More Details on Apple's Intel Mac

[jeff3835]

What will Apple call these new PC's?

So what is Apple going to call there professional line of computers when they convert them to Intel?

Apple will no longer be able to use the 'Power' name in it's high-end products now that the new machines will no longer have any 'Power' in them anyway. How about PentiMac and PentiBook?

Apple's new slogan can now be 'Nothing Different Inside' or 'Think Conformity'

Also, Intel has always 'requested' that there hardware partners (Dell, HP, etc.) have an 'Intel Inside' sticker on there machines. Where will Apple put this sticker? They could just incorporate it into the Apple logo I guess.

Now that Apple has partially moved to the dark side, can't they take it even one step further and finally come out with a 2-button mouse.

Also, everyone knows that Intel & Microsoft have been sleeping together for years, and though they have had some lovers quarrels in the past they have maintained a strong relationship, that is as long as Intel remembers who wears the pants in that relationship.

What's going to happen when Microsoft makes certains 'suggestions' to Intel regarding there involvement with Apple? Do you think that Intel is really going to give a company with only 3% (depending on what you read) market share equal or greater support than Microsoft partners like Dell or HP?

For those of you that read 'Joy of Tech', I am still on step 2.
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/

 

[maxvamp]

Ummmm, they already make PC's (personal computer) A mac is amac becasue of the software not the hardware, get a grip. Sheesh

It will be ultra critical that Apple does not become another PC maker that happens to run an odd Intel based OS as obscure as OS/2. I seriously doubt that Apple could compete with DELL, or even HP and SONY.

If handled poorly, this could be the start of the slippery slope...

Max.

 

[maxvamp]

I'm sure that the "new" Mini will use the 900X graphics, if there is still a emac it will too....the iMac may not......but it will be embeded just as now....

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!

 

[fiercetiger224]

Hmm, things could only get more interesting once the new Intel based Macs start shipping. Still a few unanswered questions that I would like the answers to:

1. Will Apple opt to use high quality graphics cards in ALL their lineups, or use crappy Intel integrated graphics?

2. On the x86 OS X, will it use the HFS+ filesystem? Or will they use NTFS or FAT on the new OS?

3. Will we be able to just buy any PC graphics card now and just stick it in a Power Mac without flashing it, etc?

4. What will Apple name their new lines, such as G4, G5, etc...Will it be a G6?

5. Will Apple limit their customers to using ONLY hardware that they will write drivers for?

Well, I'm actually excited to see Apple switching to Intel; I was quite shocked at first, but c'mon, it's APPLE we're talking about here. They know what they're doing, and once the new hardware comes out, they should run just like any Mac does today. :-D

 

[jaykk]

IBM..

I think it is clear that IBM is not interested in small revenue from Apple, so Steve didnt have any other option. Yes, IBM does all kinds of stuff with their Power/Cell technologies ( cell workstation etc), but apple requires a chip for Powerbook/iBook/iTablet. Since all the game console moved to PowerPC, intel required a new partner, and I bet Steve got a great offer from Intel than from IBM/AMD. Its a win-win situation for Intel and Apple.

 

[digitalbiker]

Heres my guess

Hmm, things could only get more interesting once the new Intel based Macs start shipping. Still a few unanswered questions that I would like the answers to:

1. Will Apple opt to use high quality graphics cards in ALL their lineups, or use crappy Intel integrated graphics?

2. On the x86 OS X, will it use the HFS+ filesystem? Or will they use NTFS or FAT on the new OS?

3. Will we be able to just buy any PC graphics card now and just stick it in a Power Mac without flashing it, etc?

4. What will Apple name their new lines, such as G4, G5, etc...Will it be a G6?

5. Will Apple limit their customers to using ONLY hardware that they will write drivers for?

Well, I'm actually excited to see Apple switching to Intel; I was quite shocked at first, but c'mon, it's APPLE we're talking about here. They know what they're doing, and once the new hardware comes out, they should run just like any Mac does today. :-D

1) Integrated graphics in low-end machines, top-of-line gpu in pro-sumer line.

2) HFS+ - definitely

3) No, you will be limited to only Apple supported hardware.

4) Completely different from G1-G5. Probably something like iseries1.

5) Definitely yes!

 

[bishopduke]

!

 

[From Win to Mac]

what the hell

people, it's a Developer Preview Kit.
and anyways, its 2 years from now, who the hell know what's gonna be out there

 

[iMeowbot]

1. Will Apple opt to use high quality graphics cards in ALL their lineups, or use crappy Intel integrated graphics?

Relax. OS X is married to graphics acceleration hardware at this point, so there are limits to how cheesy they can go now. Even if they go integrated on the low end, it will be halfway decent integrated.

