The Apple/Intel political thread

Thomas Veil

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Feb 14, 2004
2,435
5,458
OBJECTIVE reality
As you've probably heard, Apple is reportedly going to announce that they are moving to Intel chips today (Monday).

Damn that Bush and those Republicans! This is all their fault!









;)
 

pseudobrit

macrumors 68040
Jul 23, 2002
3,418
4
Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
To hijack this thread and steer it on a real topic (and since any comments I make up top will be buried within that 1000+ post monster thread), I plan on buying a G5 iMac soon.

I was leaning towards a middle-of-the-road G5 PM, but with the iMac having 128MB on the video card now, and at that price, I think I'll pick one up to bridge the gap to the Intel era.

I will echo others' sentiments that hope the gaudy "Intel Inside" logo doesn't appear outside the new Macs and that Apple TV ads will be exempt from having to play the Intel trademark chime.

I will also point out that the current roadmap for the Pentium line doesn't have a chip that can match the FSB speed of the 2GHz G5, and can't come close to the 1.35Ghz FSB speed of the 2.7GHz G5.
 

Thomas Veil

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Feb 14, 2004
2,435
5,458
OBJECTIVE reality
pseudobrit said:
To hijack this thread and steer it on a real topic (and since any comments I make up top will be buried within that 1000+ post monster thread)...
You're no fun.


Though I agree with your points. :D
 

takao

macrumors 68040
Dec 25, 2003
3,825
432
Dornbirn (Austria)
pseudobrit said:
To hijack this thread and steer it on a real topic (and since any comments I make up top will be buried within that 1000+ post monster thread), I plan on buying a G5 iMac soon.

I was leaning towards a middle-of-the-road G5 PM, but with the iMac having 128MB on the video card now, and at that price, I think I'll pick one up to bridge the gap to the Intel era.
hey well at least you didn't just switched(more "added") to a mac mini just 3 months with thinking about finally leaving the old x86 design behind ... i 'knew' the day i got it that with my luck apple gonna switch to x86 and microsoft to powerpc within a year

oh well, i thought about reading about about development in cocoa for mac during my sommer and trying to program a few small testprogramms .. looks like the amount to read icnreased a lot thanks to this ;).. heck according to the .pdfs there won't be openfirmware but perhaps something new and completly different and somewhere even something with different disk partiitions is written there

looks like i will skip any altivec stuff since the rosetta thing doesn't work with that either...


pseudobrit said:
I will echo others' sentiments that hope the gaudy "Intel Inside" logo doesn't appear outside the new Macs and that Apple TV ads will be exempt from having to play the Intel trademark chime.
depends while i'm against hose intel stickers directly o nthe machien itself i would have no problem with a intel sticker on the package (perhaps on the side or bottom ;) )
and for commercials i would use all the brand recognition i could get
while perhaps not as nice for current mac users (;)) a lot of other people might find it more interesting

pseudobrit said:
I will also point out that the current roadmap for the Pentium line doesn't have a chip that can match the FSB speed of the 2GHz G5, and can't come close to the 1.35Ghz FSB speed of the 2.7GHz G5.
and none knows how the intel chips will be called anyways
perhaps they are somehow custom and could jsutify another name like G6 ;) or perhaps Pentium 5 mac edition etc.

at least i hope that they will be _all_ based on the pentium m and not the P4 (didn't intel say that their next generation will be based onthose Ms ?)

looks like i'm gonna jump a generation of chips completly and go straighgt to intel chips thenand i really hope they get even more affordable ;)
 

mactastic

macrumors 68040
Apr 24, 2003
3,647
661
Colly-fornia
I was a little curious about the FSB issue myself. My understanding was that that was one of the real big advantages to IBM's chip architecture. Also, does this mean we're moving from RISC to CISC?

