Macintosh Moving to Intel Processors [Updated]

[john123]

My point was missed. Please read allowed so it is understood.

Until macs can use ORACLE, EXCHANGE SERVER, SQL SERVER and OUTLOOK the mac will never get more than 5% market share. Every company that needs a large database will not use macs, every company on any Microsoft Office products won't use macs. Just plain simple. Stop arguing the facts.

Like I said no company over 500 employees uses all macs for their email and important stuff. Sure there might be macs sitting on their desk, but it sits next to a pc.

This is pretty wrong. Do you think that Oracle and SQL Server are the only two products that can deal with "large databases"? Think again. SQL Server frankly isn't that scalable when it comes to performance with really large databases. Oracle is great, but it's cost prohibitive for many business that aren't at the "gigantic" level yet. This is why many companies have pursued open-source database platforms, a la mySQL, PostgreSQL, and so on.

As for e-mail, there are plenty of Mac options available there, too. Entourage and Outlook are pretty similar. So you want to use Exchange Server -- fine, that is ONE Windows box. Or maybe a Mac running Windows, as we are pretty sure they will. That has nothing to do with what client programs connect to your Exchange Server. Maybe you don't like Apple's Mail program (I don't either, frankly), but between it, Entourage, and others, there are LOTS of program choices out there.

I think your problem is that you're nibbling at Microsoft's teat a little too much. If you'll ease up on idolizing Gates and Ballmer, maybe you'll see that the options are not so narrow as you defined them to be.

 

[DakotaGuy]

Was it just me or did the loading of Adobe P CS take forever with that 3.6gig intel chip?

Yeah my sisters Dual 1.8Ghz G5 loads it WAY faster then that. Watch Steve very close while it is taking so long...you notice he does the old "nervous mouse move" hoping to coax it along and then lets out a nervous laugh which the audience laughs at, because they can see it lagging as well. It kind of upsets Steve and you could tell at a few times he was a little unsure of the beast under him. I noticed he was a little more apprehensive then he usually is with his demonstrations on a regular PowerMac.

I suppose the LAST thing he wanted to happen is a crash on stage... That would have been BAD even this early on, people would have said OMG this might be a bad idea.

 

[eVolcre]

Oh yeah its all rubbish. Lets not get defensive, just stating a fact not an opinion.

As some one else said, prove it's a fact. Your 5% number is so nonsensical that I don't even think I want to try to refute it. Come on man, you are JUST NOT LISTENING. And it's not that we're all diehards here. The point of any discussion or a debate is to learn from each other which you are NOTY willing to do. You're almost bordering on troll like behaviour. And if I wanted to be a dick I would say that you were a import from a PC board having fun with us. But I'm not a dick so I wouldn't say that ....

 

[tokevino]

Will it be something like this then, considering that Intel does manufacture several types of CPUs:

PowerMac Xeon Dual CPU 3 - 3.4GHz
PowerBook Pentium-M Dual Core 1.7- 2GHz
iBook Pentium-M 1.2 - 1.4GHz
iMac Pentium 4 Dual Core 3 - 3GHz
Mac Mini Celeron 2.8 - 3GHz

Feasible? As for me, I'm looking forward to Apple's new switch. It might require a bit more optimizations on OS X though. Anand posted some interesting facts about the OS.

http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2436

Will be much better than these by mid 2006.

 

[MacTruck]

Look almost all fortune 500 companies use either PeopleSoft or Oracle for HR. I know, oracle bought peoplesoft. There are just NO mac alternatives out there. Macintosh is weak in database and email. Its just not a seious business computer. Remember that commercial? Macs are for graphics and video. If there was ever a mac in the places I have seen it was there for the dude with the long hair that did flash. You know that guy.

That said. I love my mac way better than my pc but I NEED my pc. I don't NEED my mac. My mac is a luxury not a necessity.

 

[MontyZ]

Not trying to get people worked up but I don't see what there is to get worked up about. Just stating a FACT.

Facts mean nothing these days. Truth has lost all credibility.

