Macintosh Moving to Intel Processors [Updated]

[rockthecasbah]

my conversion predictions

We all know now that certain lines of Macs will convert sooner than others. This is my prediction for the order of the conversion:

1. iBooks / Powerbooks - Face the facts, the PPC processors create a crapload of heat and were terrible for portables. Seeing as how we are only in the mid 1ghz range still with portables, these will be the first to be upgraded, in my opinion to the Pentium Ms. They use very little power and have great battery life, just what Apple portables do not have.

2. Tablet Mac? - This i am less certain on, but seeing as how those patents were published, this may either follow or even precede the laptop conversion. Again, most likely using the Pentium Ms.

3. Desktops - I can't predict the order of this, but it is obvious that they will wait for these because they need the least work. However, Mac Minis would probably be the first, followed by iMacs, Power Macs, and eMacs. I have no idea what processors they would use or speed, only time will tell.

 

[OutThere]

AMD is x86; Intel is x86. Once you jumped to the x86 boat, you can take whatever seats you like! In fact, if you can write your own driver for the chipsets, you can *probably* have the Tiger for Intel "sing" with an AMD inside.

Yes, but as seen in the past, it is a difficult move for Apple to change proc companies, see Moto -> IBM....there were thousands of people who said it would be a bad idea, and, in any case it was a huge deal....and even then it was just PPC -> PPC.

 

[bpd115]

This may have been already asked, but the batteries in my BT mouse are dead and I don't have any spares, making browsing REALLY hard to do. How long do you speculate until they ship OS X for us PC users? I'd like to have OS X, but can't afford a mac right now.

Won't happen. Shiller said that Mac OS X will stay on Apple built computers. As it should. Apple needs to control the entire system.

Now, how they implement that will be the question. Will it be via a hardware check? Software? Who knows.

 

[Stella]

??
Then buy some more bloody batteries?!!

This may have been already asked, but the batteries in my BT mouse are dead and I don't have any spares, making browsing REALLY hard to do. How long do you speculate until they ship OS X for us PC users? I'd like to have OS X, but can't afford a mac right now.

Perhaps custom bios?

Won't happen. Shiller said that Mac OS X will stay on Apple built computers. As it should. Apple needs to control the entire system.

Now, how they implement that will be the question. Will it be via a hardware check? Software? Who knows.

 

[Warbrain]

The next major expo is in paris in the fall they always seam to attend that. I think its early september. I have also heard rumors that apple will have a presence in MW (something) in july.

Macworld Boston used to be held in July, but Apple said that they no longer would go to that expo. Unless something's changed lately, I don't think they'll be there.

I thought it was Paris in September. I can't keep track of the expos anymore. I can only remember MWSf and WWDC.

But yea, by MW Paris...there's going to be an Intel iBook. or Mac mini. Just wait for it. If Intel is already making the processors and it was demoed today on an Intel computer...it's going to happen soon. Like I said before, who cares if only iLife is Intel native...there'll be the emulation there to take over. This is going to be better than expected...

 

[Chaszmyr]

Won't happen. Shiller said that Mac OS X will stay on Apple built computers. As it should. Apple needs to control the entire system.

Now, how they implement that will be the question. Will it be via a hardware check? Software? Who knows.

I'm hoping that it's something very secure, a special chip on the mobo that MUST be there for the OS to run or something. Anything that is software only gets cracked, and I think Apple knows that, and I think they know they can't afford to let that happen.

 

[jar]

I understand this will be a phased transition with low end machine first. Does this mean that PowerMacs are stuck at 2.7GHz for the next year+? That would be terrible to have nothing faster to use for so long!

IIRC, during an interview on CNBC today Steve said that there are more new systems "already in the pipeline." No specifics, of course, but the implication was that there are updates coming prior to the Intel-based releases.

 

[admanimal]

Good call....it seems akin to running apps in X11 or Classic right now....clunky and really a pain to do. I really don't like the idea of anything being emulated...it puts a big hit on performance (however good the emulator is) and there will, no matter what the situation, be cases in which the emulator mucks up and causes problems that would not happen on a native system. Emulation is something I look at as plan B, not something I want to have to deal with on a daily basis.

Even if Windows apps could be emulated with no performance hit on OS X, it would still be a horrible interface mismatch which would make the Windows app even more unpleasant to use.

