sord said:
There are no guarantees when it comes to the stock market, let that be the first lesson you learn.
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
There are no guarantees when it comes to the stock market, let that be the first lesson you learn.
Who was it that said:
"No MBA in the world can convince us to port System 7 to Intel hardware"?
Give up?
Apple. It wasn't that it was hard to do. The Finder and QuickTime were running on 486s in under a year. But it was because it was screw Apple over financially. That's why the 'Star Trek' project was killed-- even though it could be done, it would be like suicide.
(I think I got the quote right, couldn't find it exactly in my Apple Confidential book)
(Yes, I am a geek)
"No MBA in the world can convince us to port System 7 to Intel hardware"?
Give up?
Apple. It wasn't that it was hard to do. The Finder and QuickTime were running on 486s in under a year. But it was because it was screw Apple over financially. That's why the 'Star Trek' project was killed-- even though it could be done, it would be like suicide.
(I think I got the quote right, couldn't find it exactly in my Apple Confidential book
)(Yes, I am a geek)
This weekend is a great time to buy that mac you always wanted on ebay. Nobody is going to bid on any macs until monday. Deals to be had... muwaahaha.
Gherkin said:
Actually, not many people here have necessarily made that assumption, and are fully aware that is not the case. Don't over-generalize and call people thick-headed, it's not nice, nor it is called for.
OS X on Dell? Ha!
Why do people think they'll be able to pop in OS X on their Dells? OS X will never run on anything but Apple-branded hardware. As I see it, all Macs have Open Firmware instead of the BIOS... looks like you'll need Apple's version of Open firmware (or whatever it's called) to boot into OS X. Even if Dell (or HP, or whatever) moves away from using BIOS, you still need Apple's open firmware and other proprietary hardware to run OS X.
Apple's not giving up on their hardware. Quit your orgasms, because I'll say again: OS X will only run on Apple-branded hardware.
Sheesh.
Why do people think they'll be able to pop in OS X on their Dells? OS X will never run on anything but Apple-branded hardware. As I see it, all Macs have Open Firmware instead of the BIOS... looks like you'll need Apple's version of Open firmware (or whatever it's called) to boot into OS X. Even if Dell (or HP, or whatever) moves away from using BIOS, you still need Apple's open firmware and other proprietary hardware to run OS X.
Apple's not giving up on their hardware. Quit your orgasms, because I'll say again: OS X will only run on Apple-branded hardware.
Sheesh.
Lazy said:
News to me. When did Apple say that?
Because your customer won't buy it. Doesn't matter how good it is, if nobody will buy it, it won't sell. So Intel may just make PowerPC chips because they can make this off of it: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ (that's a crapload of money)Lazy said:
Lazy said:
Never again will Apple allow clones to be made of the Macintosh. Apple spends a billion dollars of R&D, the clone companies spend 0. Apple then has to make up that money in their selling the computer, the clone companies don't.
MOVE ALONG. NOTHING TO SEE HERE.
My god I don't know how many more times we'll have to debunk this rumor before it will die.
Does anyone have a count on the number of times Cnet has been flat out wrong about Mac topics? It's got to be about as high as The Register.
I actually think this article was used to flesh out the people leaking information. It has the double effect of making them look very stupid.
I don't have a problem with Apple using, say, AMD chips. But I would *love* to see the train wreck of a PR move this will be if it's true. But, it's not.
My god I don't know how many more times we'll have to debunk this rumor before it will die.
Does anyone have a count on the number of times Cnet has been flat out wrong about Mac topics? It's got to be about as high as The Register.
I actually think this article was used to flesh out the people leaking information. It has the double effect of making them look very stupid.
I don't have a problem with Apple using, say, AMD chips. But I would *love* to see the train wreck of a PR move this will be if it's true. But, it's not.
