Perhaps Apple is simply talking to Intel about next generation controller chips, or such like rather than CPUs?
It wouldn't be the first time that an Apple machine had an Intel chip soldered to the underside of the logic board where most people would never think to look.
PCI, PCI Express and USB are all Intel standards...
Moving will ensure the longterm viability of the Mac. Intel will continue to make cutting edge CPU technology. IBM has no motivation. If Apple uses Intel based processors it will always be equal or ahead of current windows based PC machines. As far as motherboards go, they can be made into any shape you wish. Most PC motherboards are made to be installed in a standard case type. Dell, HP, and other companies use CUSTOM motherboards, however they aren't very innovative in design. There isnt' a limitation on how the case can be designed by used a chip based on intel.
In my opinion you wouldn't even know the difference, Only that it was cheepier and faster.
Stop being such a drama queen.
1) Intel does not make cutting edge CPU technology. AMD's processors are cheaper, more efficient, and use less power than Intel's.
2) Soon, Apple won't be the only company purchasing IBM's chips. All next gen consoles except for PS3 will be using IBM's G5 processors with multiple cores. Apple will be just another client for IBM, not their sole reason to be making the G5s. plus, you forget that IBM makes the G5s for themselves too, they use them in their servers.
3) Apple is already ahead of PCs. Show me an Athlon 64 processor that runs at 2.7 Ghz. Show me an Intel that can significantly outperform the equivilant of 2 2.6Ghz AMD processors. They don't exist, Apple already is AT LEAST keeping up with the competition if not blowing them out of the water.
4)APPLE ISN'T GOING TO INTEL FOR MAIN CPUS!!! STOP THIS NONSENSE!!! YOU ALL FORGET THAT INTEL IS THE LARGEST FLASH MEMORY MANUFACTERERS IN THE WORLD!!! I mean come on, Apple could just be looking for a new iPod Shuffle model. Or Apple could be looking for some type of chipset, a processor for a handheld device, or a processor for a video iPod. Intel makes MORE THAN ONE PRODUCT PEOPLE!
".....Apple could choose to add some Intel-based models to its product line or make a complete shift -- dealing a serious blow to IBM's microprocessor business"
umm... no, IBM couldn't give a sh1t if apple lapped up it's table scraps or not.
Yes because it's so "hard" to figure out intel's next generation technology. Don't be an idiot. People dont' stage corporate talks to sneak a peak back into the R&D room.
Maybe you're not familar but many of the staff of Apple computer included Steve Jobs are welcome on Intel's campus.
Uh, yeah they do. No one really knows what Intel wants to do. There were rumors not too long ago that Intel was exploring asynchronous techniques.
Secondly, as a person who's in the high-tech industry, I can verify that very often companies will meet to discuss long term plans. For example, Intel has been planning something, and (A) they want to see if Apple is interested, (B) they want to see what changes they could make in the project to make Apple even more interested. This is pretty standard procedure.
First has any one seen this by Paul Thurrott (http://www.internet-nexus.com/)? Ignoring that he makes some self important claims of discovery of the whole Apple/Intel collusion. He does however suggest a similar line to Engadet for a tablet type device.
PS don't know why his site is so OS X orientated - a troll site maybe?
Text from Paul's site as below for those who don't won't to support his add based cash generation...
Quote:
Apple and Intel: A tale of rumors and truths
Everyone has an opinion about the Wall Street Journal report that Apple may be moving to Intel chips. The most common opinion is that Apple is foisting this rumor itself in a bid to pressure IBM, its current chipmaker. Apple, these people say, is upset that IBM can't deliver the 3 GHz chip that Steve Jobs promised two years ago, and it's jealous that IBM is spending so much time working on chips for video game systems.
It all makes a lot of sense. There's just one problem. In the past, when rumors of Apple jumping ship to a different chip architecture came up, I just reported on them like everyone else. This time, I'm involved personally. I was the first to report it was happening, for starters. And I now have three sources that have independently provided me with information about these developments. That doesn't mean that Apple isn't playing Intel off of IBM of course. But I have to wonder.
