or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple To Debut Intel-Based Computers At MW SF 2004?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple To Debut Intel-Based Computers At MW SF 2004?

post #1 of 81
Thread Starter 
According to this from www.Smarthouse.com.au

Quote:



Apple set to go Intel

August 2003

By David Richards

Apple is set to announce an Intel based PC that will run on an Apple operating system.

The first system is expected to shown at Macworld San Francisco in January 2004 according to an Apple US source. The initial plan will involve Apple offering both existing RISC processor systems and an Intel based system with the RISC processor from IBM system being phased out as new software is developed. An original idea to release a duel platform MAC has been scrapped according to Apple insiders in San Francisco.

Software companies like Adobe, who develop for the Mac platform and Intel based system have already been briefed on the proposed move. One victim of the move could be Apples relationship with Microsoft. Currently Microsoft develops the Office suite of programs for the Mac platform however Microsoft are not happy with sales and have asked Apple to invest in further development of the Mac Office offering.

This could trigger a move by Apple to offering the Star Office suite of software from Sun particularly if Microsoft refuses to develop for an Intel based PC running a Mac operating system

If Apple were to go solely with the Intel based system the biggest problems would be that every existing Mac program would have to be recompiled to work under Intel. For new versions of current programs that would be fairly simple, but for older software it would not be worthwhile.

By releasing an Intel based system Apple will be able to offer the best of both worlds.

A gradual adoption by Apple of the Intel architecture would give time for the costs to drop and software to be upgraded. Eventually all Macs would be Intel.

An Apple source told SmartHouse Magazine Apple and Intel have been in discussions for a while. We are looking at delivering a series of solutions that run on Intel's Itanium chip. The issue right now are software related as a great deal of code will have to be re written for both the Mac operating system and the Intel Itanium chip. They added This initiative is will happen, but when depends on how quickly the software issues are resolved.



Things Ain't What They Seem!
Reply
Things Ain't What They Seem!
Reply
post #2 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by MacsRGood4U
According to this from www.Smarthouse.com.au

That is completely bogus. Has to be.

There is absolutely no reason whatsoevah for Apple to go with Intel now that the IBM relationship is real.

Nothing to see here. Move on.
post #3 of 81
Thread Starter 
Probably bogus. But, this is a rumor site and what would it be if there weren't rumors of every kind.
Things Ain't What They Seem!
Reply
Things Ain't What They Seem!
Reply
post #4 of 81
... sure...-

we invest in a totally new motherboard, pipes, G5, serial ata etc.pp.

then we compile our unix to another processor type... why not... just for fun... it's easy, especially all that stuff which connects a gazillion hardware possibilities in this world.

one word:

NEVEREVER
post #5 of 81
first of all, the Apple is set to announce an Intel based PC that will run on an Apple operating system. is gramatically incorrect for what they want to say. It could be Apple is set to announce an Intel pased PC that will run an Apple Operating System
this is besides the point.
As previously said, apple is not going to have spent the past 3 years developing the g5 to use it for half a year.. come on
post #6 of 81
Right, just when they are - after 2.5 years - have arrived at making OS X not only crawl but actually perform, have just found a replacement for the G4 chips they are going to port to itanium - a chip that is largely incompatible with existing x86 software *and* in the process declare war on MS.

Nothing to see here, people, move on. Just the annual "Apple goes intel" thread.
post #7 of 81
Not going to happen. Mac OS X is doing well and IBM's G5 brings new respect to the platform. Besides, Linux has already been adopted as the alternative to Windows on x86. There's simply no need for Mac OS X on x86, no matter how much marketing Apple engaged in.
post #8 of 81
Well, it's about time Apple smartened up...
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
post #9 of 81
The transitions from 68xxx to PowerPC, OS 9 to OS X, from G4 to G5, and now from G5 to x86, even the "Switch" campaign (a semantic clue for our future) have just been for the purpose of gearing up to Apple's new business strategy, code named "Manic", expected to be implemented sometime in early 2005.

