Macintosh Moving to Intel Processors [Updated]

[Panu]

This is what I've been saying as well. Everytime I try to convince a friend or family member to buy a Mac, the biggest resistance is not compatibility or a new OS or a one-button mouse: it's the price that always turns them off immediately. Which is understandable when you can get a Dell for $399 compared to a $799 eMac, the lowest-priced complete solution from Apple (with monitor, keyboard and mouse). They wonder why they have to pay double, and saying "OSX is the best OS and it's fun and easy ot use" doesn't really work. They think they should be getting a lot more if they pay a lot more. Most people are not willing to pay a lot more even if the overall design is better. Just look at how many $40 DVD players WalMart sells. They're usually broken after a month, but, they still sell like hotcakes.

There is merit in purchasing a cheap, disposable computer. Computer technology moves fast. I had a LaserJet IIP+ that would not die. It churned out pages at 4ppm even while newer models were doing 22ppm. What could I do? I couldn't throw out a perfectly good and well functioning printer, even if it was 14 years old. Finally it did break.

During that ordeal, I told people that the worst feature of the LaserJet IIP+ was its immortality.

Computer technology moves fast, and it may be wiser to buy a cheap machine that will break down in two or three years so you can afford replace it with the latest and greatest with a clear conscience. Computers depreciate to zero in three years anyway--but since Macs are rarely in corporate settings, most Mac users don't know that. And this is also one of the reasons why Macs are rarely in corporate settings, and why they have to become price-competitive to break into those lucrative markets.

When I buy a computer, I want to be able to replace it with a clear conscience in 3-5 years. There is a upper level of quality I don't want. The iMac I have is an exception. I bought it to be a toy, to supplement my main computer, which I purchased in 2003 with the intention of replacing it in 2006.

 

[840quadra]

Actually read Appendix B of the universal binary documentation.. it maps out all the X86 -> Altivec conversions.. but for maxmium speed you want to use Intel's compilers.

the converted code is longer and more complicated then the altivec code, according to what is needed to address those situations.

but I am a fresh programmer (less then 2 years) so my understanding of addressing altivec is limited, and I didn't use it .

 

[triotary]

Cell Technology

what about IBM/SONY/TOSHIBA's Cell technology???

Isn't this move saying something about that Cell technology? Since the Cell technology supposably marks a new wave in chip technology?

 

[triotary]

cell "cutting edge?" technology

"Traditional computers - whether they are household PCs or PlayStation 2s - use a single processor to carry out the calculations that run the computer.

The Cell technology, on the other hand, uses multiple Cell processors linked together to run lots of calculations simultaneously. "

 

[Wotcher]

After posting a couple and reading through all of this, I feel compelled to paraphrase what others have posted.

1. Running windows natively on Mac (via VMware, whatever): Remember OS/2? It ran Win16 stuff very nicely. So where is OS/2 now?

2. Apple selling OS X to any x86-based PC: That means Apple getting out of the hardware business, and that means the end of Apple. Oh, and selling OS X? remember BeOS? So where is BeOS now?

Again paraphrasing those who have posted sane and rational posts, Apple develops OS X, iLife, Final Cut, Logic, Motion, Shake, etc to sell its hardware. they develop iTunes, they sell songs at 99 cents to sell iPods. They tightly control everything to give users the "apple experience," something that cannot be found anywhere else. And it's not entirely because Apple uses PPC--it's because they control everything.

Steve Jobs has made a chess move that right now, only he and a select few at Apple and elsewhere see the picture, let alone fully understand. Whether the move he's initiated turns out to be brilliant or not, we'll just have to find out. Apple is a business, and it needs to make money and keep its stockholders happy. So while it may be nice to build your custom-PC and install OS X, that's not, and will not be, in Apple's business model. If Apple did that, it would be time to unload your stock holdings in Apple.

Apple is a control freak. For better or for worse, it's got them where they are, and it will take them where they will be.

 

[onlysublime]

The same arstechnica that was reporting this morning about a Quad Pentium set up for Steve's demo which turned out to be 100% false?

