or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › First Intel Macs on track for January
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

First Intel Macs on track for January - Page 2

post #41 of 452
Quote:
Neither Apple selling nor customers buying Intel-based Macs in January is a bad decision.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree I guess. I think they should wait until there's more software.
post #42 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by nagromme
Even Apple may not yet know the final transition schedule, so we shouldn't be surprised at shifting rumors.



Well, what I wonder is (assuming this true again) whether Apple might have snookered everyone with " Transition will be complete by the end of 2007."

Quote:
And the term "consumer Mac" could mean different things. Some would say that means ONLY the iBook and Mac Mini. Others would say it means everything except the Xserve.

I suppose that I could agree with that if someone is at the top, looking down.
post #43 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by ascii
Oh well, in that case it won't hurt to put a sign next to the computer says "Warning: there are no games for this computer." It's the truth, and since it won't effect sales, why not be truthful?

At least one game in the current iMac's software bundle should be ready:

Nanosaur II
post #44 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by SpamSandwich
This doesn't make business sense. Why would Apple introduce new models in January, AFTER the holidays and before the end of the first quarter to prop up the stock price. January is not a peak selling season, like back-to-school, or Christmas, or tax time, or hell, even Mother's Day.

Doesn't fit... I'll believe it when I see it.

This is actually quite normal (releasing new models early January). It's a way to try and get sales up after peak periods.

As an aside though what better time to release your first computers on a completely new platform than when sales are slow? Do you really want to release it in a high volume time then find out you messed up? It doesn't happen much but it can happen.
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
post #45 of 452
welll...

i have officially decided to wait.


my next purchase will be a 15 (possibly 13inch widescreen if there is one) PB with intel inside.


i'm saving, i'm saving big cuz this machine will be decked out.
post #46 of 452
Youll still have enough for christmas, wright?
Would it really be worth living in a world without television - Krusty the Klown
Reply
Would it really be worth living in a world without television - Krusty the Klown
Reply
post #47 of 452
re: Games, once the first Macintels get released, I expect there will be both more pressure and incentive to release compatible apps. The question is essentially: can you handle several months of Rosetta dependence and "first rev" risk to be part of the future of the platform, instead of the past?

For my part, I'll be wary of the first rev of all the Macintel machines. There are bound to be plenty of small snafus, given that this is the first major release for Apple on the next hardware.

I'm hungry for a new PB, but will probably buy a second-hard 15" to get me by until Merom settles in.
apple gets "it."
Reply
apple gets "it."
Reply
post #48 of 452
how do you know that no apps or game are ready for intel?
I gess apple will anounce new macintel in january, along with "more than a thousand recompiled apps"...
Apple need to push intel mac on the market in order to hurry up the "slow" developers...
So they will come in january, I'm pretty sure of it!
post #49 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by belzebuth
how do you know that no apps or game are ready for intel?
I gess apple will anounce new macintel in january, along with "more than a thousand recompiled apps"...
Apple need to push intel mac on the market in order to hurry up the "slow" developers...
So they will come in january, I'm pretty sure of it!

You said it: the key are the developers.

All Mactels in 2006 or not later than January 2007.

That will make developers rerlease native Mactel code ASAP.
post #50 of 452
It wouldn't surprise me if the plan had always been to release the first Intel machines much earlier than the publically announced roadmap to bypass any sales slowdown due to transition.

I would also be inclined to keep selling PPC models alongside their Intel counterparts until rev. 2 Intel versions are announced. This should satisfy those people who want the first Intel machines and those that don't. This would also explain why we have just seen an update to various models which may be at the front of the queue for Intel processors. The Intel and PPC versions of each model will have few differences other than the CPU.

At the time of announcement of the first Intel machines I would make it clear that support for PPC machines would last at least 5 years after the last one was made. That should ease some of the fears associated with buying the last PPC models.
post #51 of 452
I am a bit skeptical about the first macintel being an iMac. \
- Why was it updated only three months before MWSF then?
- Will the yonah be faster than the G5?

