More Details on Apple's Intel Mac

[hanxu]

Listen ppl, listen.... it's only a very early development kit, it does not mean the final product will be exactly the same, ye, open firmware is out, then it doesn't mean bios is in, maybe just a temperary solution.

Also, that article explained everything about the benchmark post earlier, it emulate as a g3 (u can't compare a g3 to g5)

 

[paulypants]

Keep in mind that the developer Intel PMac is for nothing more than developers to test their binaries. These obviously won't ship and I doubt that Apple will ship just another PC. They have a year from now to get their own board in their machines so Joe Schmoe can't install OS X on his Dull. Also I doubt anything except maybe the mac mini would use integrated graphics...

 

[barneygumble]

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!!

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

 

[apple_intel]

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....

Yes, and couldn't Apple make a custom motherboard? ... and wouldn't that make it even more difficult to install OSX on another PC system?

 

[virus1]

It's a PC. Not very "Mac"-ish perhaps except the box.
More importantly, OS X will easily run on other PCs. (same chipset)

arn

oh, damn.. you are right.. that flopped my opinion on it. i honestly don't care if ibm is a little slower. now that i think about it, now there will be more viruses, more complaints, and now apple is turning into m$.. apple is going to like the marketshare, and they will want to keep it. now i know why igary was depressed, and im joining him.. well off to sulk..

 

[zenism]

These may be the Intel chips that Apple is really after...

I could be wrong, of course, but the timelines in the articles kind of
support Apple's "low end Macs in '06, the high end Macs by 2007"
intel chip timeline. Recommend interested folks check out the article
links or google "Conroe", "Merom", or "Woodcrest" with the word "intel"
placed before each chip's name.

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

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-5697088.html

http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-5181256.html

http://www.endian.net/details.asp?ItemNo=3883

Have a good one...

Zen

 

[chibianh]

oh, damn.. you are right.. that flopped my opinion on it. i honestly don't care if ibm is a little slower. now that i think about it, now there will be more viruses, more complaints, and now apple is turning into m$.. apple is going to like the marketshare, and they will want to keep it. now i know why igary was depressed, and im joining him.. well off to sulk..

Your opinions seems to change rather quickly and easily. How about I sway them again. THESE ARE DEV BOXES and serve nothing more than testing code. In 1-2 years time, if Apple ships anything like this, then you can be depressed.

 

[stcanard]

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!!

We're talking about DEVELOPER PORTING KITS. (yes, I did mean to shout, I'm getting very #$(*&(@#*$& frustrated whith this).

This is not an Intel Mac anymore than the G5 systems Microsoft shipped to their developers was an XBox 2.

So stop spreading FUD and wait until we get some details on what they are actually building.

 

[tdar]

Yeah, but they still may put intergrated graphics in iMacs, eMacs, and Mac Minis. I don't want to have to buy a graphics card for a brand new computer.

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....

 

[iMeowbot]

What's the difference between Open Firmware and BIOS?

In real life? Nothing, they are simply different names for the same thing. It's software in ROM that helps the operating system to identify and configure the hardware. Who cares what it's called?

Open Firmware isn't really a special Mac thing, it's also found in Sun, IBM and HP (by way of DEC) computers. So, Apple haven't really been doing anything unique in firmware architecture anyway. It's what the code does that matters.

 

[stcanard]

now there will be more viruses

Please tell me. How is OSX on intel more prone to viruses than OSX on PPC?

I'd love to figure out the reasoning here.

 

[Superdrive]

pfft.. cmon! If you watched the Keynote, you couldn't even TELL steve wasn't using a G5 until he actually told everyone. Just because it's a different processor doesn't mean it still won't be a Mac. give me a break.

That is because the computer was tucked away where you couldn't see it. Besides, one normally expects an ACD to normally be hooked into a nice Mac.

From what it sounds like, it is going to startup like a PC (beep beep) and only have a Mac shell on the same old x86 box.

 

[sushi]

- No Open Firmware. Uses Phoenix BIOS.

After reading the article, my bet is that Apple will put their own Open Firmware chip in place of the Phoenix BIOS, used in the developer machines, on the final Mactel products.

This way they will be able to limit Mactel products being able to run Mac OS X while at the same time, being able to boot into Windows.

Additionally, the OF will allow for a more Mac experience.

Sushi

 

[chibianh]

We're talking about DEVELOPER PORTING KITS. (yes, I did mean to shout, I'm getting very #$(*&(@#*$& frustrated whith this).

This is not an Intel Mac anymore than the G5 systems Microsoft shipped to their developers was an XBox 2.

So stop spreading FUD and wait until we get some details on what they are actually building.

^^^ Totally... I pray that all these people will ditch the Mac and run to their Windows savior.

 

[ajkst1]

I would think developers would be happy to see the Apple/Intel team-up. The developers that have PPC binaries will continue to support the PPC chipset (people are still buying Macs) and will probably gradually begin to support the Intel chipsets. Two of the major obstacles (one at least) stopping a lot of people from buying could possibly be solved. With the x86 architecture on the bottom, Windows can be installed on the system, allowing for full speed gaming. There were a lot of Mac users who still kept a PC for gaming. This could be a big selling point. Also, because Intel doesn't have supply problems (13 fabs vs. AMD's 1 [soon to be 2]) this will drive costs down. It won't be huge. You won't see a system that was previously $3000 now selling for $2000. But you will probably see systems costing $3000 selling for $200-$300 cheaper.

