Questions for you all...

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
I'm not trolling. I am totally serious about these questions.



IF Apple switched to Intel/AMD CPUs, what would your reaction be?



Would you be more or less likely to buy such a Macintosh?



Personally, I can see numerous advantages to such a move, but I'm interested in hearing other peoples' thoughts. I'm sorry if this has already been asked here...

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 18
    xypexype Posts: 672member
    I wouldn't buy a x86 Mac - why should I. I can build a box myself then.. When OSX came out I was really looking forward to having a viable graphics/design Unix workstation at hand. Easy to use and not obsolete in six months when AMD/Intel decides to dump out another group of faster CPUs or microsoft decides it's time for Windows SXPWhatever.
  • Reply 2 of 18
    nemnem Posts: 45member
    If they did so I sincerely hope they would remain in control of the hardware, eg designing special motherboards that can only run Mac OSX. There will probably be some hack around this if it happens but such a thing would never be widely recognised...



    My personal reaction would be to move back to run Mac for 100% again... I won't do that while the performance is so badly behind as it is today...
  • Reply 3 of 18
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    After I picked my jaw up off the floor, I'd try to see how on Earth Apple would pull that off without screwing themselves ten different ways. Whether or not they did, I'd continue using the Mac I have.
  • Reply 4 of 18
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,341member
    Wouldn't make much of a difference. I like the PowerPC processor and don't really envy P4's and Athlons that require 3 fans in a case.
  • Reply 5 of 18
    xypexype Posts: 672member
    [quote]Originally posted by Amorph:

    <strong>I'd try to see how on Earth Apple would pull that off without screwing themselves ten different ways.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Hehe, this reminded me of the "SGI on x86" gig of a few years ago... surely Apple has a nice example there. :cool:
  • Reply 6 of 18
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    PPC's have a significant power/cost advantage when you move to MP configurations of 4 or more. There isn't any price competitive x86 processor capable of 4 way operation.



    I would look for Apple to solve the memory throughput issues and then go to 4-way MP machines before they ever went with an x86 variant.



    It's not as ridiculous as it sounds at first blush. 4 800Mhz SOI G4's cost less than 2 1Ghz G4's. Four 1Ghz G4's cost less than ONE 4-way+ capable P4.***



    ***Remember P4 and Xeon will only work up to two way configs. You need a XeonMP for greater than 2-way MP configs, and they cost, they cost A LOT.
  • Reply 7 of 18
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    [quote]Originally posted by xype:

    <strong>



    Hehe, this reminded me of the "SGI on x86" gig of a few years ago... surely Apple has a nice example there. :cool: </strong><hr></blockquote>



    SGI's "gig" was building an x86 system and shipping it with Windows. Note they didn't port IRIX to their 320/540 Wintel workstations.



    SGI kept their MIPS based systems rather separate from their x86 systems, and IRIX won't be leaving the MIPS platform for the forseeable future, as SGI is still 100% commited to that architecture and IRIX.
  • Reply 8 of 18
    [quote]IF Apple switched to Intel/AMD CPUs, what would your reaction be?

    <hr></blockquote>



    Shock. It would be an extremely audacious move, given that developers have had to endure the transition from 68k to PPC, then from Mac OS 8/9 to X. Some developers would understand, but I dare say that some may abandon the Mac OS altogether.



    [quote]Would you be more or less likely to buy such a Macintosh?

    <hr></blockquote>



    It wouldn't affect my decision. I don't use a Mac for raw speed alone.



    I use a Mac for a variety of other reasons. I like Mac OS X (both using it, and developing with it). I like iMovie and iTunes. I like my TiBook for a variety of reasons (other than how fast its CPU is).



    If Apple can achieve these same things, but with a CPU that implements the x86 instruction set, that's fine with me.



    [ 05-21-2002: Message edited by: PipelineStall ]</p>
  • Reply 9 of 18
    screedscreed Posts: 1,077member
    [quote]Originally posted by Froggus Maximus:

    <strong>I'm not trolling. I am totally serious about these questions.



    IF Apple switched to Intel/AMD CPUs, what would your reaction be?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I would:

    1) Cash in some CDs to cover the cost of the higher electrical bills due to those wattage sucking muthas.



    2) Buy Earplugs due to the extra fans Apple engineers would be forced to put in.



    3) Hug and kiss my Cube!



