Macintosh Moving to Intel Processors [Updated]

[reaper]

What about Apple?

Until this happens (which is never) no large corporation will ever fully use the mac whether its on a pentium, titanium or alpha.








What question is there to answer. Prove that no large corportation will ever use the mac entirely? Are you kidding? That is obvioius. Want me to prove the sun will come up tomorrow too? Lets just use common sense please. This is just a way to avoid the FACTS.

What about Apple? I think it's safe to say they are a large corporation. And, if I'm not mistaken they use Macs. Think before you speak.

- Reaper

 

[scu]

According to Cnet, Phil Schiller (Apple SVP) said this:



So it sounds like Windows will run on the Macintel without requiring VPC.

This is big. For the first time I will have two systems in the same box. Sales will go through the roof as Windows switchers buy them without giving up on their own systems and Mac users will buy them in order to experience what the other side brags about all the time.

 

[admanimal]

The point isn't about me having any panic (I'm not). From a marketing and PR perspective though, the way Apple handled this announcement is terrible. An obscure reference to G4/G5 products in the pipeline, even coming from the CEO, doesn't mean anything to most people.

It wasn't supposed to mean anything to most people. WWDC is a DEVELOPERS conference. It was supposed to make sense for the DEVELOPERS, which I'm sure it did. If Apple did some big public marketing campaign right now, the reaction of most consumers would be, "So what? I don't see any shiny new products."

To quote Steve Ballmer..."DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS...." etc.

 

[rotorblade]

.... It's also funny how Apple always made such a huge deal out of the fact that 2GHz PPC chips were faster than 3GHz Pentium chips...

Exactly what I've been thinking.

I have to be honest. I'm having some difficulty swallowing this move to Intel. Remember when Apple announced the G5? Theo Gray was one of the developers who demo'd his software; showing Mathematica running on a dual 2Ghz G5 against a Dell box running dual 3.xx Xeons. If memory serves me right, Mathematica ran 2.3 or 2.5 times faster on the G5 than on the Dell box. Even though the G5 was only 2 x 2.0Ghz, it appeared to have a clear performance advantage over the 3.xx Dell box. With that in mind, logic would dictate that we're going to take a performance hit moving to Intel. Thoughts? Comments?

 

[digitalbiker]

Its not that clear cut

I don't think Apple did such a bad thing...but it's curious that they still have the performance page comparing Intel chips to PPC chips, with the PPC chips smoking the Intel chips. Does't give me much confidence in the Intel chips, unless those tests were based on the 32bit chips and not the newer 64bit dual core chips.

It's also funny how Apple always made such a huge deal out of the fact that 2GHz PPC chips were faster than 3GHz Pentium chips...

Reality is that intel is very very good at some things, PPC is good at somethings, and AMD is good at other things. There is no perfect processor or design. Apple currently touts PPC better than intel and backs it up with tests in areas that currently favor PPC. This is because they sell PPC based equipment. Dell has tests that favor intel over PPC because it primarily sells intel based machines. Neither is a lie nor a distortion. It is like Ford trucks have more standard torque vs chevy trucks have more standard horsepower. No lies! The companies just emphasize their strengths.

 

[MacTruck]

OK You seem to love FACTS. Here's one - prove it. You say that no major corporation will ever run MAC. Fine, assume I agree with you. You then make the conclusion that because of that one arguable assumption this results in a FACT of 5% marketshare.

Simple argument - for simple people - I have agreed that no major corporation will adopt the MAC platform. Now prove to me that this results in a less than 5% marketshare. Easy exercise. Should be a FACT, right?

And no shoddy asnwers. You're stating FACTS so they have to be set in stone. I want demographics, percent penetration of target households, switcher percentages, current and future personal computer growth rates, convergence of media and technology and just for fun throw in a muiltiple regression corelating a variety of intangible variables into a quantifiable increase or decrease in market share.

YO *HINT*, I can do this and disprove your FACT. But... it's yours ... so I have accepted your corporation assumption, now go off do your HW and come back with the answer. It's a FACT, should be easy right?

Assumtion - MACS will never get an entry into corporate america for all the reaons you have mentioned.
Assigment - prove to us that the assumption results in a less than 5% market share.

I can't spell this out any cleaner or make it any simpler for you. You answer my question without giving me another question or a repeated statement and I will leave this thread. I promise you that.