It wasn't Arstechnica. It was www.macinsider.com.

 

[MontyZ]

Hmm, it will probably grow wings and fly away.

Remember the flying toasters from Berkeley Systems After Dark screen saver? This will the the flying PowerBooks. When the switch is final, all pre-Intel machines will grow wings and fly away, high up into the sky, flying to the sun. They will fly to Sun Microsystems. They will inundate Sun Microsystems' San Mateo campus in a massive attack of pre-Intel Macintoshes.

I want whatever you're smoking.

 

[triotary]

hmmm~

since stone age, Apple has marketed itself as an alternative choice for computing. Remember "Think different" advertising campaign, or "I made the switch campaign." And take a look at the G5 benchmark table on Apple.com, it is pitted against PCs with intel chips. Not just G5, all other PowerPC is pitted or marketed against intel based PCs. So basically, Apple has been always propagandized itself as an elite opponent against Intel. So what happenned yestersday is saying that everthing that Apple has been telling us all the time is all rubbish???

So if I'm using OSX10.6, how different am I compares to a window user, when both of us are using the same hardware? The OS is totally different, but you can't deny the fact that Apple, which are already branded as "Different," is not much different from a PC user in the future.

 

[jiggie2g]

This Is going to be you're Next CPU.

1st I will say you need to worry , you will never see a P4 in a retail MacIntel PC
these are the most likey candidates. By 2006 the P4 will be EOD'd as even Celeron will be dual core.


Memrom (Notebook 64-bit Intel CPU) , and Conroe (64-bit Desktop Intel CPU) are the Future for Intel.

Especially Conroe is said to be 12-13 stage CPU built from the ground up.

Enjoy

http://theinquirer.net/?article=23055

This Is what Jobs ment about Intel will have more units per watt , 70 for Intel vs. 15 from IBM.

 

[sacear]

hmmm~

since stone age, Apple has marketed itself as an alternative choice for computing. Remember "Think different" advertising campaign, or "I made the switch campaign." And take a look at the G5 benchmark table on Apple.com, it is pitted against PCs with intel chips. Not just G5, all other PowerPC is pitted or marketed against intel based PCs. So basically, Apple has been always propagandized itself as an elite opponent against Intel. So what happenned yestersday is saying that everthing that Apple has been telling us all the time is all rubbish???

So if I'm using OSX10.6, how different am I compares to a window user, when both of us are using the same hardware? The OS is totally different, but you can't deny the fact that Apple, which are already branded as "Different," is not much different from a PC user in the future.

Well, seems like there is some crow to be eaten. I'm sure Apple would prefer to get what it wants from both Freescale and IBM using the PPC, however they are not delivering. Apple will make the best of the hand they have been dealt and the situation that they are in. And if Intel's current roadmap is an indication of what is coming in the future, then Apple is making the right choice.

 

[triotary]

My APPLE PC vs your WINDOW PC

to those who said that computing today is all about experience!


Apple's new marketing campaign:


benchmark:

Apple G6 intel with OS10.6
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

intel Crzeon with windows CCCCP
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Dell intel 10000 with windows XTP
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX


headlines

"Do the switch to OS CrazyCat! And you can see how our OS CrazyCat can totally make the new intel chip faster compares to Windows CCCP!"


"Compares to Windows CCCP, your experience with intel 10000000MHZ will be more exhilarating with OS CrazyCat!"



hahahhahahaha This is gonna be funny! Media manupilating people!

 

[Peace]

I'm sorta confused here...

Is the Universal Binary going to be a permanant thing when the Apptels come out in a couple years? Or is this a transitional thing.I also noticed in another thread that a guy at the WWDC restarted the "prototype" Apptel and held the del key down and up popped a bios that showed the Pentium 4 and EM64T..

Thoughts?

 

[MontyZ]

Why is Apple charging developers $999 for the Intel developer computer/software when they have to give it back? I wonder if they get their $999 back once they return it.

 

[MontyZ]

Is the Universal Binary going to be a permanant thing when the Apptels come out in a couple years? Or is this a transitional thing.