 

[jimbobb24]

This is a good thing, but with that comes the inherent problems associated with the Pentium chip. Anyone who has taken an Assembly or Computer Organization/Archetechture course knows that Intel has added "hack" onto "hack" to keep compatible with legacy chips of the past. The whole x86 architecture has a history of being register deprived and a bit clunky to deal with at the lower level. Heck, it is a 'CISC' architecture with a RISC chip inside. Don't get me wrong though, Intel does a great job at making processors, granted they are still dealing some of their mistakes from the past. My question though is if Intel will include that extra layer used to keep legacy compatibility? Sure Tiger is running on a P4 now, but at release I see no need for the new PowerMac Intel chip to be a full Pentium. Now I don't know my Computer Engineering inside and out (I'm a Software Eng., and really think all you Comp. Eng./Low level programmers are nuts ) This may or may not be possible, but maybe a way to appease claims about the x86's inadequacy. I am also skeptical as to how far Intel can really take x86. With all the drive for legacy compatibility, it really add a lot of overhead that could slow things down. I also realize that PPC is better for floating pt and vectors, but lets not panic. We don't know what's in store for Intel in the next few years, they maybe able to catch up(although I do see this as one of the bigger down falls in the switch). Also like someone said, at this moment, Intel is NOT as fast as the G5 or some of AMD's offerings, but honestly at the rate IBM is going, it won't be long till Intel catches up!

Some good things that come with this though is the obvious use for the mobile line. Finally some higher power mobiles. This is a huge plus. Also the Mac will still be a Mac. There won't be Dell's, HP's etc running OSX unless Apple lets them. Sure someone may be able to hack it to work, but I believe people have been able to to that for years on 3rd party PPC boards, but I don't see a many of those! Apple will do its damnedest to keep OSX off of ugly computers (yes, yes this is opinion, but cut me some slack), and I predict, will also try to prevent Windows from running on their pretty machines. Other good things that will come with this are the ability to compile once for plugins for Quicktime, Photoshop, Illustrator etc. This is a good thing! One zip file to download and install, no matter what computer you're using!

All very good points. I wish Intel could develop a new architecture. Longhorn would have been a great time for Intel and MS to just ditch IA-32 for something brand new. When they do, Apple will need to switch again.

 

[Brother Michael]

OSX86...I rather like the sound of that.

I am curious to see where this goes. Maybe now those Linux jerks and Machaters will shut their pie-holes.

Mike

 

[tokevino]

Yes, but as seen in the past, it is a difficult move for Apple to change proc companies, see Moto -> IBM....there were thousands of people who said it would be a bad idea, and, in any case it was a huge deal....and even then it was just PPC -> PPC.

But the difference is: x86 ships with higher amount than PPC. Do not forget that the remaining 90-whatever percent of the PC market is on the same boat, including Dell. Someone, yes, someone will make chips for Apple.

 

[orion123]

3. Desktops - I can't predict the order of this, but it is obvious that they will wait for these because they need the least work. However, Mac Minis would probably be the first, followed by iMacs, Power Macs, and eMacs. I have no idea what processors they would use or speed, only time will tell.

I agree with this. I think MacMinis will actually be the first Mac period to go Intel. Did you see Intel's clone of that? Coincidence?

I think iMacs will go first for the desktops, and PM and eMacs will go last. Their markets (design and education respectively), will hold out til the end before they switch to an Intel platform. They'll wait until all their "big" apps are Intel-ready (ie: Quark, Adobe, various video/audio/etc production tools for design; legacy education apps for education - they still run Classic apps!). You saw this with the OS9-OSX transition: publishing/production houses kept buying up those old 1.42MHz G4 towers to keep OS9 booting for a while.

 

[brap]

nm, wrong page.

 

[bpd115]

We all know now that certain lines of Macs will convert sooner than others. This is my prediction for the order of the conversion:

1. iBooks / Powerbooks - Face the facts, the PPC processors create a crapload of heat and were terrible for portables. Seeing as how we are only in the mid 1ghz range still with portables, these will be the first to be upgraded, in my opinion to the Pentium Ms. They use very little power and have great battery life, just what Apple portables do not have.

2. Tablet Mac? - This i am less certain on, but seeing as how those patents were published, this may either follow or even precede the laptop conversion. Again, most likely using the Pentium Ms.

3. Desktops - I can't predict the order of this, but it is obvious that they will wait for these because they need the least work. However, Mac Minis would probably be the first, followed by iMacs, Power Macs, and eMacs. I have no idea what processors they would use or speed, only time will tell.

Agreed. The Pentium M is a far better chip than the G4 and I'll bet you'll see single core Pentium Ms in the iBooks and Dual Core in the PowerBooks, finally creating the seperation needed in that line (and I will then upgrade from my 12" to a 15" Pentium M PowerBook).

Tablet Mac? Who knows.