 

[MacTruck]

As some one else said, prove it's a fact. Your 5% number is so nonsensical that I don't even think I want to try to refute it. Come on man, you are JUST NOT LISTENING. And it's not that we're all diehards here. The point of any discussion or a debate is to learn from each other which you are NOTY willing to do. You're almost bordering on troll like behaviour. And if I wanted to be a dick I would say that you were a import from a PC board having fun with us. But I'm not a dick so I wouldn't say that ....

What do you want me to PROVE exactly?

 

[jimbobb24]

kldj dslkfjjdflk gqakbj x aeu48 jdskjhf ah agfl
lkdsjflksfjkljf laksdj dkaj sdjlasj a sdf jdsalfkj
dsal;f dslkjitier ier jad s;klj aaj;kjadf fjk aj kd

Finally someone who gets it!

 

[maxvamp]

Thank you. Fact proven.

Don't get too happy...

There are companies that use Lotus Notes instead of Exchange, Oracle ( on UNIX ) or Sybase instead of MS-SQL, and some other office app other than MS-OFFICE.

Companies over 500 hmm? Try BNSF, SAP, and IBM. There are more than MS would like to admit.

 

[eVolcre]

I gotta agree with you here.... My current incarnation is working for a company that develops serious software for big pharma (among others). If they have Macs, they are not in general use..... They want Oracle, they want Exchange, etc.

Our software even supports OS X, but there's no real market for it - and we're almost all Mac faithful - even our CEO won't touch Windows.

Thog, it seems like youv'e been around a bit. How about this argument? That percentage wise, corporations form a smaller part of the target market than individual consumers?? So .. differnt niches. Windows runs in the corporate world since they have a strangle hold on OFFICE etc. APPLE takes over the consumer world and the emerging convergence of media/computing that Uncle Bill so wants to corner with his XBOX. I'm not arguing one way or the other and this isn't a FACT but just an interesting viewpoint. I almost wanna bet that the market for consumers is bigger. Why bother with the inertia of changing a HUGE installed base in corporations, lets go after an untapped and unhappy market - the consumers.

 

[Wotcher]

An interesting quote from Apples dev docs:
"Macintosh computers using Intel microprocessors do not use Open Firmware."
(http://developer.apple.com/documentation/MacOSX/Conceptual/universal_binary/universal_binary.pdf, page 47)

Does this mean that we could run osx on any standard intel PC?

My bet is that the dev kits are, but the actual shipping Macs will have Open Firmware. BIOS is dead.

 

[digitalbiker]

FUD

Apple has handled the communications on this very poorly. First, they should not have just done the recent speed bump on the G5's one month before WWDC since they knew the PPC was on the way out. The new PPC release led people to believe that the product line was viable. But now even the local news is saying don't but a current Mac, wait and buy an Intel Mac. That kind of dumb manuver has all the makings of class action lawsuit written all over it.

But even worse, they are deleting these types of posts on the Apple Discussions board on the Apple site. That's only going to infuriate the G5 owners even more. Apple better get out in front of this and address it in a major way, or there's going to be a huge negative backlash. If Rosetta can do x86 -> PPC, then Apple better let current owners know what the plan is and how they can acquire Rosetta. If it can't, then Apple has no business selling the current G4/5 models as state-of-the-art machines.

The G4 and G5 lines will be around for at least 3 - 5 years. Steve even said that many new ppc designs were still in the pipeline. Also Xcode compiles universal binaries, meaning PPC & X86. My bet is that the PPC line will dominate in speed and apps for at least 2 - 3 more years. Eventually all of the bugs will be worked out of the x86 designs and more software will be available.

I need a new PB as my 800 mhz Ti PB logic board is starting to fail. I am betting that a new PPC PB comes out within 3 months and will be much improved over the current offering. Possibly dual core freescale, PCI-Express GPU, faster FSBm etc. I'll use it with current software for 3 years and then switch to Mac-intel PB, probably with dual core Pentium-M or better and much more native apps available.