To me it's likely that these new iMacs (and powerbooks) will not replace their PPC counterparts.
post #52 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by SpamSandwich
Why are people so touchy on these boards? 8)

Who the @#$% are you callin' touchy, mother@#$%??!?!?!









post #53 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by cubist
Explains why the current iMacs use the single-core G5 rather than the dual-core tho. Dual-core Yonah, hm. For switchers, if they don't like MacOS X, they can install Windows if they want, so they have a little "safety net".

That would require the intel macs to have a BIOS since vista (which supports EFI) will not ship in january.
BTW, I heard that the HDs in the intel development boxes are not formatted in HFS. Is that true?
post #54 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by french macuser
I am a bit skeptical about the first macintel being an iMac. \
- Why was it updated only three months before MWSF then?
- Will the yonah be faster than the G5?

Me too.

The G5 iMac didn't need replacing with an Intel as it was fast enough already. The G5 is clock for clock faster than the Pentium-M in all the practical benchmarks I've seen and they both top out at 2.1Ghz (in the iMac anyway). Sometimes it's a lot faster than the Pentium-M. The only way a Yonah based iMac would be faster would be if it were Dual Core. But then you've got Rosetta to contend with if you've no Intel native software.

I wouldn't be so worried about the quad purchase melgross either. The photoshop shootout they've just had on macrumors showed it to completely toast even dual core Opterons. I think it'll continue to toast them for some time to come too. Which makes me wonder about Apple saying they'll transition completely by the end of 2007 to Intel. Unless Intel picks up it's legs and starts competing, they'll be in third place behind AMD and IBM all of 2007.
post #55 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by DifferentLee
This is great news! I'm tempted to hold off on any major purchases now.

Don't be disappointed if nothing goes Intel in January. I do think there is a good possibility of at least one line going Intel in January, but if I needed a computer now, I wouldn't torture myself by waiting only to be disappointed.

Also, PowerMac G5's appear to be unaffected. So if you need one of those, there's no reason to wait.
post #56 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by french macuser
BTW, I heard that the HDs in the intel development boxes are not formatted in HFS. Is that true?

That is true. They are formatted in HFS+ Journaled instead.
post #57 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Me too.

The G5 iMac didn't need replacing with an Intel as it was fast enough already. The G5 is clock for clock faster than the Pentium-M in all the practical benchmarks I've seen and they both top out at 2.1Ghz (in the iMac anyway). Sometimes it's a lot faster than the Pentium-M. The only way a Yonah based iMac would be faster would be if it were Dual Core. But then you've got Rosetta to contend with if you've no Intel native software.

But, if VPC lets me run AutoCad (yes, I beat this drum in every thread) a lot faster than it does now on my Mac (and possibly gets the mouse cursor correct looking), then I will purchase a new iMac* with intel because I can finally chunk my pc at work. I think this is the market Apple knows about and will get by default when they go with Intel. The several million of us wanting to buy a Mac for work but can't because of that one little program we have to have will probably buy in record numbers once VPC prooves it works. Microsoft with VPC ready to go, would be the answer for Apple in that market, oddly enough. However, I can't make myself believe that VPC would be ready when the new MacIntels are on the market after seeing the past update cycles for that program.

*(As long has my iMac will print to my 42" wide HP printer (I think it is a Design Jet 500) while in autocad.)
Hard-Core.
Reply
Hard-Core.
Reply
post #58 of 452
I find myself actually thinking about early off getting an intel Mac, if this report/investigation is true. The seeming last glory of the PPC on the Apple Mac in the 4 cpu has been quite appealing, although right now I do not need it, I just want it.

But, a laptop is more in line with what would be useful for my purposes.

If a PowerBook does come out with the dual core Yonah, and the iBook waits, one may think that when the Meron chip comes out, that would go in to the PowerBook, and the Yonah in to the iBook, given that all works well. Or, that if a single core Yonah goes in to the iBook and Mac Mini at some not too far off point, then when the Meron comes out, both the PowerBook and the iBook may have an update.

What I think is my common sense tells me to wait for a second wave of intel Macs, the early adopter in me wishes to jump.