MacTruck said:
Wrong. IBM will be sitting pretty making CPUs for over 150 million video game consoles. They've got a lot going for them right now.
a.) Why would Apple switch now, when IBM is manufacturing Power PCs for all of the next generation of gaming consoles. Finally - the quantity they'd be making could cause the price to drop.
b.) Someone said IBM is dead...um duh, clearly not (see above)
c.) With cell processors right around the corner - why wouldn't Apple be gearing up to use a variant of those - which are Power PC based?
d.) Doesn't it kind of seem like a generally dull and not very forward-looking decision? Not exactly trademark Apple thinking (well, except for that whole not-licensing-the-OS thing.) Sure, there would be GHz speedbumps now (in numbers at least) but I haven't heard about anything exciting coming out of the Intel camp any time soon.
5.) Wouldn't they want to stick with a 64bit chip? And isn't Intel's 64bit chip pretty widely panned (Itanium is it called?)
I think the person (sorry I didn't quote you) who said that it might be for a computer device - rather than a traditional computer is probably right on the money (if this turns out to be more than a rumor gone wild.) If they are building a device - a connector - for all of people's media (music, movies, photos, TV) and they want to make it immediately available for both Windows and Mac -- would it help integration if it was Intel based? It would certainly make it cheaper. And if it is portable - like that tablet we saw - then they might have a broader range of fast portable chips to choose from.
Wouldn't that be nice - a portable tablet that allows you to surf the web, stream movies, program music to play, share photos, record TV all from the ease of a handheld tablet with a flawless visual interface that allows you to do everything without leaving your couch. Sort of the remote of the future. Maybe it would be accompanied by a small mac-mini like box that sits by your TV with a hard drive and DVD player /recorder in it. The two could work together seamlessly, bringing Apple further into the realm of entertainment device manufacturer -- before the iPods glory fades.
b.) Someone said IBM is dead...um duh, clearly not (see above)
c.) With cell processors right around the corner - why wouldn't Apple be gearing up to use a variant of those - which are Power PC based?
d.) Doesn't it kind of seem like a generally dull and not very forward-looking decision? Not exactly trademark Apple thinking (well, except for that whole not-licensing-the-OS thing.) Sure, there would be GHz speedbumps now (in numbers at least) but I haven't heard about anything exciting coming out of the Intel camp any time soon.
5.) Wouldn't they want to stick with a 64bit chip? And isn't Intel's 64bit chip pretty widely panned (Itanium is it called?)
I think the person (sorry I didn't quote you) who said that it might be for a computer device - rather than a traditional computer is probably right on the money (if this turns out to be more than a rumor gone wild.) If they are building a device - a connector - for all of people's media (music, movies, photos, TV) and they want to make it immediately available for both Windows and Mac -- would it help integration if it was Intel based? It would certainly make it cheaper. And if it is portable - like that tablet we saw - then they might have a broader range of fast portable chips to choose from.
Wouldn't that be nice - a portable tablet that allows you to surf the web, stream movies, program music to play, share photos, record TV all from the ease of a handheld tablet with a flawless visual interface that allows you to do everything without leaving your couch. Sort of the remote of the future. Maybe it would be accompanied by a small mac-mini like box that sits by your TV with a hard drive and DVD player /recorder in it. The two could work together seamlessly, bringing Apple further into the realm of entertainment device manufacturer -- before the iPods glory fades.
Duff-Man says...I think Steve has pretty much acknowleged the fact that they have OS X running on Intel hardware in their labs - it is pretty much common knowledge and if I find the link I will post it. Of course that does not mean it runs on *any* Intel hardware...oh yeah!Mechcozmo said:
Maybe Steve himself leaked this one out to get every mac rumor site watcher into a great big huff over the weekend by causing a distraction and to send the dogs on the trail of what he REALLY has going on to be kicked off the scent. Just another option to consider.runninmac said:
Hell Has Frozen Over
Apple Switches to Intel ..another Sign of the Apocalypse. Muwahhahahahahah the x86 guys win .......Death to IBM. Death to the PPC. Long Live Apple + Intel.
PowerBook M coming ...Fall 2006
Dual Core 2ghz P-M , DDR2-667 , 667 FSB, 100GB HD , 7hrs battery life.
Take That IBM...Muwahhhahahahah
HECTOR ...Where are You.
