Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

More Details on Apple's Intel Mac

All This A Side...

Hi everyone.

With all this Hoo Ha with MacIntel/Intosh change, does anyone know if the current PPC product line is due apdates BEFORE the release of new architecture?

I'm in need of updating my G4 1GHz P/Book. And all indications from "speculation" are that there will be a LOW end product line release in 2006 and HIGH end release late 2006/early 2007!.

The M.R. buyers guide is indicating a product refresh soon, but with this revalation, will Apple keep it's PRO users happy with newer PPC kit???

Cheers

EDIT:
Product: PowerBook
Last Release: January 31, 2005
Days Since Update: 129 (Average = 185)
Recommendation: Neutral - Mid product cycle.
 
lets hope we don't get the PC typical quality issues in Macs

Not sure if anybody else here hopes that Apple produce their own Motherboards.. I appreciate that it would drive costs down if Apple were to use off-the-shelf boards, but I'm afraid of quality issues. In the last few years for example I have had 3 MSI motherboards give up on me because of some stupid capacitor leak and had enormous problems with some GigaByte board... while my Macs are all running fine. I mean, I can't complain because the boards were all dead cheap and because they were running some less important linux server stuff under my control, but I wouldn't want to have my mother-in-law call me every few days because of spurious problems...

We really don't want to loose Apple quality over this, this is all part of the Mac experience, I think. I mean, other manufacturers like Dell and HP are doing it, lets hope Apple will do it too. I would also hope that Apple won't use a standard Phoenix BIOS, but their own incarnation at least.
 
rashdown_online said:
Hi everyone.

With all this Hoo Ha with MacIntel/Intosh change, does anyone know if the current PPC product line is due apdates BEFORE the release of new architecture?
Click to expand...

I suspect there will be a dual core PPC PowerMac before the Intel PowerMac.
Like the guy on Ars said, the PowerMac will be last to go Intel because they will want a 64-bit x86 for it.
http://arstechnica.com/columns/mac/mac-20050608.ars
 
Forget the fact there will be Intel processors inside Macs.

Mac will still be Macs. High end Macs will probably be called PowerMacs - I doubt whether this will change. There is no reason why Apple should change this.

I don't quite understand why you think "the new machines will no longer have any 'Power' in them". Intel Macs will quickly outperform G5s.. ( with rapid Processor progression ).


jeff3835 said:
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/
Click to expand...
 
Platform said:
Well have they not got an x86 that is 64Bit today, and the current PM and iMac have 64Bit.......Intel = a bit behind some places :eek:
Click to expand...
the intel cpu in the mac dev kit has 64bitness you want but I don't think OSX is gonna really use 64bit that much IIRC. anyways shouldn't matter much seeing the dev people stating that native apps are showing performace better then a 2.7ghz G5 and sometimes a dual config.
 
poundsmack said:
does anyone know when Intel will release "pentium 5" and leave the mess that is the P4?
Click to expand...

C'mon, Pentium 5? Pentium 4? Pentium III, Pentium II....

Intel needs to just move on. Let's hear it for the new Sextium processor. :eek:
 
Prom1 said:
What are the implementations of the Pentium-M based Intel (Yonah?) - essentially a Centrino - with regards to compatibility with AirPort Express/Extreme; because the chipsets either the same or not (Broadcomm) are very proprietory and usually are not compatible even amongst Wireless Routers/Cards with the existing Mac Airport Extreme/Express.
Click to expand...

I've NEVER seen a wireless 802.11b/g card that DIDN'T connect to a wireless network because of an incompatible chipset. I've owned a Centrino notebook and it got along just fine with my networks at home and school.

Prom1 said:
Most importantly how is the technology Spotlight going to be able to work on the Intel based Macs'? Is this partially cpu specific? Is the future of Mac OS X still going to be coded with Objective-C or is every programmer going to have to go back to school, slowing development time?? How will my Mac formatted iPod react with this new Intel cpu based mobo?
Click to expand...

Did you even watch the Keynote?
 
rashdown_online said:
With all this Hoo Ha with MacIntel/Intosh change, does anyone know if the current PPC product line is due apdates BEFORE the release of new architecture?

I'm in need of updating my G4 1GHz P/Book. And all indications from "speculation" are that there will be a LOW end product line release in 2006 and HIGH end release late 2006/early 2007!.
Click to expand...

