<strong>oh, its just that? why do they call it marklar?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Probably to match with the other worldy connotations of the previous Mac OS Project on Intel, which was called "Star Trek", way back in the early 90's ... "to go where no Mac OS has gone before" ... and was actually successfully completed, but shelved.
I guess in this case, it would also conjour up images of Apple-The-Alien-OS landing in the middle of the Wintel world.
Face it, guys... Apple will never switch to intel, at least while Jobs is in, because part of the reason that OS X is so stable is because computers, for the most part, are more vulnerable to crashing at higher clock speeds. That is why all the renderfarms are run on low-speed, high-bandwidth systems. It is more like Apple to scale up performance by increasing bandwidth and throughput, rather than pushing clockspeeds. Apple should take a note out of AMD's book and advertize by equivalent pentium clock speed. Xeon is a logical move for Pixar: it costs less than the insanely high price to performance ratio of Sun's systems. At least they're not running Windows on the Xeons.
<strong>...computers, for the most part, are more vulnerable to crashing at higher clock speeds. That is why all the renderfarms are run on low-speed, high-bandwidth systems.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>Well, they're not run on 32-bit, 3 ghz P4s, now are they? They're run on slower(in the megahertz sense)64-bit Xeons. </strong><hr></blockquote>
The Xeon is a 32 bit Pentium 4 with a more advanced cache design and are tuned for multi cpu setups. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
I dunno about Apple NEVER going to Intel for procs. With IBM's announcement of plans to license out production on their 400-series PPCs, it could eventually happen with the higher-level procs. Like someone else already said, Intel has the infrastructure and the money to fab 'em -- and IBM would have already done the R/D.
<strong>Face it, guys... Apple will never switch to intel, at least while Jobs is in, because part of the reason that OS X is so stable is because computers, for the most part, are more vulnerable to crashing at higher clock speeds.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>Well, they're not run on 32-bit, 3 ghz P4s, now are they? They're run on slower(in the megahertz sense)64-bit Xeons. </strong><hr></blockquote>
You can buy Xeons that are the same speed as current PIVs.
<strong>Face it, guys... Apple will never switch to intel, at least while Jobs is in, because part of the reason that OS X is so stable is because computers, for the most part, are more vulnerable to crashing at higher clock speeds.</strong><hr></blockquote>
i thought it was unix that gives osx its stability and osx gives unix the ease of use of a... of a mac, no mather what processor it's running.
stupid me <img src="embarrassed.gif" border="0">
a good reason (and probally already mentioned but i don't want to read all 90 posts) why apple won't use intel is because of the posibillity that, if necesarry some dorc makes a patch to run osx on a dell: bye, bye apple, we will never see your soft glowing apple on hardware again...
If it's not Xeon, what is Intel's 64-bit flagship? Do they even have a 64-bit flagship? It's not like I'm on the Intel site 24/7 <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<strong>Good god man you have taken over future hardware. :eek:
Have you heard of the Itanium? It might make some sense to research some of the topics you are writing about before you post. Just a thought. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Well we shouldn't be too harsh on the lad, after all, before each of us found a left handed screw driver, we were just as out of it, even Programmer (remember that Programmer! Geez, who'da ever thought you'd find that leftie where you did!).
Anyway, OS10Geek, when you too find The Leftie, you will attain true wisdom.
<strong>Well we shouldn't be too harsh on the lad, after all, before each of us found a left handed screw driver, we were just as out of it, even Programmer (remember that Programmer! Geez, who'da ever thought you'd find that leftie where you did!).
Apple will never give up the iron grip it has on its Crown Jewels. (They may sign its 'look and feel' away so their competitor can crush them but lose control of the hardware? I don't think so...)
That doesn't rule out a propietary Intel CPU motherboard as part of the Apple's fight to survive the Tidal Wave that is Wintel. Could be used selectively or as a last resort. Personally, I think once Apple has opened a few more Apple stores and has grown the PPC market base to 10% ish...they'll go after M$ just as M$ hits with Palladium, Apple will retaliate for years of M$ abuse ie ripping off Mac OS, buggy and slow browser...threatening to pull Office. There's only so much of that kinda crap you can take before the worm turns. At that point, we'll see Apple port its Apps to Apple-'tel. CPU speed will be that fast on 970s and upwards...Apple could probably emulate any Intel CPU and give reasonable performance (probably in excess of a one gig Pentium 3...)
Will it happen in 2003? Don't think so. In 2004? Hmmm. Not quite. 2005? I think so.
Wasn't PPC the 'port' of the original Next battle plan? Didn't it start on Intel? Didn't Next have several CPUs supported with a user base far smaller than Apple's? And Steve (hear the audio clip...) certainly is able to spit out, 'Sun's gone...now they're all Intel...'. Let's not underestimate Jobs. I think he and Apple will do what it takes. At the right time. Even it offends the Thomas and Co Manticore of the Insider boards.