Ok demographic man. You have obviously lost sleep here so I will allow you to lose some more. Do this math.

Based on your own admission no large company will ever use all macs. Sooo at those all up. Every large corporation in the world. Count the employees. Now add up all the schools which have gone away from macs and will not return. Add up every elementary, middle and high school, ohh throw in every college and all its students. I'll let you have VT not that they will be allowed to spend another $5 million on macs ever again after this one. They had to switch twice already. Now what do you have added up yet???? So we are looking at the following using macs.

Movie studios, total macs maybe 5000 macs.
Graphic shops use half macs mostly.
Consumers that just play. Add those up.

Now which ones that won't use macs will use macs in 2 yrs and which ones that use macs now won't use them in 2 yrs. I would say it evens out there. Now what is the current mac market share?

Got your answer? No go.

 

[phloydde]

wrong os

stop comparing osx to windows and start comparing it to linux, and i think you'll get the idea.. they both have the same marketshare.. now imagine "porting" the open source coders to osx.

now imagine netcraft stats saying 20% of all webservers are on mac osx.

now imagine apple laughing even though they lost a few bucks because they gained an army of developers.

 

[tjatl]

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.

I remember the last keynote Steve did, his demo machine locked up while giving a demo of tiger. He had to switch to a backup machine to continue. Want to take a bet that wasn't an intel based machine but a powerpc one?

You're expectations of the first demo are a wee bit high. Do you really expect an OS that's never been released to run flawlessly right off the bat? It obviously will need some tweeks here and there, heck even Steve said it did. If the intel based os x didn't need some polishing, we'd have it out a lot sooner with dual core dual processor powermacs.

 

[MacTruck]

What about Apple? I think it's safe to say they are a large corporation. And, if I'm not mistaken they use Macs. Think before you speak.

- Reaper

Ummm

Name a large corporation, over 500 employess, that uses all macs. (Daring You). Don't say apple.

Already said don't say apple. Read before you type. Ouch.

 

[jacobj]

I have not read all 64 pages, so I apologise if I am repeating the comments of others.

I am shocked by the number of comments that are concerned that this means OSX can run on a Dell. So what if it can? Surely this opens up the operating system to all users, allowing someone to make the switch to mac without having to invest in new hardware.

I really do hope that none of those that are upset that OSX will no longer be an elitist club are not the same people that spend hours preaching to Wintel users about the inferiority of the Windows OS.

If there is a concern, it is that Apple will lose hardware sales over the next 18 months. I am also concerned that many loyal mac users are loyal to the software and not the hardware (which, to be honest, is the correct place to have one's loyalties).

Anyway, my point was: drop the elitism and celebrate the fact that Apple is finally taking Windows head on. We may finally see OSX take a larger, well earned market share.

 

[eVolcre]

Ok demographic man. You have obviously lost sleep here so I will allow you to lose some more. Do this math.

Based on your own admission no large company will ever use all macs. Sooo at those all up. Every large corporation in the world. Count the employees. Now add up all the schools which have gone away from macs and will not return. Add up every elementary, middle and high school, ohh throw in every college and all its students. I'll let you have VT not that they will be allowed to spend another $5 million on macs ever again after this one. They had to switch twice already. Now what do you have added up yet???? So we are looking at the following using macs.

Movie studios, total macs maybe 5000 macs.
Graphic shops use half macs mostly.
Consumers that just play. Add those up.

Now which ones that won't use macs will use macs in 2 yrs and which ones that use macs now won't use them in 2 yrs. I would say it evens out there. Now what is the current mac market share?

Got your answer? No go.

I played by your rules and accepted your assumption. I asked you not to respond with another question and you chose to. Can I assume that you can't answer the question i posed? is that a FACT?

Pal, I CAN run those numbers for you and it doesn't equate to a 5% market share. Want to get even more fancy? Are e defining market share as total or just ADDITIONAL market share? FACt is that installed systems aren't a very good indicator of market share. it's stagnant and not prone to change. Sooo .... look at future growth and potential penetration. it ain't in cporporations let me tell you that. Or is that too complex? probably is. So back up the truck for a second and answer my first question. Then we can play a little more and look at this one.

How old are you> Just curious.

 

[admanimal]

I remember the last keynote Steve did, his demo machine locked up while giving a demo of tiger. He had to switch to a backup machine to continue. Want to take a bet that wasn't an intel based machine but a powerpc one?