I'm betting that the first Intel-based Macs will be PowerBooks. In addition to the broken 3GHz promise, Jobs pointed out that Apple hasn't been able to deliver a G5 PowerBook, and that's hurting them. I like my Albook, but it's only good for a couple of hours and it runs hot enough to fry an egg.

I think that Apple also sees a bright future in selling iBooks to school districts because it gets students hooked on Macs. An Intel iBook would compete much more effectively than the current iBooks, especially up against administrators who don't like to Think Different.

As for interim updates: I don't see Apple doing much with the current PowerBook line. What can they accomplish? Another miniscule G4 speedbump? However, I'm sure we'll see at least one or two new G5 PowerMacs before they switch. How Apple will introduce them is another story... maybe "G5 - the Last Generation" or "Get your hands on a collector's item."

Seriously, as I've said before, Apple's going to have to walk a fine line with these machines because they won't be able to credibly compare them with Intels. It'll all be about how much faster they are than the current models and, for switchers, how they run OS X.
 
Speculative Roadmap

Over at Ars there's an interesting article, wherein "Hannibal" sketches a speculative roadmap. It looks like this:

1Q 06-2Q 06 Mac Mini, iBook, and PowerBook
Yonah: A dual-core Pentium M successor; 65nm process; 32-bit; SSE3; improved FPU performance

2Q 06-3Q 06 iMac
Sossaman: A desktop Yonah derivative. This chip will have very low power consumption for a dual-core desktop design.

4Q 06-1Q 07 PowerBook PowerMac
Merom: A dual-core Pentium M (Banias) successor
Conroe: A 64-bit desktop version of Merom (see comments above about Conroe).

3Q or 4Q 07 Xserve
A Xeon based on the same architecture as Merom and Conroe.

The article is here: Hell freezes over; it must've been the liquid cooling: Hannibal on the Apple-to-Intel transition
 
Some conclusions one could draw out of Steve's last move:

1) If Apple decides to sell OS X to everybody this will mean the end of Mac and Apple Hardware, think of it as Transition III: Revenge of the Clones
2) If Apple makes a closed system, there will still be hacks to make OS X run on other systems. Remember how the Playstation, X-Box etc was hacked...
3) 1) & 2) => Mac is dead anyway! sooner or later
4) I will buy one of the last PowerPC PBs and keep it for a looooong time, I hope there will be a last revision based on the Freescale/Motorola 8641 G4

just my 2 cents
 
kingstontown said:
Some conclusions one could draw out of Steve's last move:

1) If Apple decides to sell OS X to everybody this will mean the end of Mac and Apple Hardware, think of it as Transition III: Revenge of the Clones
2) If Apple makes a closed system, there will still be hacks to make OS X run on other systems. Remember how the Playstation, X-Box etc was hacked...
3) 1) & 2) => Mac is dead anyway! sooner or later
4) I will buy one of the last PowerPC PBs and keep it for a looooong time, I hope there will be a last revision based on the Freescale/Motorola 8641 G4

just my 2 cents
Click to expand...

Thats funny cause the powerbooks are like the worst value in the laptop market and to my opinion the worst product apple has.
2000$ for a 15 inches heavy but not really powerful on a crippled bus laptop.
Seriously, what is it with you guys and your unconditionnal love for a processor you probably dont comprehend anyway.
 
Platform said:
Well have they not got an x86 that is 64Bit today
Click to expand...

Yes they do. AMD has Athlon64 and Opteron (which were released before G5 BTW). Intel has Xeon, P4 and P4 EE that all are 64bits
 
coyoteshawn said:
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.).
Click to expand...

I agree with u. i thought that too.
 
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.).
Click to expand...

What development? Once you release a console, the cpu stays the same for the 6 years to follow, not much development there.
 
paulypants said:
I doubt anything except maybe the mac mini would use integrated graphics...
Click to expand...