I'm very ambivalent about the whole thing.
 

takao

macrumors 68040
Dec 25, 2003
3,825
432
Dornbirn (Austria)
mactastic said:
I was a little curious about the FSB issue myself. My understanding was that that was one of the real big advantages to IBM's chip architecture. Also, does this mean we're moving from RISC to CISC?

I'm very ambivalent about the whole thing.
well it has been some time since Powerpc has been a RISC (the r is for reduced but a modern power pc like the G4 or G5 have way lot more instructions than a classical RISC design...)

i think there was a risc once with roughly 25-30 isntructions and power pc of today has easily more than 200 i tink just like pentium (who even has more)

i doubt that the front side bus gonna play big role like it used to ...

lack of power of the cpu is not the thing i'm worried about with the switch to intel.. mroel ike energy consumption and heat ... but intel learned alot from their errors with the P4 and ae going to do something against it (and i hope the patchwork of the x86 architecture won't hinder software developers much)
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,915
1,466
Palookaville
Speaking of the "politics of computers," my beloved LA Times ran this cliché-ridden story on the switch to Intel in today's paper. Clichés highlighted for those who might have a difficult time spotting them...

Despite Switch, Apple Still Seen as Unique

Analysts say Mac faithful shouldn't worry about the company's alliance with Intel.

SAN FRANCISCO — Monday's announcement that Apple Computer Inc. will use Intel Corp. chips in its PCs made the Mac faithful think: different.

After weeks of rumors and speculation, Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs told software engineers at the company's annual developer conference that Intel microprocessors would power Macintosh computers beginning next year, with Intel inside all Apple computers by 2007.

The move ends a long and sometimes stormy relationship between Apple and IBM Corp., which builds the Mac's current PowerPC chips, and Motorola Inc., which makes chips for Apple laptops. Intel supplies most of the chips that power PCs running the Windows operating system of Apple archrival Microsoft Corp. So closely aligned are Microsoft and Intel that they often are referred to as Wintel.

So to some of Apple's Macolytes, the new alliance portended something sinister for the Cupertino, Calif.-based company that has leveraged the success of its iPods to boost sales of its stylish but expensive PCs.

"Where does this lead us?" Jobs asked from the stage. Before Jobs could answer himself, someone in the audience cracked, "Down the road to hell."

Despite sentiments like that, computer industry analysts and many Mac users discounted the long-term effects of the change, saying Apple has built its reputation on software and design rather than the raw computing power of its machines. By switching to Intel, they said, Apple may be able to cut prices on its computers and compete more directly against low-cost sellers.

In wooing Apple, Santa Clara, Calif.-based Intel can claim the prestige of supplying one of Silicon Valley's most finicky customers, but the financial benefits will be relatively small. Intel is the world's largest chip maker, and Apple is one of the smallest major PC makers, with just under 4% of the market.

For its part, Armonk, N.Y.-based IBM has already focused its energies on building chips for the video game industry. Its chip technology will power next-generation game consoles from all three of the major game companies: Microsoft, Sony Corp. and Nintendo Co.

On a generally flat day on the financial markets, Apple shares fell 32 cents to $37.92, Intel dropped 16 cents to $27.17 and IBM lost 79 cents to $75.

Jobs described the switch to Intel as the third major transition for Mac computers since the company was formed in 1976. The other two were the initial switch to PowerPC chips between 1994 and 1996 and the move to a new operating system, OS X, between 2001 and 2003.

The change was fueled by a desire "to make the best computers going forward," Jobs said, noting that he promised high-performance desktop and laptop models two years ago that never materialized. "We envision amazing products we want to build for you. But we don't know how to do it on the future of PowerPC."

He did not cite IBM by name, but Apple reportedly had been frustrated by IBM's inability to develop a chip that could process immense amounts of data without overheating. Intel, by contrast, touts its cool-running chips that consume less power.

But just because the chips are the same, differences will still exist between Macs and other PCs. Most noticeably, Apple will continue to promote the virtues of its operating system, which is widely viewed as more stable and secure than Windows even if it runs a fraction of the programs.

