Pentium M and Yonah Processors in Upcoming Macs?

[Stella]

Actually, I know a lot about computers.. I think you need to re-read my post... when did I EVER suggest Viruses were due to Processors?!!! I didn't... GO BACK AND RE-READ PROPERLY!!!!

You obviously know nothing about processors and computers. Chips don't create viruses, programming in operating systems do.

You should have have known that I wasn't being literal.. it was an extreme example... If microsoft disppeared over night.. intel would be quite screwed ( although they do more processor than just Pcs)

Intel's profit would plummit without microsoft, that was my point.. I didn't MISS the point. I can see little reason why intel would want to 'over throw' microsoft with the help of apple. As long as intel sells processors, they will be happy.

You're missing the point. Microsoft isn't going to disappear tomorrow therefore there is little point in using that in an argument. Sure Intel gets most of its business from Windows PC sales and it is hardly going to that at risk. However just in case that were to change, which is a possibility with the resurgence of the Mac and the advent of Linux, Intel has it's fingers in more than one the pies. They are no longer has directly tied to Microsoft's fortunes as they were which can only be a good thing for Intel.

 

[sehix]

my only worry is that Apple will still cripple bus speeds, ram limits and Vram.

"cripple bus speeds"? Like they currently do with the dual G5 systems? Like they do with the G4 laptops (which run at the highest speed that the G4s used in the laptops are capable of)?

"RAM limits"? What, you can't understand how computer companies meet cost goals? Or are you arguing that it's not possible to add more RAM *if you need it*?

VRAM: See paragraph above.

 

[Mav451]

I disagree with you, I dont think we'll see a Pentium M derrivative in the Powermacs. I think we'll see something that has been developed from the Xeon processor line in the Powermacs. I'm sure I've read about quad cores somewhere.

The fact is the dual G5 Powermac doesnt compete against any P4 configed boxes, they compete against the Xeons and Optrons of this world. When a dual mac comes up against a P4 it kills the thing.

Personally I'm a powerbook user, so I'm all sweaty palmed at the prospect of a dual core Powerbook!! Just hope they dont screw us 12" Powerbook users over and give us some slow stripped down version of hte 15' Powerbook. I'm also hoping that the next 12" Powerbook will be ridiculously thin and weigh next to nothing!

Jay
p.s apologies for poor spelling, just did a clean install and haven't loaded word back onto my PB yet.

What does installing word have to do with your poor spelling? I thought that was innate in Safari/Camino or what have you.

 

[paulypants]

Joke's on you!

You obviously know nothing about processors and computers. Chips don't create viruses, programming in operating systems do. Apple will keep producing high quality machines, they always have, this isn't changing. If anything its making it better. And last, most people do want Apple to have a larger market share. IBM wasn't doing justice for technology advancement.

Obviously YOU know nothing about READING entire posts. Re-read it, maybe you'll get it this time...

 

[pont]

The Alpha may be gone, but some of it lives on in the Itanium (same crew designed both, IIRC).

Intersting fact, the alpha really seemed to undergo a slump after digital went by by

 

[plinden]

A lot of revisionist history and reviewing going on with the Pentium class of chips. It's nothing more than putting lipstick on a pig. Pentium chips still equal crap no matter what kind of spin is put on them. Why do you think they aren't used in workstation mini frame computers? Why do you think Microsoft and Sony dumped Intel for their upcoming game stations?

You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.

Oh great This is my biggest problem with this change. Not only will we have the Windows/Mac OS debate going on, but we'll also have AMD vs Intel fanbois.

Currently the Pentium-M is the best chip for portables. Nothing else comes near. I wouldn't buy an x86 laptop with anything else (although right now, until the x86 Macs are released I wouldn't buy a x86 laptop at all - despite the G4 being slower than the P-Ms I would still buy a Mac laptop if I needed one.)

AMD is still the best for desktops - I wouldn't buy an Intel desktop CPU now. I've been considering building my own desktop to run Linux and I would use an AMD 64 on socket 939, so I could easily swap in an X2 when the price comes down. I'm not so sure now though - I might wait till this time next year to see what Apple and Intel come out with.

 

[MontyZ]

I find it amusing that IBM was the original "enemy" of Apple in the 80s (remember the 1984 commercial) but so many people here talk about IBM with fondness and loving memories, while trashing Intel.

Interesting.

 

[CubaTBird]

It would be great marketing to fanboys but...

It is based not on Intel's P4 but the CISC junkpile called PIII.