    Screed ...I tend to hug and kiss my Cube anyway.
  • Reply 10 of 18
    zozo Posts: 3,115member
    IF AMD/Intel were to MAKE a new generation PowerPC chip FOR Apple, I dont think I would care much.



    IF Apple were to use X86 based processors, I would really wonder what was going on through their heads. It doesnt mean I wouldnt buy one (not like we would have a choice). Plus, IF Apple were to use an AMD/Intel X86 chip, Im sure there would be some kind of hardware related 'thing' that wouldnt let us just buy ANY clone PC and install OS X on it.

    Like maybe Apple making the mobo that would have some specific hardware for OS X to run.. but use X86 chips.



    Still, if Apple were to use X86 chips I think it would be purely for desperation. Apple would just become 'another pc company' with a different OS.



    Also, since Apple would still control the HardWare, we wouldnt be able to (probably) just plop out the old processor and add a new one. We would still have to resort to buying new hardware for better specs.
  • Reply 11 of 18
    sc_marktsc_markt Posts: 1,397member
    [quote]Originally posted by ZO:

    <strong>IF AMD/Intel were to MAKE a new generation PowerPC chip FOR Apple, I dont think I would care much.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    I'm almost at the point where I agree with this.
  • Reply 12 of 18
    serranoserrano Posts: 1,806member
    shake my head, buy the fastest processor out there (assuming it would also be an x86) and run mandrake <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
  • Reply 13 of 18
    sc_marktsc_markt Posts: 1,397member
    [quote]Originally posted by ZO:

    <strong>IF AMD/Intel were to MAKE a new generation PowerPC chip FOR Apple, I dont think I would care much.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    I'm almost at the point where I agree with this.
  • Reply 14 of 18
    fischerfischer Posts: 35member
    I'd be surprised if by an x86 Mac, mostly for the politics of it - but I wouldn't necessarily be turned off. As long as it runs OS X and Apple designed the hardware, I don't much care what CPU is inside.



    For most Mac users (and certainy for the general public) Apple's software, integration, industrial design and brand name are far more important when it comes to differentiating the Mac from other PCs. PowerPC was extremely strategic for Apple when the 680x0 stalled and IBM/Motorola were interested in challenging Intel for the desktop, but nowadays it's less so.



    I'm not dismissing the technology or bashing the G4, but Apple didn't gain the long-term benefit PowerPC was supposed to deliver. For the second time in as many decades, it is facing a situation where progress in CPUs for Macs lags behind that for PCs. How nice it would be if Apple could put an end to this nonsense. There couldn't be a better time than now, what with the greater portability of OS X, and the competition between Intel and AMD. Imagine Apple being in a position to play one supplier against the other.



    Of course, less-than-bleeding-edge performance shouldn't be a showstopper for a lot of people, but Apple's current situation is a bit absurd. Like someone choosing to be sick every six months.



    Just my two cents... <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />



    [ 05-22-2002: Message edited by: Fischer ]</p>
  • Reply 15 of 18
    othelloothello Posts: 1,054member
    [quote]Originally posted by Froggus Maximus:

    <strong>I'm not trolling. I am totally serious about these questions.



    IF Apple switched to Intel/AMD CPUs, what would your reaction be?



    Would you be more or less likely to buy such a Macintosh?



    Personally, I can see numerous advantages to such a move, but I'm interested in hearing other peoples' thoughts. I'm sorry if this has already been asked here...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Anyone else think the wording of these questions sounds like a customer survey? Perhaps by Apple...





    <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
  • Reply 16 of 18
    zerozero Posts: 39member
    [quote]Originally posted by Froggus Maximus:

    <strong>I'm not trolling. I am totally serious about these questions.



    IF Apple switched to Intel/AMD CPUs, what would your reaction be?



    [...]

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    I wouldn't care. I have to x86 boxes at home which run Linux.



    The processor is not guilty. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

    It's Windows I do not like .



    zero
  • Reply 17 of 18
    bryan furybryan fury Posts: 169member
    apple have x on x86 already as a backup



    imagine x on dual athlons - sweet !
  • Reply 18 of 18
    danmacmandanmacman Posts: 773member
    [quote]Originally posted by ZO:

    <strong>IF AMD/Intel were to MAKE a new generation PowerPC chip FOR Apple, I dont think I would care much.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    If AMD has the ability to further develop the PPC faster and more efficiently, then I say drop MOT now and don't look back. How much longer can Apple let this hardware lag continue?
Sign In or Register to comment.