They'll all be using integrated graphics chips for all i care. I can put in the best card i can afford and use the integrated one for the second monitor. The price go's down and we have the option the choose whatever GPU we like at the best price. i Like it a lot, in 2 years from now those integrated chips/motherboards going to evolve too so its not that bad. Learn to live with it, we ore going to have more options than ever before. :D
 
sparksinspace said:
Not sure if anybody else here hopes that Apple produce their own Motherboards.. I appreciate that it would drive costs down if Apple were to use off-the-shelf boards, but I'm afraid of quality issues. In the last few years for example I have had 3 MSI motherboards give up on me because of some stupid capacitor leak and had enormous problems with some GigaByte board... while my Macs are all running fine. I mean, I can't complain because the boards were all dead cheap and because they were running some less important linux server stuff under my control, but I wouldn't want to have my mother-in-law call me every few days because of spurious problems...

We really don't want to loose Apple quality over this, this is all part of the Mac experience, I think. I mean, other manufacturers like Dell and HP are doing it, lets hope Apple will do it too. I would also hope that Apple won't use a standard Phoenix BIOS, but their own incarnation at least.
Click to expand...

What makes you think HP, Dell and others use custom mobos? I have a compaq machine right here, and the motherboard is from ASUS. It even has "ASUS" printed on it. It's clearly an off the shelf part.

There's nothing wrong with that.

When I boot up this machine (ok, not the same as a mac) I get a nice compaq logo hiding all the crappy bios stuff. There's no reason for Apple to not use an "off the shelf" intel board.

What I will predict is that the production macs don't use a 'classic' bios, but instead use EFI (Extensible Firmware Interface)

I've personally built every PC in my familiy since 1989 save 1. I think that works out to something like 20 or 30 systems. I've only **ever** had 1 motherboard fail- and that was after a lightningstorm. I replaced it (first time ever) with a Compaq system, which "just worked" out of the box like a Mac would.
 
Evangelion said:
Yes they do. AMD has Athlon64 and Opteron (which were released before G5 BTW). Intel has Xeon, P4 and P4 EE that all are 64bits
Click to expand...

Intel's Xeon, P4 and P4EE are 32bit cpus. The 64 bit parts come out Q1 06.
 
Does this mean....

So does this mean there will be no dual processors in the foreseeable future? (As Pentium 4 does not support dual). Does it support Intel in general? As in Xeon, perhaps?


-Sam
 
Xeon or not Xeon, THAT is the question

Quixcube said:
Do you think they will go Xeon?
Click to expand...

Two things to think about. Xeons are used in multi-CPU scenarios (I seem to recall the stepping factor is different or something to that effect which makes them better suited for multi-cpu boards... anyway)... The current G5s and XServes are dual CPU. If you had a dual-core Intel Pentium, you wouldn't need two CPUs in a G5 or XServe... BUT if Apple really wanted to push some hardware to their limits, they could do two dual-core Xeons and get the effective power of roughly 4 CPUs. All in the same-sized container... Not too bad.
 
Custom IC's? So what.

w_parietti22 said:
Have any of you seen this artice: http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1120

It saying that OS X will require a special chip (created by apple) to boot. Therefore PCs will not be able to boot OS X.
Click to expand...

Welcome to the wonderful world of hacking. Someone will be writing an patch and a s/w emulator to make OS Xi think its on Mac hardware and it isn't. AND the reality is that it won't be super slow, because all you have to emulate is a few small chips, NOT the processor.

It is inevitable. I'm not saying I'd do it, but its inevitable.

Besides, I really don't see this as being a BAD thing. If the hackers get OS X working on their PC's, I would think eventually they would get tired of having to constantly re-patch the OS and Apple upgrades and closes loopholes. EVENTUALLY, you'd probably turn a lot of these guys into Mac users anyway.

Think of the OS as the NEW "Halo Effect".
 
Integrated graphics.

The reason to use integrated graphics in this developement platform seems pretty obvious to me.

1. Apple makes no graphics drivers or cards.
2. Intel does. But they only do integrated graphics.
3. Jobs didn't want too many manufacturers "in the loop" too early.

I'd guess iBook and Mac mini (or whatever low end systems Apple ships this time next year)
might use integrated graphics. High end no way, but adequate. Even enough to play games
at crappy resolutions and low quality.
 
does anyone else see a style change when the intel macs start shipping?! the powermac box is HUGE for the intel motherboard!!! its a waste of space! maybe they will have a PM looking mini tower, but because there are less cooling needs there certainly doesnt need to be as large of a tower anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back