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
Here are some thoughts:
If Apple allows release of OS X to run on Intel (I believe it already exists) they must do this in such a way that it increases the profits that Apple makes from hardware sales, with no disruption in quarterly sales and profits (or foreseen disruption in future quarters)
Apples forte is delivering an entire solution/user experience which includes hardware, software and now, services (read dotMac and iTMS).
Apple must maintain highly-profitable hardware sales or the entire package suffers.
This is not to say that Apple should not be in lower-profit, more competitive markets-- just that their participation would be different. For example I can see Apple licensing older iPod technology to others as they move on to leading-edge offerings the rationale is: if we are going to have competition at the low-end, it might as well be us!
So, If Apple can find a way to license OS X and/or build hardware using Intel (or anybodys) chips without damaging their installed base and business model, then they should go for it.
Personally, I think the idea of Apple ditching IBM for Intel is total BS.... there is just too much to be gained from IBM chips on the near horizon.
The promise of the CELL chip alone, is too great to toss away.
Dick
If Apple allows release of OS X to run on Intel (I believe it already exists) they must do this in such a way that it increases the profits that Apple makes from hardware sales, with no disruption in quarterly sales and profits (or foreseen disruption in future quarters)
Apples forte is delivering an entire solution/user experience which includes hardware, software and now, services (read dotMac and iTMS).
Apple must maintain highly-profitable hardware sales or the entire package suffers.
This is not to say that Apple should not be in lower-profit, more competitive markets-- just that their participation would be different. For example I can see Apple licensing older iPod technology to others as they move on to leading-edge offerings the rationale is: if we are going to have competition at the low-end, it might as well be us!
So, If Apple can find a way to license OS X and/or build hardware using Intel (or anybodys) chips without damaging their installed base and business model, then they should go for it.
Personally, I think the idea of Apple ditching IBM for Intel is total BS.... there is just too much to be gained from IBM chips on the near horizon.
The promise of the CELL chip alone, is too great to toss away.
Dick
WSJ
Becasue the WSJ is far more reliable then C|Net. They will verify thier own sources. WSJ does not like egg on face and is careful, well at least more then others.
intrepkid21 said:
Becasue the WSJ is far more reliable then C|Net. They will verify thier own sources. WSJ does not like egg on face and is careful, well at least more then others.
I'm only sure of 2 things:
I have my calender set to ping me at 9:30 on Monday to check the Tech news outlets for head lines
Intel will not produce PPC cpu's - they barely have the design staff on hand to deliver either new or rev'd cpus EVERY year for:
- Desktop systems
- Laptop systems
- Servers
Ain't gonna happen - Intel would not divert any resources that would risk their primary cash cows $$$$$$ - i.e. x86 in all its flavors
I have my calender set to ping me at 9:30 on Monday to check the Tech news outlets for head lines
Intel will not produce PPC cpu's - they barely have the design staff on hand to deliver either new or rev'd cpus EVERY year for:
- Desktop systems
- Laptop systems
- Servers
Ain't gonna happen - Intel would not divert any resources that would risk their primary cash cows $$$$$$ - i.e. x86 in all its flavors
Flying Llama said:So we would have to download or buy new software for our mini? Rebuy photoshop? word? all my programs? one version for x86, one for ppc? oh, the confusion... unless intel makes the chips but they stay ppc. sorry, i haven't been able to take the time and read all 40 pages and all 1000 posts, most of them including wow! oh no! cool! and other one-word posts...
It is generally called upgrades
Mid 06 to 07 - it seems like there would be a massive fall-off in sales in that period if the plans have to do with desktop/laptop processors. Come to think of it - a massive fall off in software too from folks that can afford to wait / can't affort not to wait.
cosmicsoftceo said:
Many will be happy becasue it is more MONEY for a newer forced upgrade.
Just as we did from 6 to 7
As in from 9 to X
Dr.Gargoyle said:
They can survive if they morph into a software company.
Imagine that they allow clones. As I recall Steve put and end to that. However, they can sell ROMS, the MAC OS, iLife to each of these compaines.
Maybe the time is right to morph into something new
what the hell is wrong with everybody? clearly IBM isn't moving forward like it should and apple needs an alternative. x86 isn't the devil and apple switching to it would only bring more users on board. people saying they'd sell their macs because of this bought a mac why? was it because you really loved the design of the hardware? guess what, that wouldn't change. apple would still make beautiful computers. if it's because osx is awesome, then nothing would change there. until monday, nobody knows exactly what'll happen but i'm extremely excited about this.
If you haven't seen this already, here is how apple is going to switch to intel.
http://www.transitive.com/products.htm
http://www.transitive.com/products.htm
For some reason I just don't see that happening. It would be very strange to have 2 different processor companies... My guess is they either go full on Intel, this is all BS, or that Intel makes PPC processors for Apple (very unlikely in opinion).weev said:
Who says Intel has to "design" anything. It is possible that Intel fabrication plants could be used strictly to produce existing designs in greater volume than IBm or Moto ever did. Intel's design team can keep on designing their own stuff while their fabrication plants can produce PPCs in great quantity. Apple has it's own design teams. And the AIM (Apple/IBM/Moto) have their own teams working on designs. Intel may be used only for its production capabilities. IBM has shown it is clearly falling short. And though x86 may not wind up inside of Macs ... what a feather in the cap of Intel to be able to say that prrocessors they "produced" are inside of Macs. This could be a possible reason for Intel to do it. Just another option.Bad_JuJu said:
corywoolf said:
From the Transitive site under "Customers":
"We anticipate that a second computer company will deploy products enabled by our technology in early 2005 and that others will deploy QuickTransit before the end of the year. Unfortunately, strict confidentiality obligations prevent us from saying more about these relationships at this time."
The 'first' company was Silicon Graphics. Will the second be Apple?
You just might be right!
macuser05 said:
You will be in the minorty, i figure less then 5% will jumpship to Linux.
I have done LINUX before and really do not like it at all. I even tried again earlier this year just for fun on my dual g4. I think once most people see this most will stay.
some will hold on to PPC for years to come... there will be a great demand for PPC items for years to come. Just as there was for the Newton (I was one of them - boy was that a mistake).
The majority will stay with Macintosh and we will live through this just as all the other little hickups in our lives.
If Apple does survive the transition... which it will even if by the skin of teeth... they will be back stronger and greater market share.
People will live windows in droves to make for the 5% who will go to Linux. They may lose another 2-3% to Windope.
I will be first in line ordering the new powerbook, wether a dual core G4, a G5 or Intel.
LaMerVipere said:
Um, perhaps they'd like to have some PPC tech to offer Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo for the next series of game boxes???
Start making an existing design in a toll-production deal to supplement IBM production, and work with Apple, and hell, maybe even Sony to make new and more advanced PPC designs?
Shrug.. To me, that makes a hell of allot more sense to me than Mac-> x86/x86-64...
MacIke said:
No, Apple will survive if they just let the hand play out... they have the winning cards [technology/os/time etc] on their side. All they have to do is play them boldly, carefully and to win!
Dick
thanks, ya we filmed it in 2 hrs just spur of the moment and didnt have any time to reshoot. It was my first film though so i thought it would be cool to leave in...It's odd though because on the DVD version thats like high quality, you can't see any of the feet or hands..corywoolf said:
It would be kinda cute for a commercial, like that egg commercial for the mutual funds or whatever.