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
If they ever broadcast new Mac commercials? Quite possibly.nishishei said:Does this mean, at the end of an Apple Macintosh commercial, there'll be an Intel logo with Dun! dun-dun-dun-dun!
I wouldn't put it past Apple to do an iPod ad with the shadow dancers dressed in bunny suits, though.
How about Apple looking to Intel for a new handheld device?
What about the cell processor?
And last but not least: Why not consider the possibility of Apple making Marklar publicly available (which would require some collaboration with Intel to get the most out of the x86 architecture)?
Remember that MS have a windows version running off Power architecture. Cell (according to a few people) is poised to take over the PC market in the next decade. If Apple could let a wider base of users get the hang of OS X by the time cell breaks through and delivers...
Or maybe this is all bull
What about the cell processor?
And last but not least: Why not consider the possibility of Apple making Marklar publicly available (which would require some collaboration with Intel to get the most out of the x86 architecture)?
Remember that MS have a windows version running off Power architecture. Cell (according to a few people) is poised to take over the PC market in the next decade. If Apple could let a wider base of users get the hang of OS X by the time cell breaks through and delivers...
Or maybe this is all bull
beginning of the end of mac hardware
face it people, this intel switch is going to happen. and, my guess, it will signal the end of mac-specific hardware. apple will become an OS-only company, along with a handful of "consumer devices" that they'll manufacture.
there's no way they'll be able to make the margins on computer hardware necessary to compete. and, there won't be any incentive for users to buy an overpriced apple PC when you can have any customised pc you want running OSX.x
just wait and see.... i'm not happy about it, but i'm not suprised either
face it people, this intel switch is going to happen. and, my guess, it will signal the end of mac-specific hardware. apple will become an OS-only company, along with a handful of "consumer devices" that they'll manufacture.
there's no way they'll be able to make the margins on computer hardware necessary to compete. and, there won't be any incentive for users to buy an overpriced apple PC when you can have any customised pc you want running OSX.x
just wait and see.... i'm not happy about it, but i'm not suprised either
skunk said:
Any idea how much of this comes from iPods and how much comes from laptops/desktops?
I am not that sure that Apple will stop bulidng Mac-Hardware. Technically any company could build a Mac clone based on PPC architecture, but Apple is preventing it by firmware that is necessary to run the OS.bpuk said:
I am pretty sure that Apple will still develop own motherboards for an own line-up of PowerMacs and Laptops. All the other peripherals/components are PC standard anyway already (HDs, RAM, USB, DVI, PCI cards, etc...pp).
If Apple would not do this they would openly compete with Microsoft, which won't happen any time soon. M$ would be majorly pissed.
In addition Apple makes still a lot of money with their HW. With a world wide market share of about 1-2% they would shoot themselves with a move like that.
Maybe that's an option on the long run, when Apple has a market share of about 15-20%. But not now...
groovebuster
bpuk said:
Then why the heck ar ethey opeing Apple Stores rapidly and expanding their retail outlets? That doesn't make sense if they are a software and services company only, does it? Hardware does not go away. Going Intel does not mean an open system. Most people don't seem to realize that.
I have to agree with Mediababy (see above): What's wrong with you people? Virusses, instability has all to do with OS and an open hardware system, not Intel itself. Intel makes some great chipsets and has some powerful chips coming up in the next year or 2. By example: in the pipeline is a double-core 3.7 Ghz Xeon processor with FSB on 1066 MHz. And I don't see PPC to beat that soon. That's probably one variant Apple will use in their hardware. I can't imagine Steve selling OS/X to run on your eMachines and loose control over the OS. BTW only 5 1/2 hours to go and we will know what Steve has up his sleeve.
Yeah! Motorola has stunk for years,example best cpu 1.67G4joshuawaire said:CNBC's analysts are reporting this morning that it's Freescale (Motorola) that Apple is ditching and not IBM.
We will see in a few hours!
Now look at AMD and Intel.all you can do is laugh....should have done this years ago before they hit rock bottom of 3%. Anyways this is goodMore Choices
Since Jobs likes choices(options), then maybe iLife for other OS platforms may be in the offing. I would embrace this decision since I know I for one would love to be able to use Garageband on my existing machines.
Since Jobs likes choices(options), then maybe iLife for other OS platforms may be in the offing. I would embrace this decision since I know I for one would love to be able to use Garageband on my existing machines.
Way back in this thread, I speculated:
--Apple was not going to ditch & switch PPC chips/MBs for Intel chips/MBs
--Rather, Apple would offer a CPU option (Intel-based or PPC-based) on Apple's computers, as appropriate.
--That OS X 10.4 already runs on Intel-based CPUs
--That OS X 10.4 (for Intel) will only run on Mac/Intel boxes or those configurations that Apple blesses (licenses)
--That Apple has (or will) recompile and tweak Apple-branded apps to exploit either/both CPU options
--That Apple has Integrated QuickTransit into OS X 10.4 so that existing 3rd-party Mac apps will run on new Mac/Intel boxes an 80% full speed (the dip may not even be noticeable)
--That Apple will provide tools to assist developers to port their apps to run 100% on both CPU architectures as single Fat binaries
--That the same process could be used in reverse from Intel architecture to PPC architecture
--So, developers on either side had potential new markets for their products with very little effort.
The big gotcha, was (I thought) that the apps on both sides had to run on Unix/Linux-- the technique could not be used for wintel apps.