You're expectations of the first demo are a wee bit high. Do you really expect an OS that's never been released to run flawlessly right off the bat? It obviously will need some tweeks here and there, heck even Steve said it did. If the intel based os x didn't need some polishing, we'd have it out a lot sooner with dual core dual processor powermacs.

To be honest, I was somewhat impressed with how well photoshop ran. You have to consider the fact that he was actually running an emulated PPC version of photoshop on Intel...not bad for essentially a beta version of the OS.

 

[vatel]

I don't think Apple did such a bad thing...but it's curious that they still have the performance page comparing Intel chips to PPC chips, with the PPC chips smoking the Intel chips. Does't give me much confidence in the Intel chips, unless those tests were based on the 32bit chips and not the newer 64bit dual core chips.

It's also funny how Apple always made such a huge deal out of the fact that 2GHz PPC chips were faster than 3GHz Pentium chips...

1) Depending on the application IBM's 2 GHz G5 chips are faster than 3 GHz Pentiums, although as you point out Apple should very quickly find a way of toning down the rhetoric.

2)Intel doesn't have 64 bit dual core (Pentium) chips (If dual core Xeon variants are out, someone feel free to correct me)

3) This switch is all about the laptop market. Apple had no viable roadmap in laptop land. Even if they shoehorned one 1.8 GHz G5 into a short-lived laptop, IBM wasn't going in a direction that was going to let them compete with the dual core Pentium M offerings Intel has planned.

This switch is going to great for laptop users, like myself, but desktop owners won't really be getting any advantage over the G5 path.

 

[MontyZ]

This is big. For the first time I will have two systems in the same box. Sales will go through the roof as Windows switchers buy them without giving up on their own systems and Mac users will buy them in order to experience what the other side brags about all the time.

How do you know that Microsoft won't limit the computers on which Windows will work if Apple does the same?

 

[840quadra]

MacTruck

First off I am just having a little fun with you, and you are avoiding the facts, not me

Secondly, there is absolutely no way you can answer tech4all’s question. Unless you are able to jump into a time machine and dig up future data of enterprise corporations. I also can’t stand when people address a question, with an other question. Besides the fact that I believe tech4all had you from the start , and was just playing a bit (like I am now).

Until this happens (which is never) no large corporation will ever fully use the mac whether its on a pentium, titanium or alpha.

Oh really? Then prove what you said in your post is true. Unless you can prove it's a fact it's meaningless to us.

In your post you said “never”, and in the context of your sentence it would include the future. Unless you can go into the future and bring us some data as to what happens with Apple and it’s market share, and a list of what enterprise companies are doing, there is no way to correctly answer his question.

It would be almost impossible (in current time) to have an enterprise corporation with 100% Apple hardware or software. This is because currently apple does not currently have a strong enterprise hardware or software product lineup to support enterprise business.

But,

Since none of us know what is going to happen in the future with Apple, and their customers, your point which tech4all asked about, has no standing ground.

Using the word “never” in a debate is a dangerous thing to do

840
Just having fun on Macrumors

 

[MacTruck]

I played by your rules and accepted your assumption. I asked you not to respond with another question and you chose to. Can I assume that you can't answer the question i posed? is that a FACT?

Pal, I CAN run those numbers for you and it doesn't equate to a 5% market share. Want to get even more fancy? Are e defining market share as total or just ADDITIONAL market share? FACt is that installed systems aren't a very good indicator of market share. it's stagnant and not prone to change. Sooo .... look at future growth and potential penetration. it ain't in cporporations let me tell you that. Or is that too complex? probably is. So back up the truck for a second and answer my first question. Then we can play a little more and look at this one.

How old are you> Just curious.

Look come back with some facts and stop babbling. Run the numbers, when you find I am right you won't be back. Tired of you avoiding facts. You are making a fool of yourself. Show us the charts and graphs that you say you can generate and prove me wrong. Now run along and get to work we don't have all night. We want graphs with pictures so YOU understand what you say.

 

[MacTruck]

MacTruck

First off I am just having a little fun with you, and you are avoiding the facts, not me

Secondly, there is absolutely no way you can answer tech4all’s question. Unless you are able to jump into a time machine and dig up future data of enterprise corporations. I also can’t stand when people address a question, with an other question. Besides the fact that I believe tech4all had you from the start , and was just playing a bit (like I am now).