I still like the PPC, and so what seems to me to be sensible will be to look at the prices on PPC notebooks, come January.
post #59 of 452
Ever since I was little, I reffered to my mac as a G3 or G something, and now its going to be all taken away and replaced by PM-3625 this and m-8365 that.
Would it really be worth living in a world without television - Krusty the Klown
Reply
Would it really be worth living in a world without television - Krusty the Klown
Reply
post #60 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by Glamingo
Ever since I was little, I reffered to my mac as a G3 or G something, and now its going to be all taken away and replaced by PM-3625 this and m-8365 that.

Yes, I am a sentimentalist, and so it will be difficult. I first deeply admired the Apple IIGS when it came out, before the Mac, and saw the fulfillment of my recognition in 1971 that computers would be much easier to use in ten years or thereabout than they were with the command line.

I came to be able to afford a Mac when the 7300 and 8600 were in their day, with 604 cpu, and so after that came the G3>>. But the PPC, or a Motorola chip was always used. I wanted a Mac IIFX 'Blackbird' in its time, pre PPC, but it was the most expensive Mac ever made.

Well, the intel chip was used in the Next computers. I would not at all be surprised to see a black Macintosh when the intel Macs come to town, remembering the Next cube type of computer. Just to return to the intel Mac story.
post #61 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by NordicMan
Well, the intel chip was used in the Next computers. I would not at all be surprised to see a black Macintosh when the intel Macs come to town, remembering the Next cube type of computer. Just to return to the intel Mac story.

The only Intel chip used in NeXT hardware, ie, hardware manufactured by NeXT Computer, Inc, was the i860 RISC chip in the NeXTDimension graphics board. A NeXTcube with a NeXTDimension board could also be considered an axisymmetric multiprocessor machine because the board ran an optimized Mach kernel dedicated to accelerating Postscript.

All NeXT computers rans variations of the Motorola 68030 and 68040. There may have been an after market 68060, but I think I'm confusing that with the Nitro board (66 MHz 68040?). Long time ago.

After NeXT abandoned hardware, it ran on a small subset of generic Intel hardware, then HP-PA RISC workstations, then SPARCstations, and finally, Apple PowerPC. Next year, it'll come back to Intel.
post #62 of 452
Sign me up for a 15" Intel Powerbook.
post #63 of 452
I am very interested to see what will happen to Mac gaming once the transition has started. Or more specifically once Intel Macs will run Windows games at native speeds either through VPC/VM Ware or dual-booting.

Personally, I can't see how the Mac game market won't be destroyed as part of this change. From a consumer standpoint why would anyone wait months and months for a PC game to be translated to the Mac when I they could buy the game the day it comes out (not to mention the cost of Mac games).

The bigger problem I see here is not the games themselves, but what will happen to the Mac software ecosystem?

I believe the entire Mac software market acts like an ecosystem of sorts. You have business tools, artists tools, education tools, freeware, shareware, and games. If so dismantle/disrupt one portion of the ecosystem how will will it affect the other portions?

I am happy to think that I will be soon playing <insert next big PC game here> my Intel Mac soon. But I am afraid than once the Mac game starts to dry up, you will start seeing other portions start to dry up as well (imagine Photoshop 9 that you have to run through VPC).

Thanks

dave
post #64 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by tacojohn
Sign me up for a 15" Intel Powerbook.

Me too.
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
post #65 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by Dave K.
what will happen to the Mac software ecosystem?

Dave K...

I don't know what is going to happen here, but I don't think developers will resort to being lazy enough to assume that people can just run their software through Virtual PC.

I think that the Intel Mac opens the "Mac door" to so many software developers. I don't know much about architectures, but from what I have read many developers will have a much easier time porting their Windows-only software to the Intel Mac than to the PowerPC Mac.

Actually, as I think I understand it, it may be more difficult for existing software that already runs on the Mac and uses the vector part of the PowerPC to transition to Intel.

Either way you slice it, I'm optimistic. Good times lie ahead.
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
post #66 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by 1984
How about a sticker for Windows PCs that reads "Warning: in less than 24 hours this computer will be infested with viruses, worms, trojans and malware".