The purpose of "Manic", like the soon-to-occur switch from the G5 to x86, would serve the dual purpose of driving up R&D costs while also giving Mac-users an extremely incoherent roadmap. Under Manic, instead of making significant changes every few years or so, Apple will be making major changes to both hardware and software every few days.

We've already seen the precursor to "Manic": Within the span of 18 months Apple went from the Apple VGA port, to the standard VGA port, to the DVI port to the ADC. While these changes occurred in PowerMacs, similar changes did not take place in PowerBooks until sometime later; and though changes occurred in the monitor lineup, there was no cosmetic change to the monitors alerting users as to which monitor was right for their computer. This constant state of tranisition and port confusion was an early implementation of "Manic", code named "Wha??!"

Manic Revealed!
Under Manic, MacOS X.5.1.003 (expected release date 3/15/05) will not support any protocols implemented in MacOS X.5.1.002 (expected release date 3/12/05). X002 will have to be run in Classic mode inside of X003, and then only if you have a G5+ co-processor card that fits the custom made 1.2" PCI-X2 slot (not the 19.5mm PCI-YZ slot in your PowerMac Gx86 as some have said). Of course both the PCI-X2 and PCI-Y slots will only be available in the Rev C PowerMac Gx86 (release date 3/14/05) and neither will support standard PCI or PCI-X cards, nor will either slot be included on the PowerMac Gx86+ (release date 3/18/05).
post #10 of 81
My reply as the person who has been registered the longest...

BULLSHIT!
Nov 98 - Earliest Registered User on record
Jan 02 - Earliest iPad prediction
Reply
Nov 98 - Earliest Registered User on record
Jan 02 - Earliest iPad prediction
Reply
post #11 of 81
"The initial plan will involve Apple offering both existing RISC processor systems and an Intel based system with the RISC processor from IBM system being phased out..."[/QUOTE]

Two things came to my mind when I read this article.
1) The author is trying to put doubt into the minds of people who are thinking of buying a G5.
2) The article is true.

I agree with the reasons stated above on why the article is bs. But becuse the article sounds genuine, it has put some doubt in my mind on whether or not I should shell out 3 grand for a computer with a processor that Apple is going to phase out.

I guess the only thing I can do is call my local Apple stores (and Apple computer sales) and press them on why I should buy a G5 when they are going to phase it out in place of an Intel processor.
post #12 of 81
nerV:

This is just more horsepuckey. Why would Apple phase out PPC in favor of Itanium? What on earth are the advantages to that strategy? Apple just got a robust, backward compatible, scalable, VMX-capable, high-performing, (relatively) cool and inexpensive 64 bit platform with a long-term roadmap, sporting a processor bus that Apple designed, and they just built a gorgeous architecture around it. So they're going to do what? What are the odds that Apple could persuade Intel to make a special version of Itanic with VMX and Apple PI on board? Would that realize Intel's economies of scale, or defeat them? Or would they use a stock Itanium, and eliminate any possibility of differentiating themselves performance-wise, or having any say in the nature and direction of the architecture they use? Would it benefit them to give Microsoft a tremendous say in the nature and direction of the architecture they use?

This rumor is dumb.

Now, as moki has pointed out, Apple could introduce a server based on another CPU family, with a special version of OS X Server. But again, why Itanium? Not for the applications! Not for a power/watt advantage. Not for cost reasons. Apple could be far more subversive by building an Opteron server. The advantage here is that the Opteron can run 32-bit x86 apps. Now, combine that with the Linux compatibility getting rolled into Panther, and you have an Apple machine that can run all Linux applications in binary form seamlessly. And then you have an effective trojan horse. (As well as yet another reason to keep the Other Side chained to the x86 legacy instead of adopting Itanium. Muahahahahahaha!)
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #13 of 81
There are only two reasons why Apple would do this:-

1. No further supplies of PowerPc baseed processors.

2. They think they would make more money selling software than hardware.

Frankly I don't believe it will happen.
Wll I have my G5 so I am off to get a life; apart from this post...
Reply
Wll I have my G5 so I am off to get a life; apart from this post...
Reply
post #14 of 81
Quote:
The initial plan will involve Apple offering both existing RISC processor systems and an Intel based system with the RISC processor from IBM system being phased out as new software is developed.