2. On the x86 OS X, will it use the HFS+ filesystem? Or will they use NTFS or FAT on the new OS?

Darwin on x86 needs its root partition to be formatted as UFS (the native BSD filesystem), and it can mount HFS+ volumes without a problem. They'll certainly have HFS+ root volumes on Tiger, though, because moving to a case-sensitive filesystem would be a disaster for experienced Mac users.

3. Will we be able to just buy any PC graphics card now and just stick it in a Power Mac without flashing it, etc?

We'll have to wait and see what Apple have to say about hardware detection. open firmware is apparently out, so the situation may well improve.

4. What will Apple name their new lines, such as G4, G5, etc...Will it be a G6?

It's a new architecture, so it gets a new letter. H1

5. Will Apple limit their customers to using ONLY hardware that they will write drivers for?

They don't even do that now. It's up to hardware manufacturers to provide device drivers, as always.

Well, I'm actually excited to see Apple switching to Intel; I was quite shocked at first, but c'mon, it's APPLE we're talking about here. They know what they're doing, and once the new hardware comes out, they should run just like any Mac does today. :-D

Actually, this is all something Steve Jobs thought up this past weekend. At least, that's the impression I get from reading these threads

 

[stephenli]

"They run Windows fine. All the chipset is standard Intel stuff, so you can download drivers and run XP - on the box."

What??!! what?!!!!!
It will have some implications right here:
1) ppl dont need virtual PC
2) More ppl will run windows on Mac than OS X
3) ppl who could afford a high-end, "designed" PC (e.g. VAIO) will rush to Mac.....

I wonder if....production model of Macintel will allow us to install Windows directly....

 

[weezer160]

Intel Terminology

Can somebody please enlighten us with Intel chip code-names, etc... I don't even know what's out there, and it would be nice to think in terms of names (ie. G4, G5, etc...). I think there are a lot of people out there who think that 3.6 GHz P4 will be what's shipping in PM... but perhaps in the mac mini next year

 

[coyoteshawn]

PPC Sorry to see ya go!

Is it me or does anyone else think that with all that development money comming to IBM for the game consoles that the PowerPC development will eventually soar past that of Intel (Only because technically the PowerPC is a superior chip.). To be fair as long as there is an AMD there will be a need for faster and faster as these two companies try and one-up each other, so we benefit from that CPU war. But I still look at the future of these products and still have to ask, why do the games companies choose IBM PowerPC CPUs? The common talk on most techie boards all still say that the PowerPC being superscaler has so much more potential than the X86. The roadmap that Intel has for CPUs for the future perhaps in the short run is a better choice I however question the long run. Pentium not being able to reach 4Ghz and the fact that even Intel themselves wanted a whole new CPU and created Itanium (Itanic). The even went so far as touting the "EPIC" way being more "RISC like" than the current X86 platform. I totally understand that OSX will look and feel no different than before so I am not concerned in that arena, but you have to question the future. Do you stay like Apple of old and say "See why 1984 wont be like 1984" and stay cutting edge or do we throw the cards on the table and say "Can't beat the, join them."? I believe I enjoyed "Thinking Different" and by Apple having the one of the newest developed CPUs it made that difference unique. But with that said, it seems to be an issue with laptops as they are now bigger sellers. I actually happen to enjoy my iBook 1.33Ghz system I write here with, and its still quiet fast...

 

[NeoMayhem]

Can somebody please enlighten us with Intel chip code-names, etc... I don't even know what's out there, and it would be nice to think in terms of names (ie. G4, G5, etc...). I think there are a lot of people out there who think that 3.6 GHz P4 will be what's shipping in PM... but perhaps in the mac mini next year

They have celerons, Pentium 4s and some server chips. Dual Core P4s will be out pretty soon, so apple will probably use those in the new systems.

 

[deanbo]

Get A Grip!

Mac's were already pretty much PC's anyway, graphics cards, memory, hard disk's were all virtually identical to "PC's".

As for running OS X on your crappy Dell, forget it. Do you really think Apple is that dumb, or has forgotten the clone days? Licencing OS X to other companies would be suicide.

What incentive would their be to buy Mac hardware? I've heard people speculate about a hardware lock built into the motherboard, so this will be out of the question.

And as for integrated graphics, what do you think is running the G5 iMac? If you want dedicated graphics buy a PowerMac.

 

[CrackedButter]

i've said it before and i'll say it again, this is the worst decision ever for apple. they will be making pc's and as said, won't be very mac like except for the box. osx isn't native to macs anymore....this all just sucks!!

OSX is cross platform by design right from the start, it was supposed to work on intels as well as PPC.

Somebody didn't watch the keynote!