Apple Switches to Intel ..another Sign of the Apocalypse. Muwahhahahahahah the x86 guys win
.......Death to IBM. Death to the PPC. Long Live Apple + Intel. PowerBook M coming ...Fall 2006
Dual Core 2ghz P-M , DDR2-667 , 667 FSB, 100GB HD , 7hrs battery life.
Take That IBM...Muwahhhahahahah
HECTOR ...Where are You.
Duff-Man says... 1) statement made no doubt on promises made by IBM 2) an option that was done during the Steve-less years and rightly killed by him upon his return - it saved the company from bankruptcy 3) perhaps a valid point here but at the time it was a matter of potting the $$ into the core business in order to survive...oh yeah!guez said:
CNET is like FOX news where Mac is concerned.
Take anything they say with a grain of salt. They have predicted the demise of apple and the iPod so many times it is hard to count.
Not only that, all this is totally illogical. Microsoft is using a PPC very similiar to the G5 in their XBOX 360 (sans altivec) though it is a tri-core and set up differently, but still similiar enough that is expanding IBM's Power PC marker, and it also makes it seem very likely that Apple will have Dual Core 3.2 Chips at around the same time. And Microsoft obviosly doesn't have these chips as all the playable XBOX 360's at E3 were Alpha Development Units, meaning they were running on Macintosh G5's running a custom windows OS. Nintendo is also using a Power PC, and the CELL is a variant (though a complicated one, and one that has not proven it is as powerful as all the claims).
Take anything they say with a grain of salt. They have predicted the demise of apple and the iPod so many times it is hard to count.
Not only that, all this is totally illogical. Microsoft is using a PPC very similiar to the G5 in their XBOX 360 (sans altivec) though it is a tri-core and set up differently, but still similiar enough that is expanding IBM's Power PC marker, and it also makes it seem very likely that Apple will have Dual Core 3.2 Chips at around the same time. And Microsoft obviosly doesn't have these chips as all the playable XBOX 360's at E3 were Alpha Development Units, meaning they were running on Macintosh G5's running a custom windows OS. Nintendo is also using a Power PC, and the CELL is a variant (though a complicated one, and one that has not proven it is as powerful as all the claims).
OK the more I think about this the more I'm wondering if Longhorn precipitated this move. Apple is smelling blood in the water with the constant delay in Longhorn. Even if it DOES ship fall of 06 its hardly going to be polished. This is the perfect time for a transition. Move your pieces around the board while your competition is weakened. While both of you may be in a somewhat weakened position when its all said and done Apple may be more stabilized then Microsoft. Not only that but they will be in a better position platform wise to directly take on MS depending on if they want to go that route. This is obviously pure, unfiltered speculation since there are 10,000 other things that could kill such reasoning but its a thought.
modernpixel said:
Yeah I agree.
If I could get an affordable AMD Athlon 64 x2 4800 in my Mac, I'd be happy. But Intel? They're lagging big time. Frankly, it just seems odd that the entire world is switching to PowerPC at the same time Apple is moving away. I just don't buy it at all.
I mean, at the end of the day if friggin' MS can switch architectures of the XBox 360 *to* PowerPC, why would we do the reverse? It's just stupid. 100% of the next-gen consoles are using special purpose PowerPC's.
Ah nuts!
I don't care as long as the hardware is still being manufactured. I love OS X, but I don't want it running on a Dell, Sony, Toshiba, etc.. f@#k that crap.
I want my ******* elitist Powerbook. I want my beautiful Powermac and 30" ACD. And although some might not want to admit it, I think that's the general consensus with most Mac users.
I guess you have to have faith the boardroom isn't full of morons. But, there's just that sinking feeling in my stomach about this whole topic.
I don't care as long as the hardware is still being manufactured. I love OS X, but I don't want it running on a Dell, Sony, Toshiba, etc.. f@#k that crap.
I want my ******* elitist Powerbook. I want my beautiful Powermac and 30" ACD. And although some might not want to admit it, I think that's the general consensus with most Mac users.
I guess you have to have faith the boardroom isn't full of morons. But, there's just that sinking feeling in my stomach about this whole topic.