Desktops will be the last as the current desktop Intel Processors do not trounce the G5.

We can be sure though at no time will an eMac, iMac or Mini be more powerful than the PowerMac.

 

[Warbrain]

We all know now that certain lines of Macs will convert sooner than others. This is my prediction for the order of the conversion:

1. iBooks / Powerbooks - Face the facts, the PPC processors create a crapload of heat and were terrible for portables. Seeing as how we are only in the mid 1ghz range still with portables, these will be the first to be upgraded, in my opinion to the Pentium Ms. They use very little power and have great battery life, just what Apple portables do not have.

2. Tablet Mac? - This i am less certain on, but seeing as how those patents were published, this may either follow or even precede the laptop conversion. Again, most likely using the Pentium Ms.

3. Desktops - I can't predict the order of this, but it is obvious that they will wait for these because they need the least work. However, Mac Minis would probably be the first, followed by iMacs, Power Macs, and eMacs. I have no idea what processors they would use or speed, only time will tell.

I think that if they release a Tablet Mac, it'll contain the G4. Steve said that there would PPC products and this seems likely to be made now so people have an incentive to buy a Apple computer of any sort while the transition is happening. The Powerbook/iBook makes sense to made Intel-based first which will then allow the tablet to be made Intel-based later after Apple fixes any problems with the portables.

 

[isaacc7]

Ai yi yi

One of my personal rules is that whenever I get as annoying as the person(s) I'm disagreeing with, it's time for me to go. So this is my last post on the subject... For those of you that think that this is the worst thing ever, please do whatever you think is the right thing. You are going to have to sit down and figure out why you are unhappy and then what you are going to do about it. I chose Apple before as the best platform, and I don't think that has changed, especially over something as silly as a CPU.

I would have preferred that there wasn't an architecture change, but IBM and Freescale left little choice. There really wasn't any other good option other than Intel. Some would say AMD, and I might agree if they started to ship x86 based Macs right now but I'm willing to see what Intel has up their sleeve for next year. There's no question that the laptop line will see a big boost and will continue to get better over the years. I think that Apple will hang onto the G5 for a couple of years at least, but there will be better processors sooner than later and I'm glad that Apple is ready for them. You can kvetch and moan all you like, but Apple is doing this and you're going to have to decide if another platform actually looks better because of it. I'll be getting a Mini in 3 or 4 months and I'm sure that it'll be great then and years into the future...

Isaac

 

[OutThere]

1. iBooks / Powerbooks - Face the facts, the PPC processors create a crapload of heat and were terrible for portables. Seeing as how we are only in the mid 1ghz range still with portables, these will be the first to be upgraded, in my opinion to the Pentium Ms. They use very little power and have great battery life, just what Apple portables do not have.

Hmmm...this is pretty much entirely false...a good portion every x86 based laptop I have used in the past year, Pentium M, Pentium 4, Celeron, Athlon XXXX, and many more has been extremely hot, to the point that I have seen them a) Melt the desk beneath them b) burn people c) require cooling/extra fans to prevent constant lockups d) run so hot that the palm rest makes your hand sweat. Maybe this is anecdotal and worthless, but in my experience, x86 notebooks run extremely hot.

On the subject of battery life....my iBook gets double, maybe triple the battery life of my friends computers. I can watch two DVDs back to back on a single charge, whereas the x86s I've seen can almost get one, the Pentium M's having more battery life, but nothing like that of my iBook.

 

[jar]

Steve said "lots of great PowerPC products coming in the next year" so you can bet the farm on a 3GHz G5 PM by January. They'll be upgrading the PowerMacs and agressively lowering prices over the next year.

(Justification: It will be better for Apple to loose money by lowering prices and selling hardware during this transition, rather than loose money by not selling computers at all while people wait for IntelMacs)

Yes, thanks. When you need a new system to get some work done, you have to buy what's available. I have no doubt that businesses with budgets and schedules already set for this year will buy regardless of the new designs further down the road.

Besides, who knows how many more G5s Micrsoft will need for Xbox360 development?

 

[LaMerVipere]

Macworld Boston used to be held in July, but Apple said that they no longer would go to that expo. Unless something's changed lately, I don't think they'll be there.

I thought it was Paris in September. I can't keep track of the expos anymore. I can only remember MWSf and WWDC.

But yea, by MW Paris...there's going to be an Intel iBook. or Mac mini. Just wait for it. If Intel is already making the processors and it was demoed today on an Intel computer...it's going to happen soon. Like I said before, who cares if only iLife is Intel native...there'll be the emulation there to take over. This is going to be better than expected...