The key is in the execution. If Apple let any PC maker or Tom, Dick(!)(DELL), or 'HARRY' (HP) make PCs with their os? Apple would maybe find it hard going. And may bleed to death.
Apple is right to have their bases(asses) covered. Matsu seems to think IBM may grow tired of PPC. (I don't necessarily agree...) It's good to see Apple has a fall back plan. We mustn't rule out how tenacious Apple is. Even though they have walked through the valley of Wintel...they have feared no one.
I'm confident that if Apple went head on with M$ on an Intel CPU on a proprietary Apple motherboard...that Apple would survive and do just as well...if not better. Intel and Transmeta cpus find themselves in products are compact as Apple's give or take. Apple have already done the impossible with its Unix OX and X-serve. Any PC maker in Apple's shoes would probably died years ago (Remember Commodore? And numerous clone makers?)
Apple's got something nobody else has. They're the 'rudder'.
Personally, I think once Apple has opened a few more Apple stores and has grown the PPC market base to 10% ish...they'll go after M$ just as M$ hits with Palladium, Apple will retaliate for years of M$ abuse ie ripping off Mac OS, buggy and slow browser...threatening to pull Office.
Lemon Bon Bon</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah ... and then came along .net
Microsoft is busy patenting everything and buying off anybody else who's important and happened to think their proven abuse of 95% market share might in any way be a problem.
And I'm afraid it's working.
... and we thought Amazon's one click shopping patent was an issue!
Worst case scenario?
Microsoft is going to get away with Palladium because they're going to make .net the standard (and with 95% market share, how can anybody stop them?), and threaten any competition or reverse engineered alternatives with their patent and endless litigation ... now of course, some alternatives to MS will be allowed for optical purposes, but MS will charge huge liscensing fees before they can even get into the tent, thus assuring MS another 20 years of sitting on their thumbs and collecting checks.
We'll all get screwed, but big deal, we don't matter. Bill can buy all the friends he needs.
If you can remember the bad old days when any PC manufacturer looking for a break in the cut throat box wars, had to sign a deal with MS paying a fee for all boxes sold, regardless of the OS intalled on them (thus making any OS that hoped to compete with MS, automatically more expensive since the user had to buy both MS and the competition) ... well this will be the same thing all over again, except it will be far more pervasive, totally above board and perfectly legal.
In short, it might not matter how much cooler than Palladium Apple's OS may be ... if they want to play in a future Microsoft .net Universe, they'll have to pay the Microsoft tax regardless.
So Microsoft might have another leash waiting for Apple's neck just as they get out from the MS Office version. 970 or no ...
If I was Apple, I'd be working my ass off to find "Prior Art" to the .net patent ASAP.
Comments
<strong>im sorry, maybe i missed it, but what exactly is Marklar?</strong><hr></blockquote>
A rumored project within Apple to keep an Mac OS X running and up to date on x86-based hardware.
For 'Thomas'.
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>oh, its just that? why do they call it marklar?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Probably to match with the other worldy connotations of the previous Mac OS Project on Intel, which was called "Star Trek", way back in the early 90's ... "to go where no Mac OS has gone before" ... and was actually successfully completed, but shelved.
I guess in this case, it would also conjour up images of Apple-The-Alien-OS landing in the middle of the Wintel world.
AY!
[ 02-14-2003: Message edited by: os10geek ]</p>
<strong>...computers, for the most part, are more vulnerable to crashing at higher clock speeds. That is why all the renderfarms are run on low-speed, high-bandwidth systems.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" />
<strong>Well, they're not run on 32-bit, 3 ghz P4s, now are they? They're run on slower(in the megahertz sense)64-bit Xeons.
The Xeon is a 32 bit Pentium 4 with a more advanced cache design and are tuned for multi cpu setups. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<strong>Face it, guys... Apple will never switch to intel, at least while Jobs is in, because part of the reason that OS X is so stable is because computers, for the most part, are more vulnerable to crashing at higher clock speeds.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Wow <img src="embarrassed.gif" border="0">
<strong>Well, they're not run on 32-bit, 3 ghz P4s, now are they? They're run on slower(in the megahertz sense)64-bit Xeons.
You can buy Xeons that are the same speed as current PIVs.
<strong>Face it, guys... Apple will never switch to intel, at least while Jobs is in, because part of the reason that OS X is so stable is because computers, for the most part, are more vulnerable to crashing at higher clock speeds.</strong><hr></blockquote>
i thought it was unix that gives osx its stability and osx gives unix the ease of use of a... of a mac, no mather what processor it's running.
stupid me <img src="embarrassed.gif" border="0">
a good reason (and probally already mentioned but i don't want to read all 90 posts) why apple won't use intel is because of the posibillity that, if necesarry some dorc makes a patch to run osx on a dell: bye, bye apple, we will never see your soft glowing apple on hardware again...