 

[fiercetiger224]

Can anyone say "SAAAAAWWEEEEEEEET!!!" to Apple's decision? Well we'll see in a year how well this Intel relationship goes. ;-)

I really can't wait to see what Apple has up their sleeves, and now FINALLY, PCI Express! Hopefully Intel might even design a special processor for the Power lineup, such as an additional instruction set, such as SSEMac or some crap. PUAHA! Oh well, the only thing that gets me is what processor they're going to use in the computers, besides the Pentium M.

I'm REALLY excited, new opportunities for Apple, and now, we can dual-boot between Mac and Windows, or even run them side by side on a dual screen format! AHH BLISS! Not that I run Windows that much. But there are a few nice programs on Windows that I'd like to run as well...I'm REALLY EXCITED CAN'T YOU TELL?!

 

[maxvamp]

Can somebody please enlighten us with Intel chip code-names, etc... I don't even know what's out there, and it would be nice to think in terms of names (ie. G4, G5, etc...). I think there are a lot of people out there who think that 3.6 GHz P4 will be what's shipping in PM... but perhaps in the mac mini next year

Hmmm Maybe Apple should not have used the 'i' moniker so much. They could have called the new powerhouse the iMac ( for Intel ). I think at this point, it would confuse.

Max.

 

[willhclark]

Sells Mini', iMac, and OSX...

OSX and Apple hardware need not be mutually dependent.

Apple can succeed by competing in Hardware and Software markets with thier Box and OS being unbundled. Unlike the first attempt at licensing the Mac OS this time selling OSX on other Boxes would work for the following reasons.

1. When Apple Licenced the Mac OS in the Mid 90's it failed because the OS was only distributed by small competitors within Apple's niche market run on PPC's. If IBM, Dell, HP, Sony had sold the Mac OS on thier PC's Apple would increase OS market share without eating into it's own Hardware sales. Using the Intel chip Apple can take on Microsoft by letting HP and Dell sale pc's with OSX and/or dual boot OSX and Windows XP.

2.In the Mid 90's Apple boxes looked just like PC boxes. Under Scully's leadership Apple went away from making computers into Art and thus had little marketbale innovation in form factor and popular asthetic computer design. Howeverm, since the first fruit flavored iMac in 1999 Apple boxes have been anything but ordinary with one breakthrough in popular design after the other. The attractivenes of the iMac and Mac Mini winning numerous design awards pushing the limits on what a computer can look like. Apple does'nt sell boxes, Apple sales works of art that function as computers.

Apple hardware and software are strong enough products to sell on thier own without relying on the other. Yes, ofcourse nothing beats an Apple box with Apple OS but if you can't have both you can still get one. And then buy both later through a "Halo" effect.

Everyone wants an Apple designed computer but only if they can still run windows, and play games.

Everyone wants to the flawless and virus/spyware free OSX Operating Sytem but only if they can run it on a PC.

Imagine HP, Dell, and Apple selling thier computers with both OSX and Windows with a dual-boot partition or something functionaly similar.

 

[Evangelion]

- "the thing is fast". All iLife apps are already universal binaries

I wonder how they then explain the benchmarks where they showed PPC to be a lot faster than Pentium? Really, for as long as I can remember, they have told everyone that G3/4/5 annihilates whatever CPU Intel has to offer. And now they are switching to that "inferior" CPU. I wonder how they can explain themselves out of that hole.

Seriously, in the past they COULD claim that PPC is faster. PPC and x86 are quite different from each other, so they could say that "our 2GHz G5 is faster than 3.2Ghz P4!" for example. But how about in the future, when the CPU's are the same? the CPU in the mac will be the exact same as in the Dell for example. How are they going to tell people that "our 4Ghz CPU is faster than Dell's 4Ghz CPU", when the CPU's are identical?

Earlier, they could say that "G5 can have twice as many instructions in flight than P4 can", or "Altivec is better than SSE", or "PPC is more elegant design that x86 is". Now they can't. Whatever magic pixie-dust they had in G5/G4 that made is faster than P4, it's not there anyore. Now we will have real Apples to Apples (pun intended) comparisons. And I wonder what they can do to make Macs faster, since the PC's will have the exact same CPU's and vid-cards.

 

[sw1tcher]

These are NOT stock MB's..I've built a lot of PC's and I've never seen a fan built into the MB..Look at the CPU..there's no heat sink or fan on it.

The thing you're referring to as the CPU with no heat sink is actually the Southbridge. Under the passive heat sink is the Northbridge. And under the large fan is the heat sink and P4 chip.

Don't believe me? Take a look here. And in case you're wondering, this is Intel's new BTX motherboard.

 

[ChoMomma]

As far as integrated graphics on the dev machine.I question this.Look at the pics posted and you will see a PCI card in a PCI slot.That's a graphics card folks.