Steve said pretty clearly in the Keynote that there's a lot of work to do and they should have the first Macs running on Intel by June 6, 2006 @ WWDC 2006, a year from now.

 

[bryantm3]

This is what everyone said when Apple began sleeping with the enemy, IBM, several years ago. Recall the 1984 Macintosh commercial that had fired a missle across the bow of mindless worker bees in black suits, only to enter into a decades-long partnership later on.

Recently the enemy has been Intel and they're about to become strange bedfellows. In two years time we will be wondering why we raised such an unnecessary ruckus over nothing.

maybe you're right. i still hope though, that wintel users won't be able to run mac os x by just installing it. that would RUIN apple's market share of computers, and apple would become another microsoft.

 

[admanimal]

Steve said pretty clearly in the Keynote that there's a lot of work to do and they should have the first Macs running on Intel by June 6, 2006 @ WWDC 2006, a year from now.

Yeah, and he was even cautious in his wording of that. He didn't say they would be available by next WWDC, just "entering the market" around then.

 

[eVolcre]

* OK Lets look at them? *



* Are you on crack? You have no way of knowing any of this. 5 yrs of service? Hardly. Show me a mac besides the ones that get upgrade cards that get 5 yrs of service *



* Seemlessly hugh, again you have no way of knowing any of this. Just because jobs says its true does not make it so. Again, blind following.*



* Flat out lie. I am sure your 233mhz machine runs well. I use a 400mhz G3 for testing and its the biggest dog. Lets see, idvd not supported, needs G4 cpu, Quartz extreme not supported, Core image not supported, list goes on. Longhorn needs new machines? Maybe but XP Pro runs fine on my IBM thinkpad I bought in 2000 and its a 750mhz PIII with 384mb ram.*



* maybe you should leave fanboy. Just another jobs can do no wrong follower.*

Isaac, I'm still a couple of pages behind. Farging connection went down on me. You want to handle this one or give me the pleasure?

Lets see what lies ahead ... no NOT TWO years, but two PAGES.

 

[Redneck1089]

Being able to run current apps on the upcoming Intel machines is great and all...but what about future software running on our present PowerPc computers?

 

[admanimal]

maybe you're right. i still hope though, that wintel users won't be able to run mac os x by just installing it. that would RUIN apple's market share of computers, and apple would become another microsoft.

Apple has already said people won't be able to run OS X by just installing it on a non-Mac PC.

 

[D*I*S_Frontman]

Why this REALLY DOES MAKE SENSE--Please hear me out...

I just watched the whole keynote via the QuickTime link.

Like every other Mac fanboy who has ever bragged on the inherent superiority of the PPC chip over x86 designs, I, too, was completely floored by this news at first. It made no sense.

But now I get it.

This isn't about how great Intel is or how bad IBM or Freescale are at delivering better technologies. It is about exactly one thing: never getting burned by another chipmaker again.

This "universal binary code" business is all about choice. By creating an operating system and developer tools that are completely hardware independent, Apple is protecting itself from the all too common malady of "backing on the wrong horse."

When the G4 came out, it was initially an Intel crusher. But we all remember what happened shortly thereafter. The pace of G4 innovation at Motorola slowed to a crawl and Intel caught up. The "Megahertz Myth" was used to sell us on why we should still keep buying expensive Macs. For very intensively AltiVec-enabled tasks, the bake-off claims were true, but in the real world we knew that the Intel-based systems were faster and cheaper for most things. Then, joy of joys, IBM came to rescue us from the Moto G4 dolldrums. The same thing happened--initially a crushingly powerful chip that put Apple on top, development again slowed to a crawl. Now there are certainly some tasks that a G5 still does faster than any other machine, but in real world usage the advantage has been conceded again.

"Universal Binary" is Steve Jobs plan to prevent this from ever burning him or his company again, or at least not for a long, long time. By keeping OS X hardware independent, he can switch horses midstream any time he pleases.

Apple may switch their entire line to Intel--and then AMD might have a revolutionary technological breakthrough. Steve could easily cut a deal with them and capitalize on the new tech. Or maybe IBM gets the G5 running faster and colder. Or Freescale gets mobile-computing dual core chips working well. No problem.

With this flexibility, Apple can quickly go from Intel to Moto to AMD to IBM without that much fuss. For all of us who felt that they were burned by Moto, then IBM, this is a positive development.

Speed kills. Faster systems are better systems. If squirrels with acorn abacuses could run OS X faster and cheaper than IBM or Intel, that's what would be in my machine. Just look at the sticker: "Nuts Inside"!