Don't panic! Panic is for dolts and losers. Besides it is just a computer, not a terminal illness.

 

[Timemist]

Apple once away betray their own loyal users! They bite the hands who fed them. Well your hefty investments on Apple hardwares will be discontinue in merely a year! All of you seems to forget all these.
http://images.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/photoshop20050427.jpg
http://images.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/renderinghdv20050427.jpg
http://images.apple.com/powermac/performance/images/audio20050427.jpg

I suggest that anyone who felt they have been cheated by Apple misleading product information and roadmap should group together and file a class-action lawsuit. I certainly feel this way.

In an earlier post on this thread I said that how Apple has handled the Intel announcement is a PR disaster waiting to happen, and this guys post illustrates why.

This is going to be ugly.

 

[jared_kipe]

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!

Thats pretty funny, we were STUCK at 2.0GHz for a year after they were introduced.

 

[areyouwishing]

Niiiiice. Thanks.

You would think that it might be useful to ruminate a bit on my comments before delivering judgement like that. I'm not a Mac newbie, and I've been in the industry for a long time now. I remember DEC, Cray, and others quite well still.

I've also been loyal to Apple longer than some of my coworkers have been alive. I don't say stuff like this lightly. I'm very disturbed at what I see as a trend in the wrong direction. If it were just me, I'd chalk it up to my own weirdness. But too many people I know with similar backgrounds are also disturbed. Some of them have already cancelled Mac purchases....

You made a comment about sticking with Apple if they used opteron, but all the real world benchmarks still show Opteron's to be slower when it comes to rendering and video Apple's bread and butter customers. Sure, now AMD has a great server platform, but that doesn't mean that Apple likes their laptop platform (nor do i know a person yet that prefers AMD laptops to Intels). Plus AMD doesn't have the SIMD that intel does (close but not quite) Apple is trying to do it's best with it's hands tied.

You really think Apple wanted to move to intel? Or do you think they had a nice long chat with IBM about not wanting to go down the Moto road again. Do you think that Apple likes being the victim because they are small? Apple chose intel for 3 reasons, their roadmap, the pentium M, and because IBM has no desire or financial ties to make a low-power g5, especially after signing on 3 of 3 top game manufacturers to FINALLY help them be profitable in the chip making business.

Ask yourself a question, do you want to have a powerbook that sees zero genuine updates throughout the years as we have been living with for the last 4+ years? Or do you want to work with a company that is ACTIVELY and PUBLICLY pursuing the creation of an 8-hour dual-core powerbook?

 

[Agathon]

What are you all moaning about?

Intel is a company full of hardworking people who care about what they do. Like every company, including Apple, they've had their fair share of clangers, but they've produced some excellent stuff. I haven't heard many reasonable complaints about their new chips for portables, for example.

If Apple manages the move to Intel it will mean that they are almost certain never to be in the position of being hobbled by a chipmaker again, because there is competition in X86 processors, and if Intel won't do it, AMD will.

Add to that, the fact that Intel will not run short of their product and it's an improvement over IBM and Motorola's performance in that department.

Also, and more importantly, the Intel people seem genuinely happy and enthused at having Apple on board. It won't mean that much more money for them, but it is a big win in prestige terms, since Apple punches far, far above its industry weight in publicity terms.

Do you think that Intel's people are satisfied with having their products associated with bland design-bereft doorstops from the likes of Dell? Sure it makes them money, but that's not enough for most people.

They're human beings, and like many of us they appreciate style. Having Apple use their CPUs makes them look better, since they can point to the cool Apple designs and say that they contributed to the machines.

 

[eVolcre]

That's the truth. Tho, I did have BITNET access and eventually (since we were a tech school) Internet access in college, but we were all text-types. It was odd to enter the "real world" where nobody knew about the Internet or (in many cases) networking.

Right about now, I'd happily ban email. I spend far too much time tuning SPAM filters. Not to mention dealing with all the script kiddiez....

I might be dating myself here and given the apparent age of this threads participants I'm probably an old fart ... my first net exposure was to Lynx and Archie. And as a freshman in CompScience we beta tested Mosaic at Purdue. Memories ...