So let me get this straight-- the 970 is an interim processor? BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

This has got to be the stupidest damn rumor since... well, EVAR. Five or six months ago, this would have struck fear into the hearts of the Apple faithful everywhere, but now, it's just comic relief.
post #15 of 81
You forgot to mention the accessories with the new MACS that include a soldering iron, small ballpeen hammer, hack-saw, small MAC-TRAX type screwdriver (recently patented by S. Jobs) and other assorted goodies (mostly fuse blocks and extra wire)...
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
post #16 of 81
i went to that website and read the article.
i dont believe it for a second,you know why?
its says apple is going to migrate to the ITANIUM architecture.WHAT!?
why would they move to a slower performing more expensive and not very popular chip?
they wouldnt.
if anything they would go with a more mainstream chip.
add to that the fact that it would piss off their developers.
what would apple put in their laptops? intel chips?
NOT HARDLY!
im not saying that if apple developed a non-PPC version of PANTHER it would be a bad idea,im just saying that it would be IN ADDITION TO ppc based macs.
very bad rumour indeed!
post #17 of 81
<comic book guy>

worst rumor ever

</comic book guy>
"I'm learning how to meditate, so far so good."
Donald Fagen and Walter Becker
Reply
"I'm learning how to meditate, so far so good."
Donald Fagen and Walter Becker
Reply
post #18 of 81
mMMMmMMm.... AMD "Appleseed" running at 1.4, 1.6 & 1.8 Ghz...

MmMMmmm....
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]
Reply
post #19 of 81
How come this rumour just will not die?
Stoo
Reply
Stoo
Reply
post #20 of 81
Absolute, total BS. And very poorly written BS at that.

As Nebagakid pointed out there is a technical, or simply grammatical error in the sub head (the OS runs on the processor, not the other way around).

"duel platform"

Mac spelled correctly and as "MAC"

Their Apple source quote "This initiative is will happen" is a train wreck. Even if the source said exactly this, then the use of (sic) is required.

Basic editorial errors such as these are a dead giveaway. This is NOT a professionally written article. It's either very poor FUD or a pathetic attempt for cheap hits on the site.

As Gamblor said, the G5 is interim?! Puh-leeze!
Attention Internet Users!

"it's" contraction of "it is"
"its" possessive form of the pronoun "it".

It's shameful how grammar on the Internet is losing its accuracy.
Reply
Attention Internet Users!

"it's" contraction of "it is"
"its" possessive form of the pronoun "it".

It's shameful how grammar on the Internet is losing its accuracy.
Reply
post #21 of 81
My proposal:

We ignore any posts relating to Apple flirting with Intel, Intel flirting with Apple, or Steve Jobs flirting with Bill Gates.

The first two are always unfounded, provoke way too much discussion, and are basically ridiculous, and the last is just disgusting.

Agreed?
post #22 of 81
Attention Internet Users!

"it's" contraction of "it is"
"its" possessive form of the pronoun "it".

It's shameful how grammar on the Internet is losing its accuracy.
Reply
Attention Internet Users!

"it's" contraction of "it is"
"its" possessive form of the pronoun "it".

It's shameful how grammar on the Internet is losing its accuracy.
Reply
post #23 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by Malokata
My proposal:

We ignore any posts relating to Apple flirting with Intel, Intel flirting with Apple, or Steve Jobs flirting with Bill Gates.

The first two are always unfounded, provoke way too much discussion, and are basically ridiculous, and the last is just disgusting.