One of my sources is a Microsoft evangelist who heard that Apple was moving to Intel from two senior Apple executives. The second is an Intel engineer I met at WinHEC last month, who told me that Intel then had OS X running on Intel hardware in its labs. The third source is a Tablet PC enthusiast and expert who regularly provides me with Tablet PC information.
The first two were unequivocal: Apple is porting OS X to Intel--not to x86, but specifically to Intel--and abandoning IBM's PowerPC architecture. The third noted this week that he's hearing that the Intel work is related to Apple's much discussed Tablet device. Too, there's a hidden display option that lets you orient the screen in landscape mode in Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger," a clue that such a device is on the way, I was told by others. (However, I can't get this secret option to work because my PowerBook doesn't support it.)
So what does all this mean? I'm not sure. It may happen. It may not. But this is the first time I've actually been involved, and I'm not sure what to make of it.
First has any one seen this by Paul Thurrott (http://www.internet-nexus.com/)? Ignoring that he makes some self important claims of discovery of the whole Apple/Intel collusion. He does however suggest a similar line to Engadet for a tablet type device.
PS don't know why his site is so OS X orientated - a troll site maybe?
Text from Paul's site as below for those who don't won't to support his add based cash generation...
o what does all this mean? I'm not sure. It may happen. It may not. But this is the first time I've actually been involved, and I'm not sure what to make of it.
Yep, he's really involved in all of this. What a load of crap!
Too, there's a hidden display option that lets you orient the screen in landscape mode in Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger," a clue that such a device is on the way, I was told by others. (However, I can't get this secret option to work because my PowerBook doesn't support it.
Hidden? Secret? It's right there in the SysPref if you have the right GPU and an external display.
Hidden? Secret? It's right there in the SysPref if you have the right GPU and an external display.
To test it, quit System Preferences, re-launch it, and press "option" while clicking on the "Displays" preference pane icon.
If you have the appropriate graphics chip, you should get a "Rotate:" option with a drop down.
If you rotate, you'll lose that drop down after the display refresh, but just quit System Preferences, re-launch, and press "option" again on the "Displays" icon, and it will return. Then choose "standard" in the drop down.
To test it, quit System Preferences, re-launch it, and press "option" while clicking on the "Displays" preference pane icon.
If you have the appropriate graphics chip, you should get a "Rotate:" option with a drop down.
If you rotate, you'll lose that drop down after the display refresh, but just quit System Preferences, re-launch, and press "option" again on the "Displays" icon, and it will return. Then choose "standard" in the drop down.
And on a desktop system (which has an external display) it's right there without pressing anything.
RUMOR: Apple Tablet exists running 'reduced version' of Mac OS X
Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 10:25 AM EST
Rob Bushway, owner of Zoe Technologies, a firm specializing in web development and technology consulting, who also runs TabletBible.Com for inkable bibles and books for Tablet PCs has posted this on his blog:
I have no less than 5 sources saying an Apple Tablet announcement is due soon... And the Intel talks are for battery saving Sonoma-like Powerbook and Tablet tech, I'd heard this 3-4 weeks ago from 3 sources... And it exists, honest, [have] seen a prototype. Instant On, running a reduced version of OSX, with some funky start-up PDA like Apple icon menu. Touch only (white touch pen), [at] least the version I saw.
If Intel is evil, IBM is evil. You remember the "1984" commercial? That was aimed squarely at IBM. "Make friends with unrighteous Mammon," if you want to think of things in such terms. The question is, what does Intel have that Apple might be interested in?
Intel doesn't just make Pentiums, or x86 CPUs. They make lots and lots of stuff. Apple could be interested in any of it. I note the latest rumors that Apple is looking at their power-saving technology for PowerBooks (or tablets, as other rumors have it).
As I said above, the discussions could center around something that won't see production for years yet. Apple approached IBM about the 970 sometime in or near 2000, to give you some idea.
Finally, if it is (even partially, or tentatively) about a CPU: Intel has wanted x86 dead for over a decade now. Not all of their reasons are noble, certainly, but the fact remains that if they could line up a significant customer for a next-generation platform, free of all that legacy baggage, they might jump at the chance. There are a lot of emerging technologies and capabilities that would be more elegantly implemented on a clean sheet of paper.