This benefits Intel because it gives them another market that they previously didn't have. IBM got sweethearted by the gaming consoles, and Intel swept in and made the deal. It probably won't be a big deal for IBM, seeing as Apple was and still is a teeny tiny slice of the pie for them.

Apple wouldn't have done this unless it was a sensible and cost-effective business opportunity. They are a company and have shareholders to make happy. They do things for the bottom line. Yes, they are innovative, but at the same time they have to turn a profit. They would not do something out of pride and hurt their bottom line. It's just plain stupid to do so. It will be interesting to see how this plays out over the next 2 years.

 

[Maxiseller]

Why all this talk of integrated graphics?

One of the main selling points for Apple computers (all in one's at least) is that they come with what you need - i.e. Standalone graphics. You can't upgrade them, and they're not user servicable- thats really the simplicity that Apple stands for in terms of their consumer user base.

Just because they're adding an Intel chip instead, it doesn't mean all emacs will suddenly come with PCI slots for you to "upgrade" the graphics card, it just means that instead of reading "1.42Ghz Power PC G4" it will read "3.2Ghz Pentium D" or somthing to that effect.

Thats it.

Look at Steve's mac at the WWDC - we didn't even know that it was running a P4 processor. We wern't all watching and thinking "ooooo thats not a Mac, its a damn PC"

 

[tdar]

So long to the nice Macintosh startup with a chime, white screen, and Apple logo in the middle. After working on PCs, a BIOS just gives me a disconcerting feeling. Perhaps Apple just wanted something fast to throw out the door to developers and OF will come later. Perhaps we will be like Sony and just have a fancy box.

I'm ready to buy the first Mobile Mactel, but right now this just brings up all the bad connotations that make me think of a PC.

Apple can make these systems start up just like a Mac does today....don't worry they will have custom Bios just like Dell's do.....

 

[animefan_1]

THIS IS THE DEV KIT, NOT A SHPPING UNIT!!

For everyone complaining, calm down. This is a developer kit. The point for this system is for developers to be able to port their apps. This is NOT a system for consumers!

This is a $999 computer - Apple is going to do their best in order to keep costs as low as possible. When Apple actually ships the REAL Intel-based Macs, they will be designed from the ground up - like the Macs of today are.

Integrated graphics - It's CHEAP to use (that's the point)

No snazzy new case - It's CHEAP to use what you've got, rather than redesign a new case for a VERY limited production run and a small number of customers.

No Open Firmware - See above note; This is temporary.

I guess there is a reason that Apple doesn't want this stuff leaked: everyone panics as if this were a product for mass sale.
Calm down. When Apple releases their REAL products, I expect them to be as elegant and well designed (or better) as they are now.

Final note: This is NOT a shipping product!!

 

[virus1]

Your opinions seems to change rather quickly and easily. How about I sway them again. THESE ARE DEV BOXES and serve nothing more than testing code. In 1-2 years time, if Apple ships anything like this, then you can be depressed.

they already spent an hour long keynote bragging about how they will do it.. i don't think they will change thier mind that fast. what is to stop pc people from installing leopard on thier machines? i may as well go out and buy a nice alienware with leopard..

 

[wildworldofspor]

pc bios

that would suck bigtime

 

[MacFan25863]

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....

What about shared ram then.....OS X uses enough ram as is...

 

[Superdrive]

Your opinions seems to change rather quickly and easily. How about I sway them again. THESE ARE DEV BOXES and serve nothing more than testing code. In 1-2 years time, if Apple ships anything like this, then you can be depressed.

Spot on. For now, you can just be apprehensive.

 

[swansonma]

Assimilation indeed...

What concerns me (and call me a conspiracy theorist if you must) is that, if Apple starts putting the same CPU in Mac's that PC's are using, then the distinction which makes Apple what it is today, will be forever blurred into nothingness; and, pretty soon we'll all just be running crappy ass PC boxes and have an option to use OS X on it if we wish, (and maybe even a cool little metal sticker with ‘made for OS X’ on it instead of the MS one)… Granted, that would make my old PC a lot more appealing, however, I'm scared (yes scared of change) that this will give more incentive to spy-ware, virus, and hacker types to create the same problem for OS X that Windows has... could be just paranoid, but I wonder if the people at Apple haven’t lost their collective minds in this decision... Guess I'll just have to wait and see though eh?

"We are Intel: deactivate your operating system and prepare to be assimilated. Your technological and aesthetic Mac distinctiveness will be merged into our own. Resistance is futile."

 

[Object-X]

buh by Microsoft!

um...
Disadvantages

It's a PC. Not very "Mac"-ish perhaps except the box.
More importantly, OS X will easily run on other PCs. (same chipset)

arn

Of course it will. And Balmer askes what has changed? Your company's market share for starters!!!!! Hahaha...

 

[chibianh]

That is because the computer was tucked away where you couldn't see it. Besides, one normally expects an ACD to normally be hooked into a nice Mac.

From what it sounds like, it is going to startup like a PC (beep beep) and only have a Mac shell on the same old x86 box.

That's my point... it was a rebuttal a post claiming Macs won't be Mac like anymore.