24 hours? How nice from your part .
post #67 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by Dave K.
I am very interested to see what will happen to Mac gaming once the transition has started. Or more specifically once Intel Macs will run Windows games at native speeds either through VPC/VM Ware or dual-booting.

Personally, I can't see how the Mac game market won't be destroyed as part of this change. From a consumer standpoint why would anyone wait months and months for a PC game to be translated to the Mac when I they could buy the game the day it comes out (not to mention the cost of Mac games).

The bigger problem I see here is not the games themselves, but what will happen to the Mac software ecosystem?

I believe the entire Mac software market acts like an ecosystem of sorts. You have business tools, artists tools, education tools, freeware, shareware, and games. If so dismantle/disrupt one portion of the ecosystem how will will it affect the other portions?

I am happy to think that I will be soon playing <insert next big PC game here> my Intel Mac soon. But I am afraid than once the Mac game starts to dry up, you will start seeing other portions start to dry up as well (imagine Photoshop 9 that you have to run through VPC).

Thanks

dave

A very valid concern Dave.
post #68 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Dave K...

I don't know what is going to happen here, but I don't think developers will resort to being lazy enough to assume that people can just run their software through Virtual PC.

It is not about VPC. It is about Apple's decision to allow (read: make nothing to prevent) installing Windows on an Intel-Mac. This could have so devastating effects, that Apple would turn into a software company to survive. I am not saying it will happen, since we don't know nothing about the dual boot implementation details. But the danger is so evident, that I cannot imagine it is not part of an Apple plan. About what, I don't know.
post #69 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
It is not about VPC. It is about Apple's decision to allow (read: make nothing to prevent) installing Windows on an Intel-Mac. This could have so devastating effects, that Apple would turn into a software company to survive. I am not saying it will happen, since we don't know nothing about the dual boot implementation details. But the danger is so evident, that I cannot imagine it is not part of an Apple plan. About what, I don't know.

Even if apple does nothing to prevent people from installing Windows, how many people will actually do it? (ie: will Joe Schmo go through the trouble of partitioning his hard drive and installing it or not)
My computer can beat up your computer.
Reply
My computer can beat up your computer.
Reply
post #70 of 452
With virtualization poised to become huge in the next decade EVERY vendor is under pressure to create great apps to keep people on their platform.

Microsoft has just as much pressure to ensure that VM'd linux doesn't become a standard feature of computers.

It actually bodes well for consumers in the way that we should expect better software.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #71 of 452
here is something i haven't heard explained very well (or it was and i forgot):

we know that current powerpc-based apps will run on intel hardware via rosetta. BUT, will intel-based apps run on powerpc hardware for some of us slower to upgrade our hardware?

i ask because usually i buy the last of a line, just before a rev a. of a major transition in hardware. i usually get a great break on price, a very good machine, and usually they remain compatible for a long time. also, being the end of a line, those machines usually have had every bug worked out of them (my wife's pismo powerbook is a testament to that philosophy... so is my dual-G4 that can still boot into classic... though i never need to).

i am pretty sure apple wouldn't ABANDON those folks who were recent adopters of yesterday's macs, but how will the performance break down? could i buy a quad-g5 at the eleventh hour and still be able to use upcoming intel-apps, too? at full-speed?
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
post #72 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by rok
here is something i haven't heard explained very well (or it was and i forgot):

we know that current powerpc-based apps will run on intel hardware via rosetta. BUT, will intel-based apps run on powerpc hardware for some of us slower to upgrade our hardware?

I have never heard something like that. My impression is that intel-mac software will run exclusively on intel CPUs and there will be no a backwards (ppc) compatibility layer.
post #73 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by rok
we know that current powerpc-based apps will run on intel hardware via rosetta. BUT, will intel-based apps run on powerpc hardware for some of us slower to upgrade our hardware?

Hopefully when developers release Intel mac versions of their software, they won't be pure Intel, but rather Universal Binaries. A Universal Binary contains two separate versions of the program joined together, one of which runs natively on Intel and one of which runs natively on PPC.
post #74 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
24 hours? How nice from your part .