"This is not a clone play," said Jupiter Research consultant Michael Gartenberg. "OS X won't run on a Dell or HP machine. Will someone come up with a hack to do so? Absolutely. But the OS X installer will not allow it to work on a non-Apple machine that's not from Cupertino. But I can imagine Microsoft creating an [application] where you push a button and get OS X, and push a button and get Windows."

Change does not come without risk. When Apple switched to PowerPC chips, its market share fell to around 5% from 8% to 10%, said Insight 64 consultant Nathan Brookwood. After the computer maker introduced the OS 9 operating system, its share fell to less than 3%. "Going to Intel's … architecture, they could end up in the 1% range," he said.

Paul Hershenson, president of Pasadena-based software developer Art & Logic said that although the change might seem strange, he predicted that few would even remember it in a few years.

"Apple has always been the alternative company," he said. "They're the ones who don't feel corporate. They're the nonconformist computer company. That's always been the vibe…. So moving over to Intel processors just seems like a conformist thing to do.

"I suspect that most people will react the way we did. At first, they'll say, 'That's freaky!' But we have a lot of faith in Apple. People who have strong reactions, I think they'll settle down pretty quickly."
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-apple7jun07,1,3556212.story
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
Flip Side -- from the Windows users side.

Steve Jobs sold out to the PC world and made Apple the most exciting new PC maker.

Sucks for us, but is great for the above average Windows buyer that has been drooling over the PowerBook and iBook but couldn't afford the switch.

That is if Apple doesn't sell out on quality, to capture sales based on price. :(
 

takao

macrumors 68040
Dec 25, 2003
3,825
432
Dornbirn (Austria)
Sun Baked said:
Steve Jobs sold out to the PC world and made Apple the most exciting new PC maker.
i never talked about apple _not_ being part of the PC world so far ;) depends of point of view

Sun Baked said:
Sucks for us, but is great for the above average Windows buyer that has been drooling over the PowerBook and iBook but couldn't afford the switch.
haha count me in for a Powermac 2,5+ years from now when it's time to upgrade , no matter what ... next time i'm gonna get a big tower again ..well at least i hope so ... must resist drooling ... (i really hope they can keep a G5 powermac like exterior design )
 

mischief

macrumors 68030
Aug 1, 2001
2,920
0
Santa Cruz Ca
Please see the Intel Q&A thread in the OS X section to dispell some of these assumptions.

My question is this: How long will it take Sonnet to build a Pentium slot for existing PowerMac designs? :rolleyes: ;) :D :cool:
 

mactastic

macrumors 68040
Apr 24, 2003
3,647
661
Colly-fornia
IJ Reilly said:
Speaking of the "politics of computers," my beloved LA Times ran this cliché-ridden story on the switch to Intel in today's paper. Clichés highlighted for those who might have a difficult time spotting them...



http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-apple7jun07,1,3556212.story
You forgot one...

[OS X] which is widely viewed as more stable
;)

And what are they talking about, saying Apples share dropped with the introduction of OS 9? They forgot to add the one.
 

Xtremehkr

macrumors 68000
Jul 4, 2004
1,897
0
Given the development time that Apple and Intel have had, I am curious about may have been developed jointly between Apple and Intel.

Apple is just not abruptly making the jump, so it makes me wonder whether or not they have been working with Intel to improve on certain technical aspects that will put Apple ahead of most computer makers who use Intel chips.

With IBM floundering in their chip development, I don't know what else they could have done. What would have happened if it too the next major PB upgrade 3 - 5 years due to restrictions caused by heat? Even the most loyal of users would be frustrated at that point.

I just don't think it will be Intel as usual when they are used in an Apple.

And why not AMD?
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,915
1,466
Palookaville
I think you might have answered your own question. AMD doesn't have the resources to move things forward for Apple like Intel does.