Agreed?

we should start a rumor "steve is gay" - many readings, many meanings
post #24 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by Malokata
My proposal:

We ignore any posts relating to Apple flirting with Intel, Intel flirting with Apple, or Steve Jobs flirting with Bill Gates.

The first two are always unfounded, provoke way too much discussion, and are basically ridiculous, and the last is just disgusting.

Agreed?

Yeah, but what about Steve and Bill Clinton (Big Al's buddy)
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
post #25 of 81
Apple should have switched to Intel the moment Motorola started giving them shit with the G4. If not when they f*cked up at first and had to reduce the speed by 50 MHz, then they should have dropped them when they got stuck a 500 MHz for a year and a half.

But they didn't. They rode it through. As a result, they have access to an awesome 64-bit chip. As far as I know, Intel's only 64-bit chip is the Itanium, which costs like $10,000 for a single 933 MHz processor and can't run 32-bit code. Pretty freaking stupid if you ask me.

Maybe this rumor would have held water in early 2000, but coming now that Apple has totally wasted on Intel (and AMD) on the 64-bit front, it's complete bullshit.
post #26 of 81
Well said, Mr. Rescigno.

If it wasn't obvious that the Apple/IBM partnership is just beginning to blossom from the WWDC Keynote, then I don't know what else there is to ensure people that "It's okay."

Intel just doesn't seem to have the spirit for R&D that IBM does -- nor the humor (recall the feathering of the 970s -- those guys KNEW this proc. and its future were going to kick serious posterior).
"Be entirely tolerant or not at all; follow the good path or the evil one. To stand at the crossroads requires more strength than you possess."

"Ordinarily he was insane, but he had lucid moments...
Reply
"Be entirely tolerant or not at all; follow the good path or the evil one. To stand at the crossroads requires more strength than you possess."

"Ordinarily he was insane, but he had lucid moments...
Reply
post #27 of 81
Intel Black Ops....can't say any more for now....I'l call you back on a secure line.....
post #28 of 81
Quote:
Originally posted by Malokata
My proposal:

We ignore any posts relating to Apple flirting with Intel, Intel flirting with Apple, or Steve Jobs flirting with Bill Gates.

The first two are always unfounded, provoke way too much discussion, and are basically ridiculous, and the last is just disgusting.

Agreed?

actually in 1984 bill was flirting with steve.
he loved the macintosh that much his arm was brown to his elbow.
alles sal reg kom
Reply
alles sal reg kom
Reply
post #29 of 81
This rumor is a total BS. What next ? : windows will be the next os for mac ?
post #30 of 81
I doubt they will, and if they did, frankly I'd be disappointed.
The G4 has problems, but it's fast enough for many (and so is the G3.) For people who want power, Apple has the G5. It runs fast. The Dual model can beat the pants off a Pentium, and for consumers processor speed matters less, and Apple can soon put the G5 in them too. As for laptops, true the G5 isn't ready for lightweight yet, but neithier is the P4. The PM is, but recompiling would be a huge hassle to Apple and other companies, as other bits of software would have to be recompiled as well. And you can bet someone might come up with a way of hacking OS X so it runs on a standard PC. Note: Apple already has Darwin compiled for Pentiums. Also, I perfer AMD; I have an Athlon 1Ghz, and the only problems with it are: 1. It runs Whinedows, and it looks really ugly.
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
Reply
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
Reply
post #31 of 81
Add-ons:
1. The G5 couldn't be killed, at least not now. It still is faster then a Pentium with properly compiled programs.
2. Everyone seems to forget the other software would have to be recompiled as well.
3. If they go Intel/AMD, they'd better wait until the Athlon 64 comes out.
4. What would they do about OS 9.2?
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
Reply
Trainiable is to cat as ability to live without food is to human.
Reply
post #32 of 81
too stupid of a rumor to comment on...