I'm just guessing, but, it's probably a transitional thing right now. However, this will probably be useful for processor-independence in the future, and there may be a way to add other binaries (or whatever) to the library in the future so that apps can run on Intel, AMD, PPC, or whatever else may be invented in the future.

 

[mox358]

still in denial

please read before you flame...

i really don't know what to make of all this... nobody wants to buy a ppc now because they're afraid they won't be worth anything in two years... i wasn't planning on getting a new mac but now i'm planning to so i can get a new g5 before they switch to intel. one of the last true macs...

the g5 is an amazing chip... it hasn't realized its true potential yet, and apple decided to jump ship. that i can see... and i understand apple's reasoning for this. i don't like it, but i understand it. from my studies in how processors work (which i admit is very basic) i have always understood the pentium to be a really crappy chip, that needed raw Ghz to make up the difference with its horrible design. the powerpc however was setup as the awesome chip that was extremely efficient, didn't have the Ghz to match Intel, but didn't need it as much because of its design.

I just have a bad feeling in my stomach thinking about running an intel processor in my Mac. Its almost like having a white plastic Dell running OS X. I'm still in shock at the announcement, so maybe it all hasn't set in yet.

I do have some thoughts though...

1 - The "I hate apple, they suck" comments are pointless, its a business decision, nothing more, nothing less.

2- The "you suck anyway, intel rules, don't let the door hit you on the way out!" people are just as bad, if not worse. Last week 90% of you would have been bashing Intel, now you can't wait to get a P4 Mac. As it was once said "You've got to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything" - you people stand for nothing. At least some people have some reasoning (ex. the scientific research people) have posted reasons why they would prefer a G5 to a P4 or apple pentium chip. If you blindly believe whatever apple tells you and don't have the balls to call them out when you think they've made a bad decision then you have no right to call anybody a "fanboy".

3 - I don't agree with the decision... short term it looks great. But long term the x86 will probably die and PPC should finally reap some of the benefits that have been on paper so long. Then what? We jump back? Apple is not betting on a chip, or software, they're betting with their user's confidence. Who will believe in Apple when we change architectures every three years? This is a dangerous game my friends, even with Rosetta and Universal Binaries.

4 - I plan to get a G5 based Mac before apple stops making them... I would rather run a PPC than an Intel proc... does my decision affect the newly minted Mactel fanboys? NO. If you can't wait to get your Centrino Powerbooks then I wish you the best of luck with them... but don't you dare think about lecturing me based on my computer preference. If Universal Binaries work as promised, we both will have the same apps for our systems.

5 - OS X for Intel will be hacked and on every P2P network within a month of its release... don't be blind and say "Apple won't let it happen.." - they're not on sacred ground anymore... "When in Dell, do as the Dells" - with the exact same parts inside the case (save for an easily hacked apple BIOS) the x86 hackers will have a field day. We just have just given the keys to the city to them on a silver platter... and we've even translating all our apps for them in real-time!

So basically, my feelings on the situation are grab a G5, wait it out, and get ready for the fourth major transition back to PPC when the x86 gets tapped out. I don't like intel... but thats my decision... and every one gets to make their own decision on the situation. Thats the beauty of free will... stop the fighting over "Apple betrayed us!" and "Intel rocks, PPC sux" because as much as you call the Mac faithful zealots and nuts, both sides of this are arguing like children. Like I said, stand for something... but stand for it because you believe in it, not because Steve Jobs told you to.

End of rant... sorry

 

[admanimal]

hahahhahahaha This is gonna be funny! Media manupilating people!

But I don't want to be manupilated! I don't know what it is, but it sounds like it involves having your hair manually pulled out.

 

[form]

I am not about to explain this in detail, partly because I don't feel like it, and partly because my brain is currently half-fried.

I believe that Apple's move to Intel processors is the beginning of the end for Apple as the company that so many people (at LEAST...4% of the computer-using population) have come to fanatically trust in.

