anynigma said:
Any cached link to that? I would like to read it.
And paulsecic i don't think jobs will disapoint the whole dev. comunity by waiting 6 more months then planed when he alrady made them wait 2+ years for a PM thats still not here.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Macintosh Moving to Intel Processors [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Any cached link to that? I would like to read it.
And paulsecic i don't think jobs will disapoint the whole dev. comunity by waiting 6 more months then planed when he alrady made them wait 2+ years for a PM thats still not here.
to late in the thread, but...
FOR ALL WHO ARE GETTING WOUND UP ABOUT THIS, EITHER WAY-
This was not a change Apple made because they wanted to, they did it because they had to. And yes, they had to.
They had to because 1)Apple plays to individuals, not buisnesses, 2) Individuals are more and more buying laptops, as the desktop market is becoming more and more buisness dependent, and 3) On PPC, there is no good laptop chip. The G4 is outdated, hot, and slow, the G5 won't make it into a laptop, it's just too much power and heat, and the PPC roadmap has nothing coming.
Therefore, to stay PPC, would be to give up the portable market, and essentially, apple's whole buisness. Couple that with dissapointing performance on even the G5 chips that are doing relatively well, and it's done: Apple had to move to intel. PPC would be suicide.
So, it happened. It's happening. Jobs didn't want to give up the argument he'd been devoleping in going with PPC, he didn't do it becuase he's a turncoat. It had to happen, or it woudl be the death of the OS, and that we all would prefer to preserve.
That said, here's my opinions:
*I, like a lot of you, think it's a dissapointment that apple can't stay PPC.
*Despite the rhetoric, apple is entering into a lame duck period, where people are thinking too much about what's coming to care about what's here. This is likewise unfortunate
*using x86, in it's suppliers, in it's relationship to windows applications, hackability, has a lot of potential for change, both for the better and for the worse. We don't know what will happen.
*With the pentium M, apple could do great thigns. If they negotiated in this deal something where they can still give surprises-apple could be the first out with a chip, or have a slightly different version, it would make it a lot less like joining the wintel monopoly.
FOR ALL WHO ARE GETTING WOUND UP ABOUT THIS, EITHER WAY-
This was not a change Apple made because they wanted to, they did it because they had to. And yes, they had to.
They had to because 1)Apple plays to individuals, not buisnesses, 2) Individuals are more and more buying laptops, as the desktop market is becoming more and more buisness dependent, and 3) On PPC, there is no good laptop chip. The G4 is outdated, hot, and slow, the G5 won't make it into a laptop, it's just too much power and heat, and the PPC roadmap has nothing coming.
Therefore, to stay PPC, would be to give up the portable market, and essentially, apple's whole buisness. Couple that with dissapointing performance on even the G5 chips that are doing relatively well, and it's done: Apple had to move to intel. PPC would be suicide.
So, it happened. It's happening. Jobs didn't want to give up the argument he'd been devoleping in going with PPC, he didn't do it becuase he's a turncoat. It had to happen, or it woudl be the death of the OS, and that we all would prefer to preserve.
That said, here's my opinions:
*I, like a lot of you, think it's a dissapointment that apple can't stay PPC.
*Despite the rhetoric, apple is entering into a lame duck period, where people are thinking too much about what's coming to care about what's here. This is likewise unfortunate
*using x86, in it's suppliers, in it's relationship to windows applications, hackability, has a lot of potential for change, both for the better and for the worse. We don't know what will happen.
*With the pentium M, apple could do great thigns. If they negotiated in this deal something where they can still give surprises-apple could be the first out with a chip, or have a slightly different version, it would make it a lot less like joining the wintel monopoly.
I don't use Intel chips, so I don't know very much about them, but I do know that you can't go to dell right now and buy a 64 bit x86 varient laptop. I meant that apple may be waiting until Intel really focuses on producing 64 bit chits and delivering them to consumers. As for the 4P4 rumor, it's just that, a rumor and I was just adding that information to the giant speculation cauldron. The rig he was running was supposedly noticably slower, and he didn't do any real work in any of the non-native programs he ran. Itunes and IMovie and the like were likely recompiled and ready to blaze, but it just seemed that the Rosetta'ed apps were a bit slow. Maybe we need to wait for Rosetta to be developed further. That is all I am guessing, and it is a guess, nothing more.
runninmac said:
This was the link to the story, straight out of my history, but as you will see, it has sadly been removed.
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1117
I'm sorry I can't offer a screen shot or something, but I didn't know it would disappear.
Well, I am a scientific user too and I have never understood why Apple doesnt put more focus on that market.wildmac said:
If the prof uses mac -> students use mac -> students use macs after the exam -> Macs are used as both home and business computer.
That was off topic. What I was about to say is that science can't upgrade or switch programs as easily as you can in business or private.