Actually that is more likely a adapter for the Intel Integrated Graphics. ( I worked @ Intel from '99 - '02 on this very Intel product ) The adapter basically would route the video signal to the "riser" card that has a DVI port on it to allow it to hook up to flat panels. Typically Intel's onboard gfx have a standard VGA port on the motherboard, so to hook up the Apple display required the "riser".

And for all you out there howling about the use of integrated gfx...
<speculation> Apple will more than likely remain true to it's current gfx card suppliers. So we can probably expect to still see Mini's and eMacs with ATI chipsets and iMacs with ATI or Nvidia chipsets soldered down.. same for the Powerbooks and iBooks. Intel's gfx are cheap.. but they use system mem and I don't think Apple wants to use that (except for slapping together dev systems). </speculation>

 

[i_am_a_cow]

I am not so sure you'll see OSX running out of the box on your new DELL....I'd bet you will find that the OS is Bios locked to onlly run on APPLE bios systems....All of the large MS OEM's do this today....

Then flash it.

 

[itsa]

How does iTunes run since it is still carbon?

Well in Steves Keynote it ran great!

 

[itsa]

One thing is for sure.. We dont need that much space for the cooling unit any more.

 

[sokalegga]

Guys relax

First of all let me introduce myself: I am a graphics/web designer from Greece, that works on a PC (yeah I'am on the other side of the fence for now), but would be very eager to switch on the "white side" for good after Steve Job's announcement

Remember: I DEFINITELY don't want to launch a war here!! I am fed up of the Mac vs PC bout quite some time now-and I almost lost a good friend after escalating the...hmmm...attacks to personal level.

I have, however used macs for a looong time during my studying in UK since all the computers were Apple ones-naturally for and Art and Design faculty.

My experience however was not very nice, since their latest "achievement" was buying G4s with 256 megs RAM and OS 9 on 'em. I was using mostly Photoshop 6.0 and Flash MX and the thing was moving on a snail's pace compared to my P4@ 1.8 Ghz and 512MBs (probably lack of RAM?)!! I initally thought that the whole Apple thing was a hoax and I 'd never look on the other side of the fence again.

HOWEVER I checked the same systems with 256+ added and OSX 10.3 back in Greece and they were running extremely better than the crappies I have seen. Everything smooth and crisp-and better than my P4 for shure...So once again, it becomes obvious that the OS makes a huge difference on almost the same system!!

Now, if you don't now it already, you CAN run OSX 10.4 on a PC, using the PearPC emulator. Granted, it runs on 15% (at best) of an original G4, but the reactions of most PC users was "F**k MS!! i am a swtichaaa". Remember Apple has done NOTHING till this day, to stop development of PearPC.

But since Apple is moving to intel architecture, i am pretty sure that the problems facing PearPCs developers will be instanlty eliminated: all the cumbersome processor command translation code will diminish and it will be MUCH faster-but still an emulator.

New Apples will be a lot cheaper than the G series models since it was the mobo-CPU combination that skyrocketed the prices. Every other component was standard (HDD, RAM, DVD etc). And yes you can load a custom Bios picture-or even an animation if you want!!!

So you'll got

-Cheap Apples
-PC geeks running emulated OSX (well they already do...)
-And cumbersome PC users using Xpees..

What happens next? The geeks want the real thing (with XP running natively), Apple sales skyrocket, and Leopard becomes an instant classic-a trend like iPOD. And even more switchers appear.

Microsoft doesn't give a f"rt and they shouldn't because, the ain't gonna loose their Office afficionados. They got Xbox 360 already running with PS3 not officially launched. they 've got Media centers, PocketPCs and Tablets-as well as Longhorn in the way.

You say it "won't run on a stndrd PC". Well I am sure the hardware lock/firmware/keylock will be certainly bypassed and many people will install OSX on their machines. Pirated copies? Sure!! And Jobs WILL allow that...at least for the small fish. Why? Appreciation of the OS!! What about the hardware?

Well, honestly, only crappers would buy a cumbersome DELL tower to install OSX..Remember: Skoda Fabia is almost identical to VW Polo and the same goes with Octavia and VW Passat since VW is producing both cars. Have VW sales dropped a bit? No way!! A VW will always be a VW. Same goes with this case: "hey, you can buy a Mactel from HP, but the real thing is muuch better"

About viruses: ask any Linux/Unix user if they have ANY problem with viruses. Ask any server admin what OS they are using for secure server side apps: UNIX folks, since it is the most secure system today. OSX is using a very much modded OpenDarwin architecture which is in turn, based on UNIX. I don't see any virus problems.

Count me in after a year or so. I say Long live Steve