 

[thogs_cave]

CHANGE is always GOOD, and this was not a quick decision, it has been well thought out, and if all OSXs have been developed for intel also, then we have nothing to worry about, apple has things under control, Steve knows what he has in all of us so lets give apple a little air to breathe, you'll see that your worst fears will remain fears, and that reality is bright and clear.

Change is not always good. Change for the sheer sake of it makes no sense. Steve has made plenty of mistakes to go with the successes.

IBM was sucking, and Intel is the most productive processor maker

Yes, and Microsoft is the most "productive" software developer. Your point?

its TUESDAY ALREADY! YES!

Not where I am. Still have a half-hour to go. See, it's all a matter of perspective.....

 

[cgundlach]

My point was missed. Please read allowed so it is understood.

Until macs can use ORACLE, EXCHANGE SERVER, SQL SERVER and OUTLOOK the mac will never get more than 5% market share. Every company that needs a large database will not use macs, every company on any Microsoft Office products won't use macs. Just plain simple. Stop arguing the facts.

Like I said no company over 500 employees uses all macs for their email and important stuff. Sure there might be macs sitting on their desk, but it sits next to a pc.

OS X can run Oracle. Integration with Exchange Server is important. Most big companies don't use SQL Server -- Oracle is much more prevalent. I have seen more DB2 usage than SQL Server, but I guess we can rule that out.

 

[MacTruck]

Don't get too happy...

There are companies that use Lotus Notes instead of Exchange, Oracle ( on UNIX ) or Sybase instead of MS-SQL, and some other office app other than MS-OFFICE.

Companies over 500 hmm? Try BNSF, SAP, and IBM. There are more than MS would like to admit.

Ok, lotus notes, sybase, neither run on OS X. LIke I said, need a PC. Next.

 

[eVolcre]

What do you want me to PROVE exactly?

Are you serious? or just clueless?

*shakes his head and gives up*

 

[theROZ]

new era

like the end of star wars....the end of something hurts and feels werid...it takes a while to understand the lose of something familar...but Steve Jobs has wowed us for 30+ years...and has ALWAYS been thinking 5 steps ahead of everyone else.....the guy is like from the future..... I dont care what the hell chip is running as long as it ...is fast...runs osx...looks fUNKing sweet....and is four steps ahead of whatever is the alternative is....apple delivers... and they will again...

 

[DakotaGuy]

So why would todays cross platform developers (Win and Mac) even bother with an OSX version if you can run your Windows version of the app on the Macintel? If I were someone like say, Adobe, I'd probably just punt and build the Windows app.

What am I missing?

You know that is a good point. I can't see how a Macintel won't run Windows just as good as a PC. It will be the same thing. I suppose Apple will devise a way so OSX can't run on a generic PC, but I doubt they will go the other way since people already use Virtual PC. If a system runs Windows just as fast as MacOSX, what is the point of having all the software in duplicate? Only so you don't have to leave the Mac OS environment.

 

[cmkrnl]

Almost Perfect Timing

For me, this is pretty good news. I just bought a 2 x 2.7 PM (shipped today) and was considering cancelling the order. However, given that I usually upgrade to the "latest and greatest" every 2-3 years, the new "better" Intel based PM's should be out by the time I'm ready to upgrade. Hopefully they will have all the 64-bit and Altivec issues worked out by then. My only real concern is that they have a good replacement for my PowerBook by the end of next year.

 

[thogs_cave]

I haven't heard many reasonable complaints about their new chips for portables, for example.

Two words: "Centrino Technology"

Do you think that Intel's people are satisfied with having their products associated with bland design-bereft doorstops from the likes of Dell? Sure it makes them money, but that's not enough for most people.

Huh? Most people care about going to work, getting paid, and going home. As long as the checks roll in, the sheeple are happy. There's a very large Intel fab just down the road from me, and most of the people there could care less what their chips are used for, as long as they can make the next payment on their SUV.