Wow, you all are certainly fired up over this today...
I agree with the earlier post that the endian issues are significant. I use linux PCs a lot, and when compiling code I always have to check the byte-swap I/O option on the linux boxes. Please, let's not have to do that.
In the realm of likely outcomes, how about:
- dual-G4s in PBs long, long before there is a G5 PB
- serious horses in a dual-core (preferably dual dual-core)
powermac in under a year
- intel talk is to drive home Apple's unhappiness with IBM's chip issues.
Otherwise ... who wants to bet on how long (or not..) we will have software developers willing to write code for both PPC- and Intel- based Macs?
I sorta like the idea of Apple and AMD going in together on some serious next-generation boxes, but it seems the obstacles are significant and not worth the cost unless Apple sees IBM as a truly dead end (rather than just significantly delayed).
The only thing about this that *could* make any sense is that Intel has got, or is waiting to produce a processor that is multi-OS compatible. They announced this technology a while back, if anyone here remembers.
When asked if Apple's OS would run on it, they said yes, it would. I am sure that they meant the current PPC version, at least that's how Intel was describing the technology. I forgot what they called it, but it was virtualization, though in hardware. Supposedly there was little if any loss in performance.
IBM has this technology as well, but I'n not certain as to how advanced it is.
*IF* this chip could allow OS X to run without a conversion, then perhaps PPC software would run as well. If the chip is fast, and works well, this could be a solution.
But who knows at this point in time whether it's an actual product? Perhaps that's what the article was referring to.
Actually I think you are thinking about IBM and not Intel. IBM said the next PowerPC 970 chip will support virtualization and that Apple will be using that chip.
IBM's had this tech for awhile now. The Power5 actually uses it. See these links for a refresher:
So, IMHO, all this BS over Apple going with Intel on future computers is BS. I believe what many others do, that Apple is simply talking to Intel about chips for the Xserve, or iPod, or... Or Apple is talking about future technology standards with Intel like wireless USB, firewire, etc.
I actually think something like cell or MS' processor would work very well as a laptop chip. Keep in mind a lot of the limitations present in it are present in the G4 so it is really just a case of which would be quicker per second.
Just depends on how hot they get and their power management. Neither of those consoles is a Powerbook.
It's a totally different chip. It requires a very different programming model.
I can't see Apple being able to utilize this chip without some rather large changes to the Mach core which is not designed to operate with a chip of this type.
Remember this chip uses a much simplified PPC chip as a controller, though it does some calculations of it's own. There are no out of order execution units in it.
Actually I think you are thinking about IBM and not Intel. IBM said the next PowerPC 970 chip will support virtualization and that Apple will be using that chip.
IBM's had this tech for awhile now. The Power5 actually uses it. See these links for a refresher:
So, IMHO, all this BS over Apple going with Intel on future computers is BS. I believe what many others do, that Apple is simply talking to Intel about chips for the Xserve, or iPod, or... Or Apple is talking about future technology standards with Intel like wireless USB, firewire, etc.
No. It was very specifically Intel that had a press conference about this chip less than two years ago. They were questioned about it's capabilities to run more than one operating system at a time. The questioning led to the speculation about OS X, and their positive reply.
Several others here remember this as well.
I suppose I could look it up if I have the time, but it isn't a questionable event. It was heavily reported upon.
Perhaps the new AirPort Extreme A/V basestation will have Intel inside.
I don't know about that. Has anyone gotten to that point yet? How do the players like the HD-DVD models that are in pre-production, and the few Sony Blu-Ray machines that do exist do it?
I'm not sure which systems they use to get the video on the disks.
... all those Intel boxes in Apple's back yard are just Intel's home delivery drivers bringing round a new slew of chips for Wireless USB? Not a switch in processor technologies, but a switch in peripheral concepts -- including but not limited to a switch from FireWire to new USB standards... Go, think!
Comments
Perhaps Apple is simply talking to Intel about next generation controller chips, or such like rather than CPUs?