The politics of this thing are fascinating. Within the same month we have Microsoft jumping to IBM and Apple jumping to Intel, two things nobody would have seriously predicted a year ago. In a way, IBM working closely with Microsoft again is the most interesting. Considering how badly IBM was shafted by Bill Gates back in the early '90s, you'd think they'd have no appetite for another go-round with with a guy who will back-stab most of his partners sooner or later. It's amazing, really.
 

mischief

macrumors 68030
Aug 1, 2001
2,920
0
Santa Cruz Ca
Xtremehkr said:
Given the development time that Apple and Intel have had, I am curious about may have been developed jointly between Apple and Intel.

Apple is just not abruptly making the jump, so it makes me wonder whether or not they have been working with Intel to improve on certain technical aspects that will put Apple ahead of most computer makers who use Intel chips.

I just don't think it will be Intel as usual when they are used in an Apple.

And why not AMD?
I think we'll see exactly what we saw with IBM: A "consumerized" version of one of their most painfully powerful chips. I could see a mass-production designed derivative of Xeon (Itanium?) or perhaps the first-to-market with their 64 bit architecture.

No matter how you slice it there's a plethora of technologies Intel hasn't been able to sell to the standard manufacturers who are so focussed on lowballing each other that they don't implement the more interesting features offered. Apple has a perfect opportunity to pull the market along technologically by beig first to market with some Intel features that you just can't find all together in one stock (read: debugged) box.

I think it's accurate to guess that Apple has been talking to Intel under the table since they bought Next. It's only a short drive between campuses and there's lots of nice restaurants in between. ;)
 

mischief

macrumors 68030
Aug 1, 2001
2,920
0
Santa Cruz Ca
After looking briefly at the lineup these two chips seem most likely for the PowerMacs.

Dual Processor, Dual-core @ 3+ GHZ with an .8Ghz to 1.066Ghz FSB, Hyperthreading, potential for Hypertransport via ASIC, DDR2 support on the CPU, Quad Channel PCI-Extreme via Intel's board control sets.

Hummuna. This could be a lot of fun to watch. :eek:
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,915
1,466
Palookaville
That's a pretty good one, but did you miss this from the article above?

"This is not a clone play," said Jupiter Research consultant Michael Gartenberg. "OS X won't run on a Dell or HP machine. Will someone come up with a hack to do so? Absolutely. But the OS X installer will not allow it to work on a non-Apple machine that's not from Cupertino. But I can imagine Microsoft creating an [application] where you push a button and get OS X, and push a button and get Windows."
He can probably also imagine himself as Napoleon.
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
Thomas Veil said:
As you've probably heard, Apple is reportedly going to announce that they are moving to Intel chips today (Monday).

Damn that Bush and those Republicans! This is all their fault! ;)
Nope, this one was definitely a Democratic induced mess, they did after all stick Al Gore on the board a couple years ago.
 

mactastic

macrumors 68040
Apr 24, 2003
3,647
661
Colly-fornia
Sun Baked said:
Nope, this one was definitely a Democratic induced mess, they did after all stick Al Gore on the board a couple years ago.
Are you saying macs can connect to the recently-invented internet now??? :eek:
:p
 

zimv20

macrumors 601
Jul 18, 2002
4,388
7
toronto
mactastic said:
Are you saying macs can connect to the recently-invented internet now??? :eek:
:p
you laugh, but my mom's neighbors opted for a PC instead of a mac because the DSL salesperson told them it would work only with a PC.
 

mactastic

macrumors 68040
Apr 24, 2003
3,647
661
Colly-fornia
zimv20 said:
you laugh, but my mom's neighbors opted for a PC instead of a mac because the DSL salesperson told them it would work only with a PC.
I know it's a common misconception. Stupid is as stupid does....
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,915
1,466
Palookaville
mactastic said:
I know it's a common misconception. Stupid is as stupid does....
It's even more a matter of laziness, IMO. The guy on the phone only knows how to set somebody up with Windows, so instead of turning the page or asking somebody he just says it isn't possible.