Pentium M for dummies

I've run the Pentium M. It's slow, UNRELIABLE, and a piece of junk.

well it says that its based on a low power version of the p4.. so that is not the p3 last time i checked hehe...

 

[B_Gates]

Since this artical has was posted on slashdot yesterday i have seen it mentoned on this fourm ~4 times tis a popular one



and could someone please explain how a MacOSX running on intel will
suddenly dethrown microsoft. Unless apple propose to give you a choice of hardware to run it on (not just apple boxes) it will be pritty much the same as before for maket share.

First anything is possible.
Here is how it could happen but it won't be suddenly, no one ever said that.

1. Anyone thinking about switching will no longer be able to complain about the processor or buss speed being slower. Apple increases market share.

2. Apple's OS runs faster on the Intel processor & does more. Apple increases market share.

3. Price of Apple computers are cheaper due to the lower cost of hardware. Apple increases market share.

4. Apple increases market share so more sw apps are made. Apple increases market share even more.

 

[mienna]

"cripple bus speeds"? Like they currently do with the dual G5 systems? Like they do with the G4 laptops (which run at the highest speed that the G4s used in the laptops are capable of)?

.

I think he was referring to the front-side bus of the G4 laptops, which is still 167 mHz.

 

[~Shard~]

well it says that its based on a low power version of the p4.. so that is not the p3 last time i checked hehe...

I think what he was probably referring to was this quote from his link:

"The Pentium M represents a radical departure for Intel, as it is not a low-power version of the desktop-oriented Pentium 4, but instead a heavily modified version of the Pentium III design.

 

[pont]

First anything is possible.
Here is how it could happen but it won't be suddenly, no one ever said that.

1. Anyone thinking about switching will no longer be able to complain about the processor or buss speed being slower. Apple increases market share.

2. Apple's OS runs faster on the Intel processor & does more. Apple increases market share.

3. Price of Apple computers are cheaper due to the lower cost of hardware. Apple increases market share.

4. Apple increases market share so more sw apps are made. Apple increases market share even more.

Quite possable, but very optermistic

I've run the Pentium M. It's slow, UNRELIABLE, and a piece of junk.

Toms Hardware seems to think differently the Pentium-M and the Pentium 4 EE benchmarked quite close, I think Apple have made the right choice on what intel processor to base the Apple on ( I mean they had to change from IBM because they couldn't produce laptop cpus ) why not go with a chip that has low power consumption yet high power ~

 

[Zigster]

The first thing I thought of when I heard about the switch was that Apple was finally going back after Microsoft.

I look for a 10-15% marketshare for Apple in personal computers by 2009, more if Longhorn floppinskis.

 

[pont]

The first thing I thought of when I heard about the switch was that Apple was finally going back after Microsoft.

I look for a 10-15% marketshare for Apple in personal computers by 2009, more if Longhorn floppinskis.

I personly think that IBM is going to go after microsoft, If this cell processor (yes im talking about it again) is as cheep and powerful as they predict then we are going too see some nice cheep yet exceedingly fast linux workstations start to emerge.

IBM have been investing alot of time in the linux movement and think there about ready to recive rewards for there work.

 

[sehix]

I think he was referring to the front-side bus of the G4 laptops, which is still 167 mHz.

I know he was.

And the FSB speed on the laptops is where it is because Motorola/Freescale never made the G4 that would run with a faster FSB.

It's Moto/Freescale's fault, not Apple's (in this case).

 

[bosrs1]

PC Hackers Porting OSX is my main concern with this move.

I just hope they keep PC hackers under control. This move will definitely make porting OSX over to standard PC gear a bit easier. Last thing Apple needs is their OS being spread around outside their control.

 

[hoppo99]

Intel's profit would plummit without microsoft, that was my point.. I didn't MISS the point. I can see little reason why intel would want to 'over throw' microsoft with the help of apple. As long as intel sells processors, they will be happy.

Your last sentence is the heart of the matter. Microsoft are taking a long time to upgrade Windows: 98, XP and Longhorn are years apart. Without regular updates PCs are able to run the latest version of the OS, in fact a PC bought nearly 3 years ago is still running the latest version of the Windows. People have less incentive to upgrade their hardware if they are still running the latest version of Windows. Hardware upgrades become more infrequent and Intel sells fewer processors. This factor coupled with the fact that Windows is clearly holding back innovation at Intel due to the need to be fully x86 compatible could be part of the reason why Intel has chosen to work with Apple. Intel are not trying to overthrow Microsoft but merely trying to get a broader and more diverse share of the market to prevent them being tied so closely to Windows (as I said in my post you quoted from).