It wouldn't be the first time that an Apple machine had an Intel chip soldered to the underside of the logic board where most people would never think to look.
PCI, PCI Express and USB are all Intel standards...
Originally posted by webmail
Moving will ensure the longterm viability of the Mac. Intel will continue to make cutting edge CPU technology. IBM has no motivation. If Apple uses Intel based processors it will always be equal or ahead of current windows based PC machines. As far as motherboards go, they can be made into any shape you wish. Most PC motherboards are made to be installed in a standard case type. Dell, HP, and other companies use CUSTOM motherboards, however they aren't very innovative in design. There isnt' a limitation on how the case can be designed by used a chip based on intel.
In my opinion you wouldn't even know the difference, Only that it was cheepier and faster.
Stop being such a drama queen.
1) Intel does not make cutting edge CPU technology. AMD's processors are cheaper, more efficient, and use less power than Intel's.
2) Soon, Apple won't be the only company purchasing IBM's chips. All next gen consoles except for PS3 will be using IBM's G5 processors with multiple cores. Apple will be just another client for IBM, not their sole reason to be making the G5s. plus, you forget that IBM makes the G5s for themselves too, they use them in their servers.
3) Apple is already ahead of PCs. Show me an Athlon 64 processor that runs at 2.7 Ghz. Show me an Intel that can significantly outperform the equivilant of 2 2.6Ghz AMD processors. They don't exist, Apple already is AT LEAST keeping up with the competition if not blowing them out of the water.
4)APPLE ISN'T GOING TO INTEL FOR MAIN CPUS!!! STOP THIS NONSENSE!!! YOU ALL FORGET THAT INTEL IS THE LARGEST FLASH MEMORY MANUFACTERERS IN THE WORLD!!! I mean come on, Apple could just be looking for a new iPod Shuffle model. Or Apple could be looking for some type of chipset, a processor for a handheld device, or a processor for a video iPod. Intel makes MORE THAN ONE PRODUCT PEOPLE!
umm... no, IBM couldn't give a sh1t if apple lapped up it's table scraps or not.
http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000310044375/
Originally posted by webmail
Yes because it's so "hard" to figure out intel's next generation technology. Don't be an idiot. People dont' stage corporate talks to sneak a peak back into the R&D room.
Maybe you're not familar but many of the staff of Apple computer included Steve Jobs are welcome on Intel's campus.
Uh, yeah they do. No one really knows what Intel wants to do. There were rumors not too long ago that Intel was exploring asynchronous techniques.
Secondly, as a person who's in the high-tech industry, I can verify that very often companies will meet to discuss long term plans. For example, Intel has been planning something, and (A) they want to see if Apple is interested, (B) they want to see what changes they could make in the project to make Apple even more interested. This is pretty standard procedure.
PS don't know why his site is so OS X orientated - a troll site maybe?
Text from Paul's site as below for those who don't won't to support his add based cash generation...
Apple and Intel: A tale of rumors and truths
Everyone has an opinion about the Wall Street Journal report that Apple may be moving to Intel chips. The most common opinion is that Apple is foisting this rumor itself in a bid to pressure IBM, its current chipmaker. Apple, these people say, is upset that IBM can't deliver the 3 GHz chip that Steve Jobs promised two years ago, and it's jealous that IBM is spending so much time working on chips for video game systems.
It all makes a lot of sense. There's just one problem. In the past, when rumors of Apple jumping ship to a different chip architecture came up, I just reported on them like everyone else. This time, I'm involved personally. I was the first to report it was happening, for starters. And I now have three sources that have independently provided me with information about these developments. That doesn't mean that Apple isn't playing Intel off of IBM of course. But I have to wonder.
One of my sources is a Microsoft evangelist who heard that Apple was moving to Intel from two senior Apple executives. The second is an Intel engineer I met at WinHEC last month, who told me that Intel then had OS X running on Intel hardware in its labs. The third source is a Tablet PC enthusiast and expert who regularly provides me with Tablet PC information.