In your post you said “never”, and in the context of your sentence it would include the future. Unless you can go into the future and bring us some data as to what happens with Apple and it’s market share, and a list of what enterprise companies are doing, there is no way to correctly answer his question.

It would be almost impossible (in current time) to have an enterprise corporation with 100% Apple hardware or software. This is because currently apple does not currently have a strong enterprise hardware or software product lineup to support enterprise business.

But,

Since none of us know what is going to happen in the future with Apple, and their customers, your point which tech4all asked about, has no standing ground.

Using the word “never” in a debate is a dangerous thing to do

840
Just having fun on Macrumors

You're right should not have said NEVER. Apple might pull a rabbit out of their hat in 10 yrs and get higher than 5% or so market share, but what I am saying is a FACT today, yesterday and for the next 2 yrs minumum.

PS: tech4all’s never had me he is sweating to try.

 

[Wotcher]

3) Apple has largely been able to justify their hardware pricing based on their alternate architecture, and claiming that you couldn't compare Apples to Dells on a 1:1 basis for price. Given a move to essentially similar hardware, and a known retail price for OS X, charging more for identical hardware will become increasingly difficult, IMHO. While Apple will argue that in some way their 3.2Ghz Pentium-D box with 1GB of Ram, 160GB HD, etc. is different or more valuable than the one from Dell (or home-build, or whatever), that will be a very hard sell.

The distinctive architecture gave Apple some room on pricing that is going to be lost. Everyone knows what a Pentium box + an OS costs - just go to Dell and check it out. If Apple's price for the identical Pentium box + Mac OS + whatever Open Firmware chip they throw in to tie the hardware and software together is substantially higher, that's a major problem.

You look at this from a Hyundai to BMW perspective. Sure, Hyundai and BMW both make nice cars, they have four wheels, engine, transmission, seats (leather, even), nice stereo, airbags, ABS, stability control, etc., but a Hyundai costs thousands less. So why would anyone buy a BMW? How many rabidly loyal Hyundai fans are out there, versus rabidly loyal BMW fans?

Think about it.

There's plenty of money to be made in high-end PCs. Look at Alienware, and I hear Dell is planning to enter high-end PC market (with high-end components, design, etc). It may not get you market share, but it'll make you a tidy profit. Apple knows it will not win the battle of market shares, but it knows how to make a nice profit.

Anyone can build a PC for cheap, but all they'll be able to run is Windows or some flavor of Linux. That tells me that Apple has very expectations of OS X Tiger and Leopard, because that, the high-quality components and service will be the draw for buying Macs. Leave it to the dogs for table scraps, Apple's going for the fat.

 

[lord patton]

details to come

It amazes me how much detail gets poured over in this forum. Some of you posters are obviously experienced and have your ear to the ground...
So this will get really interesting (perhaps even substantive) when we get reports coming from the developers at WWDC about their experience porting, using Rosetta, chip-architecture roadmap, etc.
Till then, it's been a fun couple of days of hyperbole and invective

 

[eVolcre]

Look come back with some facts and stop babbling. Run the numbers, when you find I am right you won't be back. Tired of you avoiding facts. You are making a fool of yourself. Show us the charts and graphs that you say you can generate and prove me wrong. Now run along and get to work we don't have all night. We want graphs with pictures so YOU understand what you say.

Touchy touchy. Hey, I asked you first. You prove your FACTS which should be easy since I accepted your assumptions. Then I'll see if I need to do any work or can let you be hoisted by your own petard.

I'm making a fool of myself??? LOL. You *might* want to go back and look at how you have been played in the last few pages.

 

[stephenli]

If there is a concern, it is that Apple will lose hardware sales over the next 18 months. I am also concerned that many loyal mac users are loyal to the software and not the hardware (which, to be honest, is the correct place to have one's loyalties).

for loyalty, I suppose mine is to the "feeling" of using Apple: superior OS, superior design, and superior hardware, including the CPU.
Now I am confused.
Steve mentioned "power consumption / performance" in his keynote.
Yes, Intel deliver a lower walts / performance solution, but
to be honest,
How about total performance? I dont think a 2.7Ghz Pentium would run faster than a 2.7Ghz PowerPC G5.

 

[MacTruck]

Touchy touchy. Hey, I asked you first. You prove your FACTS which should be easy since I accepted your assumptions. Then I'll see if I need to do any work or can let you be hoisted by your own petard.