MSKR
"Just tell them that Ben Franklin said it, and everyone will believe the sentiment."
Reply
"Just tell them that Ben Franklin said it, and everyone will believe the sentiment."
Reply
post #33 of 81
double post...
"Just tell them that Ben Franklin said it, and everyone will believe the sentiment."
Reply
"Just tell them that Ben Franklin said it, and everyone will believe the sentiment."
Reply
post #34 of 81
I smell a very smelly POO. They guy cant even spell for Christ's sake!

"The initial plan will involve Apple offering both existing RISC processor systems and an Intel based system" - that would be some "duel" my money would be on the RISC processor!
post #35 of 81
Thread Starter 
Quote:
too stupid of a rumor to comment on..

Sorry, by posting, twice no less, you commented on it!

I emailed the author suggesting he log in to this thread.
Things Ain't What They Seem!
Reply
Things Ain't What They Seem!
Reply
post #36 of 81
slow day in the world is it...
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
I heard that geeks are a dime a dozen, I just want to find out who's been passin' out the dimes
----- Fred Blassie 1964
Reply
post #37 of 81
I've honestly not laughed so much for a long while!

Obviously, the author of this piece of Hunter S. Thompson fiction has been sampling one of those fabulous Aussie lagers like Boags, and the old noggin has simply blown a fuse.
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]

"What's your point?" ~ Mark Solomon...
Reply
"There's no bigot like a religious bigot and there's no religion more fanatical than that espoused by Macintosh zealots." ~Martin Veitch, IT Week [31-01-2003]

"What's your point?" ~ Mark Solomon...
Reply
post #38 of 81
**cough** bullshit **cough**
post #39 of 81
I could see this as a contingency plan in case the 970 project was cancelled as the Moto G5 supposedly was.
post #40 of 81
HA !

I found the original article on another server check it out !!!!




Intel set to go Apple

September 2004

By David Richards

Intel is set to announce an windows based PC that will run on an Apple operating system.

The first system is expected to shown at Macworld San Francisco in January 2004 according to an Intel US source. The initial plan will involve Intel offering both existing P5 processor systems and an Intel based POS7, 02 bit system with RISKY processing backwards compatibility and with the P5 processor from INTEL system being phased out as new software is developed. An original idea (rare at Intel) to release a duel platform MAC/INTEL has been scrapped according to Apple insiders in San Francisco, Chicago, Illinois and Buenos Aires.

Software companies like Adobe, who develop for the Mac platform and Intel based system have already been briefed on the proposed move. One victim of the move could be Apples relationship with Microsoft. Currently Microsoft develops the Office suite of programs for the Mac platform however Apple are not happy with quality and have asked Microsoft to invest further in research, research, research, and development and defiantly some management restructuring before further production of the Mac Office offering.

This could trigger a move by UNIX to offering the Star Office suite of software from Sun particularly if Microsoft refuses to develop for an Intel based PC Game box running a Lindows operating system.

If Intel were to go solely with the Apple based system the biggest problems would be that every existing Windows program and the entire windows OS would have to be recompiled to work under Darwin. For new versions of current programs that would be fairly simple, but for older software it would not be worthwhile. However in accordance with BBP (Backwards bill policy) Billions will be spent upgrading long forgotten operating systems to allow hardware from the mid eighties now worth less than a sandwich at the local dinner to be kept operating with a simple twelve hour week long software intergrade for a lowly estimated 3000 USD.

By releasing an Intel based system Apple will be able to offer the best of both worlds.

A gradual adoption Intel by of the Apple architecture would give time for the costs to drop and software to be upgraded. Eventually all Computers will be Apples.

An Apple source told SmutHouse Magazine Apple and Intel have been in bed for a while. We are looking at delivering a series of solutions that run on IBM's chip. The issue right now are software related as a great deal of code will have to be re written for both the Windows operating system and the IBM chip. They added This initiative is, will, can and should happen, but when depends on how quickly the software issues are resolved. And the price of the Intel restructuring .
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."
- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Necessity, who is the mother of invention. - Plato...
Reply
"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."
- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
Necessity, who is the mother of invention. - Plato...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple To Debut Intel-Based Computers At MW SF 2004?