The first two were unequivocal: Apple is porting OS X to Intel--not to x86, but specifically to Intel--and abandoning IBM's PowerPC architecture. The third noted this week that he's hearing that the Intel work is related to Apple's much discussed Tablet device. Too, there's a hidden display option that lets you orient the screen in landscape mode in Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger," a clue that such a device is on the way, I was told by others. (However, I can't get this secret option to work because my PowerBook doesn't support it.)
So what does all this mean? I'm not sure. It may happen. It may not. But this is the first time I've actually been involved, and I'm not sure what to make of it.
Originally posted by Owen
First has any one seen this by Paul Thurrott (http://www.internet-nexus.com/)? Ignoring that he makes some self important claims of discovery of the whole Apple/Intel collusion. He does however suggest a similar line to Engadet for a tablet type device.
PS don't know why his site is so OS X orientated - a troll site maybe?
Text from Paul's site as below for those who don't won't to support his add based cash generation...
o what does all this mean? I'm not sure. It may happen. It may not. But this is the first time I've actually been involved, and I'm not sure what to make of it.
Yep, he's really involved in all of this. What a load of crap!
Too, there's a hidden display option that lets you orient the screen in landscape mode in Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger," a clue that such a device is on the way, I was told by others. (However, I can't get this secret option to work because my PowerBook doesn't support it.
Hidden? Secret? It's right there in the SysPref if you have the right GPU and an external display.
Originally posted by JLL
Hidden? Secret? It's right there in the SysPref if you have the right GPU and an external display.
To test it, quit System Preferences, re-launch it, and press "option" while clicking on the "Displays" preference pane icon.
If you have the appropriate graphics chip, you should get a "Rotate:" option with a drop down.
If you rotate, you'll lose that drop down after the display refresh, but just quit System Preferences, re-launch, and press "option" again on the "Displays" icon, and it will return. Then choose "standard" in the drop down.
Originally posted by MasonMcD
To test it, quit System Preferences, re-launch it, and press "option" while clicking on the "Displays" preference pane icon.
If you have the appropriate graphics chip, you should get a "Rotate:" option with a drop down.
If you rotate, you'll lose that drop down after the display refresh, but just quit System Preferences, re-launch, and press "option" again on the "Displays" icon, and it will return. Then choose "standard" in the drop down.
And on a desktop system (which has an external display) it's right there without pressing anything.
RUMOR: Apple Tablet exists running 'reduced version' of Mac OS X
Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - 10:25 AM EST
Rob Bushway, owner of Zoe Technologies, a firm specializing in web development and technology consulting, who also runs TabletBible.Com for inkable bibles and books for Tablet PCs has posted this on his blog:
I have no less than 5 sources saying an Apple Tablet announcement is due soon... And the Intel talks are for battery saving Sonoma-like Powerbook and Tablet tech, I'd heard this 3-4 weeks ago from 3 sources... And it exists, honest, [have] seen a prototype. Instant On, running a reduced version of OSX, with some funky start-up PDA like Apple icon menu. Touch only (white touch pen), [at] least the version I saw.
Cool if true!
If Intel is evil, IBM is evil. You remember the "1984" commercial? That was aimed squarely at IBM. "Make friends with unrighteous Mammon," if you want to think of things in such terms. The question is, what does Intel have that Apple might be interested in?
Intel doesn't just make Pentiums, or x86 CPUs. They make lots and lots of stuff. Apple could be interested in any of it. I note the latest rumors that Apple is looking at their power-saving technology for PowerBooks (or tablets, as other rumors have it).
As I said above, the discussions could center around something that won't see production for years yet. Apple approached IBM about the 970 sometime in or near 2000, to give you some idea.
Finally, if it is (even partially, or tentatively) about a CPU: Intel has wanted x86 dead for over a decade now. Not all of their reasons are noble, certainly, but the fact remains that if they could line up a significant customer for a next-generation platform, free of all that legacy baggage, they might jump at the chance. There are a lot of emerging technologies and capabilities that would be more elegantly implemented on a clean sheet of paper.
I agree with the earlier post that the endian issues are significant. I use linux PCs a lot, and when compiling code I always have to check the byte-swap I/O option on the linux boxes. Please, let's not have to do that.