Well, this is assuming someone has that PC directly connected to the internet and not behind a firewall/router. Anyone who does that is daft and shouldn't own a computer anyway. (Or, they should be buying a Mac, obviously.)
post #75 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by mynamehere
Even if apple does nothing to prevent people from installing Windows, how many people will actually do it? (ie: will Joe Schmo go through the trouble of partitioning his hard drive and installing it or not)

As I said, it depends on the implementation details. If Apple makes it easy enough (just like installing Windows on a standard PC), then expect a real tsunami of people that will do it. Who does not have somewhere a Windows copy? This would mark the end of Apple as we know it today (mind you, not the end of Apple). And almost certainly the end of the Mac software ecosystem, to use Dave's terms.

My hope is that the new Intel technologies Apple will adopt, will make this substantially more complicated and not worth the trouble. We will see.
post #76 of 452
This is great news, and I can't wait to see these machines come out; however, I certainly won't be buying any first generation Mactels. I'd rather wait for a second gen. Mactel so that both Intel and Apple can work out the kinks in their systems, and also so that third party software developers will have had time to work on and release universal binary versions of their products. Also, in general, I'm more interested in a dual-core Merom PowerBook than a Yonah PowerBook.
-wt-
Reply
-wt-
Reply
post #77 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by PB
It is not about VPC. It is about Apple's decision to allow (read: make nothing to prevent) installing Windows on an Intel-Mac. This could have so devastating effects, that Apple would turn into a software company to survive. I am not saying it will happen, since we don't know nothing about the dual boot implementation details. But the danger is so evident, that I cannot imagine it is not part of an Apple plan. About what, I don't know.

Personally, I'd rather have VirtualPC than dual boot. The advantage of VPC is that your Mac is still running away in the background, you can drag and drop between the Mac and PC side, you can have multiple VPC installs and even multiple VPCs running. It's the only sane way I've found of running IE5, IE5.5 and IE6 which makes testing for browser bugs easy. Yes, it's slow on PPC now though it doesn't matter for me.

For users that can go almost completely Mac apart from one application it's definitely the way to go. If you dual boot then I think you'll find more users will be stuck using Windows more often than just the occasional application and buying and running Windows Games will be the norm.
post #78 of 452
Quote:
Originally posted by ascii
Hopefully when developers release Intel mac versions of their software, they won't be pure Intel, but rather Universal Binaries. A Universal Binary contains two separate versions of the program joined together, one of which runs natively on Intel and one of which runs natively on PPC.

Well, this is the obvious solution and will be put in use for some time. But I think rok's question is about pure intel software. In this case, as far as I know, the answer is no.
post #79 of 452
I think in the short term it makes sense for people to dual boot. Obviously 95 percent of the world uses Windows, and while most people can get by with using Mac OS X exclusively, there are instances when a Windows installation would be useful. And, if you're a gamer, even moreso. I wouldn't mind having a Mac with equal or better hardware than what I could put in a PC with Windows installed on the flipside when I'd like to do a bit of gaming. If the gaming arena wants to embrace the Macintel platform and help it catch up to Windows at some point, I'm all for it, but while this transition is happening, the more choice, the better.


Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Personally, I'd rather have VirtualPC than dual boot. The advantage of VPC is that your Mac is still running away in the background, you can drag and drop between the Mac and PC side, you can have multiple VPC installs and even multiple VPCs running. It's the only sane way I've found of running IE5, IE5.5 and IE6 which makes testing for browser bugs easy. Yes, it's slow on PPC now though it doesn't matter for me.

For users that can go almost completely Mac apart from one application it's definitely the way to go. If you dual boot then I think you'll find more users will be stuck using Windows more often than just the occasional application and buying and running Windows Games will be the norm.
post #80 of 452
I app apart, I doubt that all the majors Mac applications will be Universal binaries ready, when the first Intel mac will be released in january.

People will have to wait a little, to take advantage of the full potential of the newcomings intel macs.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › First Intel Macs on track for January