I'm making a fool of myself??? LOL. You *might* want to go back and look at how you have been played in the last few pages.

LOL. Who is playing who my friend. (eVolcre looks in the mirror and makes that eddie murphy face he used to make on that Mr. Rogers neighborhood skit on SNL). ha ha ha.

 

[840quadra]

You're right should not have said NEVER. Apple might pull a rabbit out of their hat in 10 yrs and get higher than 5% or so market share, but what I am saying is a FACT today, yesterday and for the next 2 yrs minumum.

PS: tech4all’s never had me he is sweating to try.

That's fine.

I agree with many of your points, it was just that one thing that was bothering me. And I have no idea why.

I get the impression (from reading many of his posts in the past) that Tech4 caught the same thing I did, and was just playing.

But only he can answer to if my theory is correct.

cheers,

840

 

[Lollypop]

I know I’m late to the game, and that almost EVERYTHING that could be said has been said, I would however just like to add my 2 cents!

This move could go either way, Intel will provide the kind of performance and speed Apple wants to provide to their clients, but Apple is now part of a bigger cut through environment. We might think its good that Apple can now do a improved Power Mac every 60 days, but just imagine what Apple will have to do to get that done, and get their stock cleared before the next revision!

Looking at the pros Apple can save them and us a lot of money if they play this one smart. But ultimately I think apple will have the software sorted, it comes down to the hardware, so here is what I think apple should do:

1. Have Intel produce the Northbridge, that way Apple don’t have to worry about the large amount of different socket types Intel has currently... they can let Intel do that. Apple also gets kick ass memory controllers and support for PCI express out of the way while reducing costs.

2. Apple should produce the Southbridge. By making their own Southbridge they can produce the hardware lock the platform will need. By restricting information about the exact hardware, like the SATA controller, Apple can make sure that the OS X only boots or at least detects the presence of one of their Southbridge’s and ensure that it wont boot on a stock dell. This way not only will someone have to emulate the rom but also provide accurate emulation of other undocumented devices such as the SATA, IDE, USB, Firewire (Intel doesn’t do firewire btw), modem and whatever other device the chipset features. Using some sort of advanced identification method, no support for other boot devices and requiring apple only hardware to be present to even start the kernel will make hacking the platform rather difficult.

3. Apple needs to closely, but not completely adhere to the Intel motherboard form factors. If apple did a BTX motherboard everyone will simply install the board in their vanilla case or their AMD board in the G6 case. By changing the physical shape a little but keeping with other requirements like cooling placement and power supply specs apple can use stock power supplies and normal cooling designed for those cheap ass lamo dells.

4. Expansion devices. This in one place Apple can score big time. If Apple could use standard x86 based PCI express hardware, manufacturers will have the extra incentive to create drivers, as they can expand their market and use their existing hardware designs as is. This will be very much like USB, most USB devices work on the mac as well... unix driver and standards hardware and you have Mac support! Graphics is a bit of a grey area for me, Apple could also go standard but then Mac users will upgrade to the latest and greatest every time something new comes along, in turn possibly making support and controlling the platform for Apple harder. I would allow ATI and nVidia to use physical and electrically compatible designs but require some sort of advanced software identification, meaning that ATI would still have to produce a Mac version but it would simply entail a new bios. On the other hand if Apple could get ATI to do drivers like they do for windows all people would need to do is boot OS X in 256 colors, install the drivers and reboot into wonderful accelerated full color bliss... using cheap ass standard graphic cards.


I think Apple should push the new hardware out the door ASAP! Start with the laptops... skip the G5 powerbook and go for the G6, without using the hated intel inside sticker make it known: "we also use the pentuim M, we also have 8 hours battery life", then migrate the Power Mac and iMac, Apple needs to worry about their laptop line first, that’s the thing suffering the most at this point. Use the dual core chips in the PowerMac, and the single core ones in the iMac, use the Celeron in the Mac mini and the eMac.

That’s my 2 cents.

 

[MacTruck]

That's fine.

I agree with many of your points, it was just that one thing that was bothering me. And I have no idea why.

I get the impression (from reading many of his posts in the past) that Tech4 caught the same thing I did, and was just playing.

But only he can answer to if my theory is correct.

cheers,

840

No problem. Just having fun.