In the realm of likely outcomes, how about:
- dual-G4s in PBs long, long before there is a G5 PB
- serious horses in a dual-core (preferably dual dual-core)
powermac in under a year
- intel talk is to drive home Apple's unhappiness with IBM's chip issues.
Otherwise ... who wants to bet on how long (or not..) we will have software developers willing to write code for both PPC- and Intel- based Macs?
I sorta like the idea of Apple and AMD going in together on some serious next-generation boxes, but it seems the obstacles are significant and not worth the cost unless Apple sees IBM as a truly dead end (rather than just significantly delayed).
Originally posted by melgross
The only thing about this that *could* make any sense is that Intel has got, or is waiting to produce a processor that is multi-OS compatible. They announced this technology a while back, if anyone here remembers.
When asked if Apple's OS would run on it, they said yes, it would. I am sure that they meant the current PPC version, at least that's how Intel was describing the technology. I forgot what they called it, but it was virtualization, though in hardware. Supposedly there was little if any loss in performance.
IBM has this technology as well, but I'n not certain as to how advanced it is.
*IF* this chip could allow OS X to run without a conversion, then perhaps PPC software would run as well. If the chip is fast, and works well, this could be a solution.
But who knows at this point in time whether it's an actual product? Perhaps that's what the article was referring to.
Actually I think you are thinking about IBM and not Intel. IBM said the next PowerPC 970 chip will support virtualization and that Apple will be using that chip.
IBM's had this tech for awhile now. The Power5 actually uses it. See these links for a refresher:
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2004/12/22.3.shtml
http://esj.com/enterprise/article.aspx?EditorialsID=951
So, IMHO, all this BS over Apple going with Intel on future computers is BS. I believe what many others do, that Apple is simply talking to Intel about chips for the Xserve, or iPod, or... Or Apple is talking about future technology standards with Intel like wireless USB, firewire, etc.
Originally posted by Telomar
I actually think something like cell or MS' processor would work very well as a laptop chip. Keep in mind a lot of the limitations present in it are present in the G4 so it is really just a case of which would be quicker per second.
Just depends on how hot they get and their power management. Neither of those consoles is a Powerbook.
It's a totally different chip. It requires a very different programming model.
I can't see Apple being able to utilize this chip without some rather large changes to the Mach core which is not designed to operate with a chip of this type.
Remember this chip uses a much simplified PPC chip as a controller, though it does some calculations of it's own. There are no out of order execution units in it.
I can see Apple using it for a rendering engine.
Originally posted by Leonard
Actually I think you are thinking about IBM and not Intel. IBM said the next PowerPC 970 chip will support virtualization and that Apple will be using that chip.
IBM's had this tech for awhile now. The Power5 actually uses it. See these links for a refresher:
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2004/12/22.3.shtml
http://esj.com/enterprise/article.aspx?EditorialsID=951
So, IMHO, all this BS over Apple going with Intel on future computers is BS. I believe what many others do, that Apple is simply talking to Intel about chips for the Xserve, or iPod, or... Or Apple is talking about future technology standards with Intel like wireless USB, firewire, etc.
No. It was very specifically Intel that had a press conference about this chip less than two years ago. They were questioned about it's capabilities to run more than one operating system at a time. The questioning led to the speculation about OS X, and their positive reply.
Several others here remember this as well.
I suppose I could look it up if I have the time, but it isn't a questionable event. It was heavily reported upon.
Perhaps the new AirPort Extreme A/V basestation will have Intel inside.
Originally posted by Xool
Does Intel make an H.264 decoder chip?
Perhaps the new AirPort Extreme A/V basestation will have Intel inside.
I don't know about that. Has anyone gotten to that point yet? How do the players like the HD-DVD models that are in pre-production, and the few Sony Blu-Ray machines that do exist do it?
I'm not sure which systems they use to get the video on the disks.
Anybody sure about this (not speculation)?
... all those Intel boxes in Apple's back yard are just Intel's home delivery drivers bringing round a new slew of chips for Wireless USB? Not a switch in processor technologies, but a switch in peripheral concepts -- including but not limited to a switch from FireWire to new USB standards... Go, think!