Apple interest in Intel switch led to purchase of NeXT, return of Steve Jobs

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 68
    IBM PPC still used in Nintendo's, Playstation 3, XBOX 360, ...

    From Wikipedia:
    Quote:

    Toward the close of the decade, the same manufacturing issues began plaguing the AIM alliance in much the same way it did Motorola, which consistently pushed back deployments of new processors for Apple and other vendors: first from Motorola in the 1990s with the G3 and G4 processors, and IBM with the 64-bit G5 processor in 2003. In 2004, Motorola exited the chip manufacturing business by spinning off its semiconductor business as an independent company called Freescale Semiconductor. Around the same time, IBM exited the 32-Bit embedded processor market by selling its line of PowerPC products to Applied Micro Circuits Corporation (AMCC) and focused on 64-Bit chip designs, while maintaining its commitment of PowerPC CPUs toward game machine makers such as Nintendo's GameCube and Wii, Sony's PlayStation 3 and Microsoft's Xbox 360 both use 64-Bit processors. In 2005 Apple announced they would no longer use PowerPC processors in their Apple Macintosh computers, favoring Intel produced processors instead, citing the performance limitations of the chip for future personal computer hardware specifically related to heat generation and energy usage, as well as the inability of IBM to move the 970 (PowerPC G5) processor to the 3*GHz range. The IBM-Freescale alliance was replaced by an open standards body called Power.org. Power.org operates under the governance of the IEEE with IBM continuing to use and evolve the PowerPC processor on game consoles and Freescale Semiconductor focusing solely on embedded devices.

    IBM continues to develop PowerPC microprocessor cores for use in their ASIC offerings. Many high volume applications embed PowerPC cores..



  • Reply 62 of 68
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,678member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    So, you're saying that Apple didn't keep NeXTSTEP/OS X up to date on Intel the entire time, despite the fact that it was on Intel when Apple acquired NeXT? Interesting.



    As far as I heard they kept building it for intel, but not testing it anywhere.
  • Reply 63 of 68
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by c-ray View Post


    Don't forget that the G5 (the last few used in the Power Mac) had to be water cooled.



    Not all G5 Macs were water cooled.

    Only the Power Macintosh G5 2.5 DP (PCI-X), Power Macintosh G5 2.7 DP (PCI-X), Power Macintosh G5 "Quad Core" (2.5) were water cooled.
  • Reply 64 of 68
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by 8CoreWhore View Post


    I wonder why this wasn't in the book.



    Because it's largely rubbish.



    Apple bought NeXT because System 8 (and 9) was falling apart and developments of the replacements had more or less fallen apart. Windows 95 had moved memory management on, and Apple needed to update and quickly.



    And remember that Apple bought NeXT in 96/97, whereas Apple Intel machines were 2006 - so the best part of a decade away. As someone else pointed out, they had only just made the transition to PowerPC a few years earlier and PowerPC was a promising cpu platform in those days.
  • Reply 65 of 68
    ssquirrelssquirrel Posts: 1,196member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdcat View Post


    Me, too, and other Amigas. Some can run 680x0 Mac (OS 7.5 and before) s/w, which

    is more than my Mac Mini and Macbook Pro can



    You would expect the MBP and Mini to be running software from 15 years ago, which ran originally on a cpu that was 2 platform moves ago WHY exactly? Those Amigas were at elast contemporaries of System 7.5.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tinman0 View Post


    Because it's largely rubbish.



    Apple bought NeXT because System 8 (and 9) was falling apart and developments of the replacements had more or less fallen apart. Windows 95 had moved memory management on, and Apple needed to update and quickly.



    And remember that Apple bought NeXT in 96/97, whereas Apple Intel machines were 2006 - so the best part of a decade away. As someone else pointed out, they had only just made the transition to PowerPC a few years earlier and PowerPC was a promising cpu platform in those days.



    System 7. Jobs decided to do a new OS release (System 8) so they could kill the clone market as there was nothing in the contracts about the next version.
  • Reply 66 of 68
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Brainless View Post


    There is quite informative info on Be vs. NeXT decision :



    http://macspeedzone.com/archive/art/con/be.shtml



    Thanks for the link, all coming back to me. Love this piece:



    "In a statement released the night Apple purchased NeXT, Jobs wrote, "Much of the industry has lived off the Macintosh for over ten years now, slowly copying the Mac's revolutionary user interface. Now the time has come for new innovation, and where better than Apple for this to spring from? Who else has consistently led this industry§ first with the Apple II, then the Macintosh and LaserWriter? With this merger, the advanced software from NeXT will be married with Apple's very high-volume hardware platforms and marketing channels to create another breakthrough, leapfrogging existing platforms, and fueling Apple and the industry copy cats for the next ten years and beyond. I still have very deep feelings for Apple, and it gives me great joy to play a role in architecting Apple's future."
  • Reply 67 of 68
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jdkullmann View Post


    JK, Apple, 1987-2008



    Wow, you have seen the fall and the rise of Apple. Turbulent times, I'm sure.
  • Reply 68 of 68
    very informative post and other all comments right i also think why not see before
Sign In or Register to comment.