Get it through your heads... YOUR DELL WILL NOT BE ABLE TO RUN OSX!

Well, not initially, but I'm pretty sure the first cracks are not very far off...

 

[feffer37]

Switchers, prepare to switch back ;D

Look here, naysayers, none of this can be bad IF....

1. Apple still controls it's own hardware design
2. Apple still controls it's own OS design

When 95% of us buys a computer on today's market, it's for the Operating System, NOT the type of hardware it runs on. OSX still crushes any other OS for 95% of all user needs out there. It doesn't matter WHO makes the chips, as long as it's up to Apple's Standards.

If apple starts to farm out however, well, let's just trust that doesn't happen

Personally, I'm hoping that a cooler chip + faster clockspeed x recent apple patents = that OSX tablet I dream about every night

 

[Analog Kid]

In walks the Hegemon...

So sad... I guess what this means, in the end, is that IBM and Freescale just couldn't compete. Lot's of talk about running PPC apps on Intel, but will there be any emulation to run Intel apps on PPC?

 

[IlluminatedSage]

Very much in support of Apple and this Move

With the problems in the PowerPC world, which have provided great, but all too few steady advancements, Apple did what they had to do.

IBM and Motorola (now Freescale) had been given a golden opportunity, yet they did not reinvest to keep advancement of the PPC chips moving along.

With OS X, they clearly had been working for some time to make intel chips work well. My hope is that this will be an easy transition. With the emulation/transitive software, hopefully it wont be a problem at all.

Hell we probably could also get a windows Transitive program so we can run a windows program if needed on our mac.

Intel never was the evil enemy, just a company who made big bloated chips. However, their chips have been getting better lately.

Why not give them a chance. I think it will be worth it.

 

[bosrs1]

So sad... I guess what this means, in the end, is that IBM and Freescale just couldn't compete. Lot's of talk about running PPC apps on Intel, but will there be any emulation to run Intel apps on PPC?

No but they'll be releasing versions of everything in both modes for a few years. By then you should have bought an Intel Mac anyway.

 

[iGary]

AAPL

-.18

 

[Sun Baked]

Get it through your heads... YOUR DELL WILL NOT BE ABLE TO RUN OSX!

Not yet... give the Chinese a few weeks to hack the Dell to emulate a Open Firmware x86 Mac.

What is your guess Intel CPU + Intel PCI Express Northbridge + HT PCI-X Tunnel + Apple K2 Southbridge.

All this running as a Open Firmware PC without any of the legacy BIOS.

You know darn well Intel is now going to fight real hard to become the Airport CPU supplier, iPod ARM supplier, Apple Southbridge supplier... and the prices will be some smokin deals.

 

[7on]

Hmmmmmm, 2007 is the next year when I need to upgrade the ole' computer. I do hope that the transition is seamless - I'd hate to have to buy new software. Intel was my favorite CPU and mobo manufacturer when I built PCs.

The biggest problem with game porting and then the speed issues of VPC is the GPU and OpenGL coding. As far as I know, Macs will still have their proprietary GPUs. At least Intel is happy...

 

[Dr.Gargoyle]

The same thing is going through my mind. May just get to see the longevity of a Mac, currently almost five years old. Wonder what Steve has in mind to encourage sales?

Note that 47% of Apples profit come (or came from hardware)... I think stevie boy just killed off Mac.

 

[Eidorian]

I'm a bit mad since I just purchased a new iMac. The reason that I got it was for the OS. I love OS X Tiger and it's features. I just feel let down for Apple switching to the x86 architecture. I have AppleCare too so this machine is going to be with me for at least 3 more years. I want to reserve my final judgement for then.

 

[Doctor Q]

I see that the phrase "fat binary" has been changed to "universal binary". It's the same idea - one software package runs on either architecture, but that probably sounds better for marketing reasons.

On the other hand, I think they should have gone with the latest fad, and called them "Low CARB" binaries, where CARB stands for Computer ARchitecture Bias.

 

[hesdeadjim]

Just give it a few days

I'm thinking along the same lines. Yeah, there's some risk (and bad timing, what with Mac Minis just having been released not more than 5 months ago) involved in Apple switching their chips again, so for anyone bellowing "NOOOOOOO" doom-and-gloom based on that, go right ahead, I understand. But I bet a lot of people are so negative about this news just because the idea of using Intel chips means a hit to their over-inflated Mac-nerd egos. People, you're still going to be able to have a Mac, with all the delicious software that entails.

Even better, if the Intel chips are close enough (or identical) to the ones that power Windows-based machines, it may become much, much easier to run PC software on Macs. Hellooooo? Games, anyone? If this move makes it easier to get popular games running on Macs much more quickly and easily, people will be much more willing to switch to Mac for the hardware and software stability and design. I'm hoping this makes a revolution of sorts in Mac gaming. Particularly older games that only have classic versions for the Mac. The PC versions might be easy to port to an Intel-based OS X... Or maybe not, I don't know diddley. I just think this is probably going to be much better for Apple and OS X than most people seem to think. A lot of people want to switch, but don't want to lose certain PC software. If it's at all possible to run PC software more easily, speedily and cheaply, people will switch much more readily.

I have to admit, when I first heard about it on Friday, I thought the world was ending. But it set in over the weekend and I rethought it. I think this is a good move for Apple in the long run, it ensures that they stay with a company that is compeled to update their processors and we will still have the Mac experience.

I am fearful for the next two years, but it sounds like the transtion will be as seamless as possible. I am optimistic. I don't think that this will speed up software ports though, I think market share really determines this more than the computer.

 

[army_guy]

3. Wintel Boxes like a Dell WILL NOT be able to run OSX. There are still proprietary aspects of OSX and Macs that will make it neccessary to have a Mac to run Mac OS

Yes they will whatever protection they use it can be broken unless its a hardware level thing.

 

[Eric_Z]

How has his investment turned to poo?

By the ISA swich. It's lifetime was calculated to be something in the region of five years or so. Now it's been drastically cut. And to add to the insult, the resale value will be close to nothing.

Allso, if you noted, there is no information about rossetta running x86 OSX code. Infact I would allmost expect this to be the case to force people to uppgrade.

 

[joepunk]

Watch the whole Keynote. Rosetta will allow all PPC based software to run seamlessly. You have nothing to fear.

Ah, gotcha

Can't really read/look at the entire keynote as this is finals week
Heck, I really shouldn't be here in the first place (should be studying w/o distractions )

I still hope that we don't get some crappy sticker on our shiny boxes.