I fear that Apple will lose many users from the science community by this transition.
The fact that shares for all three companies (Apple, IBM and Intel) were down sort of says something. But I don't really mind the switch, as long as Apple maintains the quality, stability, efficiency and the user-friendliness of OS X and Apple software.
What does this mean for my brand new 20" iMac though????
What does this mean for my brand new 20" iMac though????
Since Dell are reportedly going to try a high-end Dell, this might not be quite so much of an issue. If there's suddenly a quality Dell market with comparable quality components, it might not be quite so hard to explain the difference.
onlysublime said:
Where do you get your information? That's complete and utter rubbish.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A COMPUTER WITH MORE THAN ONE PENTIUM 4 PROCESSOR.
Geddit?
The Intel family runs like this:
Pentium M (plus Celeron versions). Single CPU. For portables.
Pentium 4 (plus Celeron versions). Single CPU. For desktops.
Xeon DP. Dual CPU. For workstations and servers.
Xeon MP. Four (and more) CPUs. For servers.
Itanium. Dual and >= 4 CPUs. For servers.
Pentium 4s have never, do not currently and will not ever run in multiple CPU configurations. You can get Pentium 4s with dual cores, but that's not the same thing.
Here are the Intel pages on the Pentium 4:
http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentium4/
Please read them and provide the following:
1. Evidence that Intel says that Pentium 4s are available in configurations of more than one CPU.
2. Evidence from manufacturers and resellers of Intel-based personal computers that feature multiple (>1) Pentium 4 CPUs.
3. Links to motherboard manufacturer websites (Supermicro, Tyan, Iwill, Asus, Gigabyte, MSI, ECS, Abit, etc) that sell motherboards capable of running more than one P4 CPU.
When you fail to find this information, please post to that effect so we can all laugh at you.
galvez465 said:
Wasn't a merger. Was an outright sale. I'm not arguing that the IBM line didn't use IBM processors. Don't ask me why, I'm not a bithead. All I'm disputing is your claim that they still have a PC business. They don't. It was sold. Lenovo can use the IBM brand for 2 years I think. (might be wrong in this). BUT, the entire business division was SOLD. Not a tieup, not a remarketer, not a merger but an outright sale.
I might be nitpicking. Back to the thread. But this thread is all over the place anyway so I don't feel too guilty.
eV
I highly doubt that Apple will be using Intel standard motherboards. Apple computers are not Windows computers. The adoption of the Intel CPU does not mean that Apple will do away with other controllers and chips in the computer design. Items that are on every Apple motherboard.GuyClinch said:
Besides, the "Intel standard motherboard" is the reason why practically every Windows PC you see out there is the same size/shape box. With the only "innovation" being in the configuration of where the drives sit.
The Mac mini, and iMac G5 (or even the iMac G4) would never have happened with an Intel standard motherboard, and Ive would never allow himself to be handcuffed with that design constraint.
-Pete
Well first off the new macs will probably use a variation of the Pentium M. It's die size is only 87mm which is much smaller then the huge G5 at 144mm. The Pentium M is very fast and has alot of headroom.
Secondly, die size is only a factor in the cost of fabbing chips. The failure rate matters as well. Intel has some of the process technology in the business and tend to have alot lower failure rate then IBMs fabs.
Finally, a company like Apple has to buy the chipset as well. They can get a deal on the whole kit from Intel. With this change they only have to worry about intel falling behind AMD and there is nothing to stop them from going with AMD if they really feel intel is underperforming.
No more pressuring IBM to get a decent notebook chip out. It's like a weight of Jobs shoulders. Apple had no choice. Without the processors they need they would go out of business.
Pete
Intel based PCs
Its fairly straightforward to see that what Apple has been missing is a new PB. So come next June (2006), we will see:
New PB's (12, 15, 17 in) running Pentium M (Yonah - the dual core versions)
New iBook running Pentium M (single core)
Mac Mini running same as iBook
The G5 will continue in the iMac and PowerMac until Intel gets the lower power consuming P4 dual cores out (especially for the iMac).
The priority for Apple is the laptop range that is stale and Apple stated sometime back that the future of "desktop" computing will be notebooks. Also on www.theinquirer.net you can find references to Yonah that says volume shipments will be out in early 2006. This makes it ideal for the PowerBooks.
They needed Intel for their survival (the notebook range). PPC will continue in the desktops until into 2007 when you can see them trying to get everything to Intel to standardise the software side.
I for one am very excited by the good news!!!!
Its fairly straightforward to see that what Apple has been missing is a new PB. So come next June (2006), we will see:
New PB's (12, 15, 17 in) running Pentium M (Yonah - the dual core versions)
New iBook running Pentium M (single core)
Mac Mini running same as iBook
The G5 will continue in the iMac and PowerMac until Intel gets the lower power consuming P4 dual cores out (especially for the iMac).