I believe that, though the past marketing will damage their reputation temporarily, such things can be smoothed over by new advertisements, new media, new focal points and all of the other new, optimistic spiel that big businesses excel at using to make people forget any information possessing the potential to cost them money.

However, the future similarities and inevitable blending and blurring between platforms is what I believe will, in the end, remove Apple from the playing field entirely; at least, from the playing field it has been in since the beginning of the corporation.

I already said that I'm not about to explain it; figure it out for yourself. You might find enlightenment, you might find idiocy. Just remember, whatever you construct, however you interpret it, came from Your viewpoint, not mine; I merely introduced a thought (likely one which many people have already considered), and placed it in a tangible verbal form, which may be used as a theoretical foundation for more ideas; solidified it, perhaps.

And no, I haven't looked at the more than 2,000 posts on this thread, so I don't know if I'm repeating an idea which has already been mentioned on here.

 

[GuyClinch]

since stone age, Apple has marketed itself as an alternative choice for computing. Remember "Think different" advertising campaign, or "I made the switch campaign." And take a look at the G5 benchmark table on Apple.com, it is pitted against PCs with intel chips. Not just G5, all other PowerPC is pitted or marketed against intel based PCs. So basically, Apple has been always propagandized itself as an elite opponent against Intel. So what happenned yestersday is saying that everthing that Apple has been telling us all the time is all rubbish???

It's called marketing and your foolish to believe everything Apple tells you. The G5 is faster then the intel - FOR SOME OPERATIONS. It all depends on what your chip is doing and what kind of code it's running.

For example even though gamers like me left for PC's years ago we notice that the benchmarks of DOOMIII absolutely SUCK compared to even lowly p4s never mind the faster AMD64's.

Why? John Carmack creator of DOOMIII and master programmer explained. It takes a bunch of cycles to do a floating point divide (if I remember right). ANd he needs to use the operation alot. Carmack hand goes a ton of stuff w/assmebly so he really knows his crap.

Likewise AMD64's just own P4's right now for GAMES and most softwared. But ripping say a Cd - intel rocks at that their high clockspeed rips through the simple "non-branchy" code needed for that.


BTW This forum is so rife with myths about PC's it's unbelievable. Some poster said PC's last like 2 years. Well the work fine many years down the line. I have a seven year old one sitting right near me. It works fine.

Pete

 

[triotary]

It's called marketing and your foolish to believe everything Apple tells you. The G5 is faster then the intel - FOR SOME OPERATIONS. It all depends on what your chip is doing and what kind of code it's running.



Pete

well~ if the Moderators never delete my posts~ you will read me saying that




"It is dangerous that it all proves that media is nothing more than manupilating lies that propagates any agenda the user wish to enforce."

And this is just an example how media can really manupilate anything they want on national television. For example, do you really believe everything that the news show you about what is going on in middle east? Have you actually been to middle east?"








thanks moderators for such a good job!

 

[mox358]

I already said that I'm not about to explain it; figure it out for yourself. You might find enlightenment, you might find idiocy. Just remember, whatever you construct, however you interpret it, came from Your viewpoint, not mine; I merely introduced a thought (likely one which many people have already considered), and placed it in a tangible verbal form, which may be used as a theoretical foundation for more ideas; solidified it, perhaps.

My friend, I believe the camp you and I reside in is the same - I also believe its the minority... its called sanity, and its in short supply at the moment.

 

[arcterix100]

newbie question

No sure if i understands what this meens.. Will Pc native apps like autocad will be able to run on OsX?

sorry this question may be obvious for most of you guys....

 

[triotary]

It's called marketing and your foolish to believe everything Apple tells you. The G5 is faster then the intel - FOR SOME OPERATIONS. It all depends on what your chip is doing and what kind of code it's running.



Pete

and if you read carefully~

to those who said that computing today is all about experience!


Apple's new marketing campaign:


benchmark:

Apple G6 intel with OS10.6
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

intel Crzeon with windows CCCCP
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Dell intel 10000 with windows XTP
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX


headlines

"Do the switch to OS CrazyCat! And you can see how our OS CrazyCat can totally make the new intel chip faster compares to Windows CCCP!"