I speculated that if QuickTransit could be extended to encompass wintel apps that:
--Current wintel apps running under OS X 10.4 with QuickTransit on a Mac/Intel box would run, without change, at closer to 100% (no need to translate the CPU instructions)
--Current wintel apps running under OS X 10.4 with QuickTransit on a Mac/PPC box would run, without change, at 80% (the dip may not even be noticeable)
If this were true (QuickTransit for Wintel) then there would be a set of hardware and an OS that could run all the current Mac and Wintel apps, without change, on the CPU of your choice... without all the maleware baggage of the windows OS.
That was/is a big IF!
While, in my gut, I felt that QuickTransit for wintel was a done deal, I couldn't find any reference to (or even any discussion of) running wintel apps on OS X via QuickTransit.
Well, this morning I found this link:
http://www.architosh.com/news/2004-09/2004c-0914_quicktran.phtml
Mmm... this gives me some confidence... maybe it is a done deal, after all!
Dick
--Apple was not going to ditch & switch PPC chips/MBs for Intel chips/MBs
--Rather, Apple would offer a CPU option (Intel-based or PPC-based) on Apple's computers, as appropriate.
--That OS X 10.4 already runs on Intel-based CPUs
--That OS X 10.4 (for Intel) will only run on Mac/Intel boxes or those configurations that Apple blesses (licenses)
--That Apple has (or will) recompile and tweak Apple-branded apps to exploit either/both CPU options
--That Apple has Integrated QuickTransit into OS X 10.4 so that existing 3rd-party Mac apps will run on new Mac/Intel boxes an 80% full speed (the dip may not even be noticeable)
--That Apple will provide tools to assist developers to port their apps to run 100% on both CPU architectures as single Fat binaries
--That the same process could be used in reverse from Intel architecture to PPC architecture
--So, developers on either side had potential new markets for their products with very little effort.
The big gotcha, was (I thought) that the apps on both sides had to run on Unix/Linux-- the technique could not be used for wintel apps.
I speculated that if QuickTransit could be extended to encompass wintel apps that:
--Current wintel apps running under OS X 10.4 with QuickTransit on a Mac/Intel box would run, without change, at closer to 100% (no need to translate the CPU instructions)
--Current wintel apps running under OS X 10.4 with QuickTransit on a Mac/PPC box would run, without change, at 80% (the dip may not even be noticeable)
If this were true (QuickTransit for Wintel) then there would be a set of hardware and an OS that could run all the current Mac and Wintel apps, without change, on the CPU of your choice... without all the maleware baggage of the windows OS.
That was/is a big IF!
While, in my gut, I felt that QuickTransit for wintel was a done deal, I couldn't find any reference to (or even any discussion of) running wintel apps on OS X via QuickTransit.
Well, this morning I found this link:
http://www.architosh.com/news/2004-09/2004c-0914_quicktran.phtml
Mmm... this gives me some confidence... maybe it is a done deal, after all!
Dick
joshuawaire said:CNBC's analysts are reporting this morning that it's Freescale (Motorola) that Apple is ditching and not IBM.
We will see in a few hours!
That would be interesting. A new Intel chip for PowerBooks/iBooks and Mac minis. With the G5 staying in the Power Macs and iMacs is what that could mean.
joshuawaire said:CNBC's analysts are reporting this morning that it's Freescale (Motorola) that Apple is ditching and not IBM.
We will see in a few hours!
Analyst know as much about this as u and me. You should never trust them , they are fully of crap 80% of the time.
joshuawaire said:CNBC's analysts are reporting this morning that it's Freescale (Motorola) that Apple is ditching and not IBM.
We will see in a few hours!
Actually, this makes the most sense, as Freescale/Motorola is way, way more into the embedded market, while IBM is not as far.
People are forgetting that IBM benefits from Apple's pushing them to provide better tech for desktop PPCs - IBM uses them in their own systems. And tech can be moved to other chip designs, as they have done with Cell.
It makes far more sense that Intel is becoming a fab for G4 and G4-esque chips...remember, the articles even said that "low-end" systems would move to Intel-based chips first.
We'll see.
MarcelV said:Then why the heck ar ethey opeing Apple Stores rapidly and expanding their retail outlets? That doesn't make sense if they are a software and services company only, does it? Hardware does not go away. Going Intel does not mean an open system. Most people don't seem to realize that.
I have to agree with Mediababy (see above): What's wrong with you people? Virusses, instability has all to do with OS and an open hardware system, not Intel itself. Intel makes some great chipsets and has some powerful chips coming up in the next year or 2. By example: in the pipeline is a double-core 3.7 Ghz Xeon processor with FSB on 1066 MHz. And I don't see PPC to beat that soon. That's probably one variant Apple will use in their hardware. I can't imagine Steve selling OS/X to run on your eMachines and loose control over the OS. BTW only 5 1/2 hours to go and we will know what Steve has up his sleeve.
the 3.7ghz Xeon has 37 stages in its pipe.
The g5 has 17 stages.
The FSB in Xeon is quad pumped 1066 mhz. That is 266 i real life.
The FSB in G5 is real 1.25ghz
Have you used a Xeon?
Try to do some mpeg2 work, and you will know what I mean.
Funny, I was just reading this thread and turned around to see the same story on the 'ticker' on CNN. Hard to believe it's not going to happen now.
It's going to be an interesting sell, after years of 'smoking' Intels, now we're going to adopt them?
I wonder if there will be any anti-trust implications of this, if Apple does indeed go for a closed Intel based platform?
It's going to be an interesting sell, after years of 'smoking' Intels, now we're going to adopt them?
I wonder if there will be any anti-trust implications of this, if Apple does indeed go for a closed Intel based platform?