Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Really switching to Intel!!??
- Thread starter dodonutter
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
i just got sick to my stomach. literally.
this would mean certain death of apple's notoriety. and its not just about CPU registers either.
that means they are so desperate to push out their little mac minis that they are sacrificing the G5 and what makes the powerpc great for the age-old x86, which is only retrofitted for x86-64.
i really hope that the intel rumors are for XScale processors in a video ipod and not desktop processors for a mac.
this would mean certain death of apple's notoriety. and its not just about CPU registers either.
that means they are so desperate to push out their little mac minis that they are sacrificing the G5 and what makes the powerpc great for the age-old x86, which is only retrofitted for x86-64.
i really hope that the intel rumors are for XScale processors in a video ipod and not desktop processors for a mac.
i wonder - every time apple switched to a new chip, they redesigned the look of their computers. does this mean a fairly decent look for the ugly powermac industrial machine?
Intel G5 =! Pentium 4
Apple can still claim that the G5 is faster then the Pentium 4, even if the G5 becomes a glorified P4. Apple doesn't have to mention that it might be the same exact processor an could easily tweak everything to get the same performance differences. The fact that the G5 is a PPC 970 is only mentioned to professionals and in passing everywhere else - and a marketed name can be applied to anything.
VanNess said:
Apple can still claim that the G5 is faster then the Pentium 4, even if the G5 becomes a glorified P4. Apple doesn't have to mention that it might be the same exact processor an could easily tweak everything to get the same performance differences. The fact that the G5 is a PPC 970 is only mentioned to professionals and in passing everywhere else - and a marketed name can be applied to anything.
big-a$$ negative
At least the dual 2.7's will be enough for most of us to cling to in the coming years. We'll stay put at OS10.4.9. Consider how many are still happy with OS 9.
At least the dual 2.7's will be enough for most of us to cling to in the coming years. We'll stay put at OS10.4.9. Consider how many are still happy with OS 9.
If it's true...
Will Apple retain its tight control over Macintosh hardware, or will that make more likely the possibility that Apple would sell you Mac OS for a box manufactured to Apple's specifications but sold by another company, not an Apple retailer?
How will the stock market (and the perceived fortunes of IBM, Intel, Apple, even AMD) react to this story?
Since Apple wouldn't want to dry up current sales with an announcement that they are abandoning their long-time processor, would they plan to sell for both platforms for the foreseeable future and convince buyers that PPC Macs are still a worthy investment and not lame ducks?
or
Since Apple wouldn't want to dry up current sales with an announcement that they are abandoning their long-time processor, would they announce that Intel Macs are already ready for the market, which means they are near the end (not at the beginning) of a secret porting project for Mac OS, Apple applications, and maybe their biggest software vendors?
If it's false...
Will this rank with the worst mistakes by CNET?
Will Apple retain its tight control over Macintosh hardware, or will that make more likely the possibility that Apple would sell you Mac OS for a box manufactured to Apple's specifications but sold by another company, not an Apple retailer?
How will the stock market (and the perceived fortunes of IBM, Intel, Apple, even AMD) react to this story?
Since Apple wouldn't want to dry up current sales with an announcement that they are abandoning their long-time processor, would they plan to sell for both platforms for the foreseeable future and convince buyers that PPC Macs are still a worthy investment and not lame ducks?
or
Since Apple wouldn't want to dry up current sales with an announcement that they are abandoning their long-time processor, would they announce that Intel Macs are already ready for the market, which means they are near the end (not at the beginning) of a secret porting project for Mac OS, Apple applications, and maybe their biggest software vendors?
If it's false...
Will this rank with the worst mistakes by CNET?
If apple change to X86, then I'm going to be really pissed, I just ordered a iMac!
If its just a move to another producer of PPC chips, then meh, doesnt mean anything.
If its just a move to another producer of PPC chips, then meh, doesnt mean anything.
Is Intel even liscensed to make PPC chips? I don't know how that works....
I thought he AIM group is only allowed to manufacture them... Apple, IBM , Motorola... in which case could Apple pass on it's rights to Intel to manufacture said chips?
Hrmm..
I thought he AIM group is only allowed to manufacture them... Apple, IBM , Motorola... in which case could Apple pass on it's rights to Intel to manufacture said chips?
Hrmm..
Dunno if this has been posted, I'm not really keeping up with this thread very well, but I just got another email from C|Net saying they've updated the article. I can't notice any difference yet.
I am a god! I told THE G5 IS A BIG SCAM!!!
THE CORE audio and video is a technology used by PC ages ago and it was the last resource of Apple to try to SIMULATE speed enhancement in the G5!!!!
The G5 is not more than an overclocked G4, that is why I returned mine BECAUSE IT WAS OVERRATED!
THE CORE audio and video is a technology used by PC ages ago and it was the last resource of Apple to try to SIMULATE speed enhancement in the G5!!!!