The priority for Apple is the laptop range that is stale and Apple stated sometime back that the future of "desktop" computing will be notebooks. Also on www.theinquirer.net you can find references to Yonah that says volume shipments will be out in early 2006. This makes it ideal for the PowerBooks.
They needed Intel for their survival (the notebook range). PPC will continue in the desktops until into 2007 when you can see them trying to get everything to Intel to standardise the software side.
I for one am very excited by the good news!!!!
Not much, unless you plan to sell it.imz said:
It will still be just as beautiful as it was before. It will still be just as capable as before. All Mac owners are more or less in the same boat, we just have to wait and see how things turn out. I dont think there is any reason for a big alarm right now.
I am just a bit shocked about the PPC -> x86 transition we have infront of us. I really didnt expect that.
nhkader said:
Man, I hope you're right. I would be stoked by this release strategy. I made this post in another thread but I think I'd like to copy it in here. Everybody's chatting in here anyway on every single topic so it's not even off topic. Plus, there are more people in here and I'd like to see what people think ....
Here it is ....
I disagree. Saw a article the other day that said that laptop sales had beaten desktop sales for the first time. The notebok is the future and partly the reason why Apple decided to dump IBM for Intel - no roadmap for powerbook chip innovation.
My dream is a dual core Powerbook that is super powerful, ultralight and has a great battery life. Maybe a 13.1" widescreen? Great design that we have come to expect from Apple - very stylish. This would be the perfect notebook for me. Stylish - that sets me aprt from the crowd. Mobile - for my long flights. Ability to give sales pitches and yet powerul enough that I can come home, plug it into a Display and have a perfectly fine desktop relacement for my needs. I really hope this is the first machine they release with the new platform. Targets businessmen, students, and the hardcore Apple fans who will be ready to upgrade.
Somethign similar to this http://www.dynamism.com/x50/index.shtml
sexy eh? and if it dual boots with Windows I can even convince my company to buy it for me since it can be 'supported' Would save me from buying a personal machine in addition to my company piece. I would seriiously pay up to 2500 and maybe even 3000 for this machine. Until then, I will make do with my 2002 12" Powerbook since it does evreything I want it to and will continue to do so until the new ones are released.
Actually, the picture above is a 15" screen.Check out some of these with smaller screens and even lighter weight
I can't wait!!
eV
You're the man, Steve!!!
Well, first I tought Steve Jobs were a Soth Lord, because he "betrayed" Mac Fans... But, after wathcing Keynote last nght at my friends house, I became very confident that he is a powerful Jedi Master and he did not betrayed the force.
He is looking for the best of Apple and the best of it's users. Of course, he's looking forward to make more money. But that's business.
So, besides the fact that I BOUGHT MY MINI YESTERDAY, I'm willing for a new Mac Intel machine...
It's a great and important move and Steve Jobs had to have some balls to do it...
[]s
Fábio.
Well, first I tought Steve Jobs were a Soth Lord, because he "betrayed" Mac Fans...
But, after wathcing Keynote last nght at my friends house, I became very confident that he is a powerful Jedi Master and he did not betrayed the force. He is looking for the best of Apple and the best of it's users. Of course, he's looking forward to make more money. But that's business.
So, besides the fact that I BOUGHT MY MINI YESTERDAY, I'm willing for a new Mac Intel machine...
It's a great and important move and Steve Jobs had to have some balls to do it...
[]s
Fábio.
It has always struck me as interesting the mini being the first to adopt ... I spose it is because it's the most blatant switcher product out there.Peel said:
(I bet the moment Intel was mentioned as a contender Ive started to cry ........ who wouldn't?!)
Well I am more worried about an emac or mac mini with a shared video memory design. Yuck. We just cannot tell everything is rumor other then the next Macs will use intel x86 processors. We dont know more then that. Lets wait a year and see. Hey lets wait 2 weeks for someone to rip apart a dev kit and then we can speculate!
Don't count PPC out yet
The fact that the first machine is a year away and the whole lineup 2 yrs out leaves a lot of room to stay with a partial PPC lineup if there a need for it for any length of time. If the high end remains strong only chip availabilty will prevent the PPC from dissapearing.
Who knows maybe in 2yrs the macs will all be intel based except for one or two models for specific uses.
Apple will likely keep its options open again this time "just in case".
The fact that the first machine is a year away and the whole lineup 2 yrs out leaves a lot of room to stay with a partial PPC lineup if there a need for it for any length of time. If the high end remains strong only chip availabilty will prevent the PPC from dissapearing.
Who knows maybe in 2yrs the macs will all be intel based except for one or two models for specific uses.
Apple will likely keep its options open again this time "just in case".
- Status