"Compares to Windows CCCP, your experience with intel 10000000MHZ will be more exhilarating with OS CrazyCat!"



hahahhahahaha This is gonna be funny! Media manupilating people!

 

[mox358]

No sure if i understands what this meens.. Will Pc native apps like autocad will be able to run on OsX?

sorry this question may be obvious for most of you guys....

With a new version of vpc... with a ported wine... its possible to run them at full speed on their native arch... but not with out of the box OS X intel.

 

[jiggie2g]

**** CELL

This CPU has to be the most overrated POS in Computer History. It's not they type of CPU made for the complexity of a REAL os , it's fine for small bare bones OS on a ROM chip like PS3 will have. It's a Specific task CPU like the 3 core PPC M$ is getting from IBM.


It's never going in a dektop ..get over it. you think AMD and Intel would allow such a thing they would bribe everyone not to use it.


Overall i am Happy with Apple choosing Intel over AMD ....yeah Imagine an AMD nut saying that. With that said , Intel gives them a ton of CPU options that AMD or anyone else can't offer.

Celeron D...not a chance
Celeron M...Low End iBook
Pentium M..Powerbook / Highend iBook
Penitum 4...Unlikely
Pentium D....iMac /PowerMac
Xenon ...Xserve
XScale ....can be used in future Video iPod

Not to mention Excellent lineup of MB chipsets , PCIe finally, SATA2 w/NCQ , DDR2 , real RAID support.

Smaller Processors for other Purposes
Moblie Media Graphics Accelerator...Cell Phones , PDA , PVP
Wimax chip
Intergrated Graphics chips for desktop and Notebook..

Apple dosen't have to design any hardware anymore , just the case and cooling.

AMD has the same Problem as IBM ....Great Desktop CPU ..no major notebook solution..

Turion 64...still too hot compared to Pentium M..DEAL BREAKER
Athlon 46 Mobile....Way too hot for a Apple...Turion cancels this CPU.
Athlon 64...already being phased out..AMD will not release any more.
Athlon FX ..will contiune till mid 2006 then be EOD
Athlon x2...The King....Possible , but for how long? 2007 is a life time away.
Opteron... Fantastic ...possible

 

[matticus008]

I'm glad Apple is abandoning IBM in favor of progress, but I still think I'd feel better if Apple had a proprietary chip with Intel. With all this talk of easy porting of x86 apps, I shudder to think of all the virus writers/propagators that are currently licking their chops. I mean really, one of the things I like most about my mac is walking into a room full of PC users complaining about viruses and spyware and breathing a sigh of relief that I don't have to deal with that.

Nobody said anything about porting x86 apps. Rosetta and the new XCode makes it easy to port PowerPC applications to the new Intel platform. So the virus writers have been handed a tool to recompile their existing PPC viruses--oh wait. There aren't any to port.

Furthermore, there's nothing precluding Intel from developing a slightly different and therefore proprietary chip. Adding specific instructions, extensions, or optimizations to the basic ISAs could distinguish Apple CPUs, if they so desired. Even just repackaging it into a socket that is used solely by Apple motherboards (where Apple exclusively owns the design) and requiring a chipset and OpenFirmware made for or by Apple would keep Apple Macintosh computers and the rest of the PC world separate as it's always been. Without the appropriate controller chipset, you wouldn't be able to run OS X. Even if hackers wrote custom code for a non-Apple chipset and emulated OpenFirmware, so what?

What would be the point of breaking the Apple-branded machine lock? If OS X runs so well on x86, something like PearPC would suddenly deliver blazing performance (especially if you could kill the Windows overhead). Windows will run well on the new Macs. The only advantage to getting OS X to a neutral platform would be for better hardware (namely graphics and audio components that Apple doesn't offer). But after all that work creating motherboard compatibility and emulating OpenFirmware, now you'd have to write your own drivers for unsupported peripherals, too. Few people would undergo such a process. Certainly too few for Apple to care.