The G5 is not more than an overclocked G4, that is why I returned mine BECAUSE IT WAS OVERRATED!
gate said:
Don't know if Apple's marketshare can survive another G4 type fiasco either, but it looks like we're headed that way. Apple is between a rock and a hard place. They have to choose between risking another transition or risking their processor supply drying up.
MacTruck said:
MacTruck
I cannot believe that IBM is dumb enough to let itself get screwed over <b>again</b> by Microsoft...
...If they are, then there is no future with IBM, for anyone!
swingerofbirch said:
I agree, I have a g4 cube, and for what i use it for, Its still very fast with tiger in it, I have a cust that has a old g3, 350 beige powermac, and to my suprise, with panther in it, it pretty snappy at the internet and basic stuff... that just shows that appl ecan make not only the hardware work, but the software work well at 6 years old.
This is probably the most likely scenario.
This dovetails neatly with all the rumors floating around about an Apple Media Hub device running some sort of embedded OS, but also able to run a graphically rich UI and even Dashboard widgets. Intel make all sorts of processors for the set-top, embedded and wireless markets, so this makes a lot of sense.
It is the one missing piece of the puzzle for Apple. This will be a computer appliance for non-computer users, people who want an iTunes / AirTunes jukebox, a TiVO, a wireless access gateway/firewall, maybe even a wireless IP telephony application (iphone?).
It also opens the doors for new significant markets - one, doing an end-run around Microsoft's IPTV initiative, as an end-user terminal for streaming HD programming either as an "IP cable box", downloadable free programs like "HD podcasts," and purchased / rented movies via an Apple Movie Store.
The tablet could also dovetail with it - maybe acting as a rich-media remote control for the Media Hub, maybe as a video iPod in-home (screen to stream content to from the Hub) as a wireless client device with an embedded browser (a kind of Knowledge Navigator) and access to email, contacts, etc. via .Mac; maybe via Remote Desktop screen-sharing it could be a remote screen for a desktop Mac as well.
I really don't think Apple would put Pentiums in their desktops - even if it is technically possible. One, the PR blowback would be crippling: it belies the message of PPC superiority they've sent out over a good decade of marketing. Two, for technically unsavvy purchasers, it makes the choice even more confusing than trying to explain the differences between windows and mac, powerpc and x86.
Overall It doesn't provide anyone with a compelling reason to switch, other than the OS and user experience, even on a 'closed' box.
They won't release OS X for generic PCs either, because the support issues would be a nightmare (potentially infinite number of system configurations, manufacturers, chipsets, bios versions), and it would kill their hardware business. Apple is not Microsoft; their money is in making Macs - OS X and the iApps are the bait to get us to buy them. Nobody buys a new PC to get Windows, I imagine...
hernick said:
This dovetails neatly with all the rumors floating around about an Apple Media Hub device running some sort of embedded OS, but also able to run a graphically rich UI and even Dashboard widgets. Intel make all sorts of processors for the set-top, embedded and wireless markets, so this makes a lot of sense.
It is the one missing piece of the puzzle for Apple. This will be a computer appliance for non-computer users, people who want an iTunes / AirTunes jukebox, a TiVO, a wireless access gateway/firewall, maybe even a wireless IP telephony application (iphone?).
It also opens the doors for new significant markets - one, doing an end-run around Microsoft's IPTV initiative, as an end-user terminal for streaming HD programming either as an "IP cable box", downloadable free programs like "HD podcasts," and purchased / rented movies via an Apple Movie Store.
The tablet could also dovetail with it - maybe acting as a rich-media remote control for the Media Hub, maybe as a video iPod in-home (screen to stream content to from the Hub) as a wireless client device with an embedded browser (a kind of Knowledge Navigator) and access to email, contacts, etc. via .Mac; maybe via Remote Desktop screen-sharing it could be a remote screen for a desktop Mac as well.
I really don't think Apple would put Pentiums in their desktops - even if it is technically possible. One, the PR blowback would be crippling: it belies the message of PPC superiority they've sent out over a good decade of marketing. Two, for technically unsavvy purchasers, it makes the choice even more confusing than trying to explain the differences between windows and mac, powerpc and x86.
Overall It doesn't provide anyone with a compelling reason to switch, other than the OS and user experience, even on a 'closed' box.
They won't release OS X for generic PCs either, because the support issues would be a nightmare (potentially infinite number of system configurations, manufacturers, chipsets, bios versions), and it would kill their hardware business. Apple is not Microsoft; their money is in making Macs - OS X and the iApps are the bait to get us to buy them. Nobody buys a new PC to get Windows, I imagine...
dicklacara said:
dicklacara,
You are absolutely right. IBM is a Dinosour and is going to go out of business slowly but surely just like the bloated AT&T which is already on its way out. IBM and AT&T are both dead. Oh well. Out with the old, in with the new.