[ 02-15-2003: Message edited by: gar ]</p>
Have you heard of the Itanium? It might make some sense to research some of the topics you are writing about before you post. Just a thought.
[ 02-15-2003: Message edited by: FotNS ]</p>
<strong>Good god man you have taken over future hardware. :eek:
Have you heard of the Itanium? It might make some sense to research some of the topics you are writing about before you post. Just a thought.
Well we shouldn't be too harsh on the lad, after all, before each of us found a left handed screw driver, we were just as out of it, even Programmer (remember that Programmer! Geez, who'da ever thought you'd find that leftie where you did!).
Anyway, OS10Geek, when you too find The Leftie, you will attain true wisdom.
Now off you go...
(anybody got a photo to help him out?)
<strong>Well we shouldn't be too harsh on the lad, after all, before each of us found a left handed screw driver, we were just as out of it, even Programmer (remember that Programmer! Geez, who'da ever thought you'd find that leftie where you did!).
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Nobody's perfect.
<strong>(anybody got a photo to help him out?)</strong><hr></blockquote>
That doesn't rule out a propietary Intel CPU motherboard as part of the Apple's fight to survive the Tidal Wave that is Wintel. Could be used selectively or as a last resort. Personally, I think once Apple has opened a few more Apple stores and has grown the PPC market base to 10% ish...they'll go after M$ just as M$ hits with Palladium, Apple will retaliate for years of M$ abuse ie ripping off Mac OS, buggy and slow browser...threatening to pull Office. There's only so much of that kinda crap you can take before the worm turns. At that point, we'll see Apple port its Apps to Apple-'tel. CPU speed will be that fast on 970s and upwards...Apple could probably emulate any Intel CPU and give reasonable performance (probably in excess of a one gig Pentium 3...)
Will it happen in 2003? Don't think so. In 2004? Hmmm. Not quite. 2005? I think so.
Wasn't PPC the 'port' of the original Next battle plan? Didn't it start on Intel?
The key is in the execution. If Apple let any PC maker or Tom, Dick(!)(DELL), or 'HARRY' (HP) make PCs with their os? Apple would maybe find it hard going. And may bleed to death.
Apple is right to have their bases(asses) covered. Matsu seems to think IBM may grow tired of PPC. (I don't necessarily agree...) It's good to see Apple has a fall back plan. We mustn't rule out how tenacious Apple is. Even though they have walked through the valley of Wintel...they have feared no one.
I'm confident that if Apple went head on with M$ on an Intel CPU on a proprietary Apple motherboard...that Apple would survive and do just as well...if not better. Intel and Transmeta cpus find themselves in products are compact as Apple's give or take. Apple have already done the impossible with its Unix OX and X-serve. Any PC maker in Apple's shoes would probably died years ago (Remember Commodore? And numerous clone makers?)
Apple's got something nobody else has. They're the 'rudder'.
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>
Personally, I think once Apple has opened a few more Apple stores and has grown the PPC market base to 10% ish...they'll go after M$ just as M$ hits with Palladium, Apple will retaliate for years of M$ abuse ie ripping off Mac OS, buggy and slow browser...threatening to pull Office.
Lemon Bon Bon</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah ... and then came along .net
Microsoft is busy patenting everything and buying off anybody else who's important and happened to think their proven abuse of 95% market share might in any way be a problem.
And I'm afraid it's working.
... and we thought Amazon's one click shopping patent was an issue!
Worst case scenario?
Microsoft is going to get away with Palladium because they're going to make .net the standard (and with 95% market share, how can anybody stop them?), and threaten any competition or reverse engineered alternatives with their patent and endless litigation ... now of course, some alternatives to MS will be allowed for optical purposes, but MS will charge huge liscensing fees before they can even get into the tent, thus assuring MS another 20 years of sitting on their thumbs and collecting checks.
We'll all get screwed, but big deal, we don't matter. Bill can buy all the friends he needs.
If you can remember the bad old days when any PC manufacturer looking for a break in the cut throat box wars, had to sign a deal with MS paying a fee for all boxes sold, regardless of the OS intalled on them (thus making any OS that hoped to compete with MS, automatically more expensive since the user had to buy both MS and the competition) ... well this will be the same thing all over again, except it will be far more pervasive, totally above board and perfectly legal.
In short, it might not matter how much cooler than Palladium Apple's OS may be ... if they want to play in a future Microsoft .net Universe, they'll have to pay the Microsoft tax regardless.
So Microsoft might have another leash waiting for Apple's neck just as they get out from the MS Office version. 970 or no ...
If I was Apple, I'd be working my ass off to find "Prior Art" to the .net patent ASAP.