 

[hoppo99]

I look for a 10-15% marketshare for Apple in personal computers by 2009, more if Longhorn floppinskis.

That is pure conjecture. Any facts to base it on?

 

[Mr Maui]

You obviously know nothing about processors and computers. Chips don't create viruses, programming in operating systems do. Apple will keep producing high quality machines, they always have, this isn't changing. If anything its making it better. And last, most people do want Apple to have a larger market share. IBM wasn't doing justice for technology advancement.

Stella was sarcastically mocking other posts, not making the post of their own opinions. Sarcasm was quite obvious. Typical newbie, non-reading poster.

 

[plinden]

Somewhere in reading up to this point I thought I read the Pentium-M design (Wow, that's the first time I've ever had to spell Pentium), and presumably the designs derived from it, like Yonah and Conroe, don't have hyperthreading. I would think hyperthreading would be an advantage for OSX. Am I wrong here?

Hyperthreading really just improves user experience under Windows, not raw processor speed. Windows isn't very good at process control. If a runaway processor is taking up 100% of one of the virtual processors, you can use the other virtual processor to fix things.

I use a Pentium-M laptop and most of the time it's pretty fast, but I've also lost count of the number of times that it's locked up due to some runaway process that takes up 100% CPU:

Ctrl-Alt-Del ... nothing happens ... wait 30 seconds ... still nothing ... Ctrl-Alt-Del ... nothing happens ... wait 30 seconds ... still nothing ... repeat until the Windows Security box appears ... select Task Manager ... watch the empty window until Windows eventually renders the process list ... order processes by CPU usage ... wait until Windows eventually renders the reordered process list ... select the runaway process ... nothing happens ... select it again ... nothing happens ... repeat until it's highlighted ... select End Process ... nothing happens ... select it again ... nothing happens ... repeat until the Task Manager Warning box appears ... but it's just an empty box ... wait until the warning message appears ... select yes to terminate the process ... nothing happens ... eventually another box appears telling you the process is not responding, do you want really want to stop it ... scream "HELL YES" at the computer ... buy a Mac

 

[fastred]

That is pure conjecture. Any facts to base it on?

Just about everything on this forum is conjecture....


J.

 

[B_Gates]

Actually, I know a lot about computers.. I think you need to re-read my post... when did I EVER suggest Viruses were due to Processors?!!! I didn't... GO BACK AND RE-READ PROPERLY!!!!



You should have have known that I wasn't being literal.. it was an extreme example... If microsoft disppeared over night.. intel would be quite screwed ( although they do more processor than just Pcs)

Intel's profit would plummit without microsoft, that was my point.. I didn't MISS the point. I can see little reason why intel would want to 'over throw' microsoft with the help of apple. As long as intel sells processors, they will be happy.

Intel's profit would plummet without Microsoft? So without Microsoft people are just going to stop buying computers? Intel processors are used to run many OS's & soon one more Apple's. A computer sold without Microsoft OS is a computer with another OS which will likely have a Intel processor in it.

I think Intel wants another viable market to sell their processors so there not controlled by Microsoft.

 

[davidchristophe]

It would be great marketing to fanboys but...

It is based not on Intel's P4 but the CISC junkpile called PIII.

Pentium M for dummies

I've run the Pentium M. It's slow, UNRELIABLE, and a piece of junk.

I want to see you figures, Chatin- I want you to show me irrefutable third party verified proof that the PM is unreliable. I want you to show me a benchmark (third party verified also) that says the M is slow, too. Then I want you to give me an exact detailed techincal analysis of why its a "piece of junk".

Will you fanboy idiots please stop bashing something you know nothing about? You don't know what Apple...or Intel... will have out next year?

You're all worse than Amiga users, and you give us MacOS users a bad name.

Cut it out, dammit!

 

[SiliconAddict]

Sure, but he also said the first 3 GHz G5s would ship by June '04....

The diff being Intel has a better rep for actually delivering chips. Hence the reason they left IBM. IBM hasn't been able to deliver a warm cup of urine since the original G5 came out.

 

[Mr Maui]

The diff being Intel has a better rep for actually delivering chips. Hence the reason they left IBM. IBM hasn't been able to deliver a warm cup of urine since the original G5 came out.

Not sure how many people out here would be interested in the "warm cup" thingy, but point well made.