If the rumours are try, then I'd start worrying about the "It Just Works" mantra. Also the timing would be just around the same time as MS is supposedly releasing Longhorn, is it a ploy to move Mac OS to Intel based chipsets? Perhaps the whole debacle with the G5's is causing Apple to look for a different chipset for 64 bit processing. I'll wait and see, I live by the old saying; "I'll believe it when I see it".
If this were true... Why would Steve be announcing the news now? Seems like this would just about kill all current CPU sales. People won't buy now if the "new Macs" aren't coming until next year?
on contrarê, mon ami (excuse the french)
G4 and G5s would actually start to become a collectors item with an announcement of a switch to Intel in 1 year's time.
existing ranges would be snapped up because people will be getting something that works very well right now, people may not take the risk on the new "apple-tel" or 'Nipple as some have coined until they come out
plus Mac fans will shell out some extra bucks for <drum roll> dah-dah-dahhhh
the last g4 and g5s -- the end of an era...
btw, my guess is there is no way Apple will be using x86 architecture, very unlikely. custom intel-apple thingy with as smooth as possible a PPC-translation thingymajig
Hmm, Interesting thought, but most people (even Apple users) don't buy computers for collecting. I'd say there are a limited number of "Die-Hard" Apple fans out there who would just drop $1500 to $3000 on a Mac just because it may be a collectors item. And I highly doubt the number of people who would do this are enough to sustain the same level of CPU sales that Apple has achieved in recent quarters if a MacIntel machine is announced for release next year.
If people know that something brand-new and/or better and faster is in the pipeline, they will most likely hold off on purchasing a current machine. That is the very reason that Apple is so tight-lipped about future products and has never announced upcoming hardware until it is ready.
But yes, I do agree that OSX on x86 is very unlikely. Guess we will see on Monday.
Personally, I think this rumor is complete horse poo, but I guess we have been surprised in the past.
As someone mentioned above, this most certainly would be a messy process. I remember all of the PPC, 68040 and/or FAT versions of software that were necessary for years after Apple switched to the PPC. I wonder how this would compare (Im guessing it would be worse)...
But a dramatic revolution in processing has to come at some point. Is it possible that Intel has something up their sleeves and Apple is in on it? Why and how would Apple be involved? It really all comes down to the almighty dollar. And with less than 5% marketshare, does Apple really have enough weight to partner with Intel?
On that same note, Apple does dominate the digital music player industry and obviously has enormous influence there. To me (I know others have mentioned it) something in this direction seems more likely. Could Apple have a new multimedia device up its sleeve (powered by an Intel processor or multimedia decoder)?
I suppose we shall see on Monday (or perhaps not, you never know with Apple)
You know, it's been said many times in many places that Intel wants to kill off x86 compatibility. Just a thought, but I wonder what it would take for Intel to license the PPC ISA to create custom chips for Apple.
As it stands with the scenario Forbes etc. is proposing for Apple on Intel, Apple as a company?it's priorities, business model, and pricing structures?will all have to drastically change. If done properly, however, it could be a huge coop for Apple as far as Apple vs. MS?especially given the current FUD surrounding MS and latent ill will.
But it would have to be masterfully orchestrated by all companies involved. Certainly much more so than either the 68k?PPC or OS 9?OS X transitions.
Basically we are currently in a situation where MS has pissed off Intel, Dell/HP etc. have a customer base at least partially unsatisfied with an OS they do not control, and Apple has a mature OS similar in nature to Linux, which has massive popularity and momentum in eastern countries (admittedly largely no doubt because it's basically free). If there were any time when Apple could most benefit from a strategic transition to Intel and a CHRP style resale, this is it. The lynchpin is does Jobs see iPod dominance and revenue as a strong enough foundation to risk cannibalizing it's 30% hardware margins. Since sales volumes are so low on the high margin machines, I'm betting it does.
And really, why not let someone else manufacture the low margin commodity boxes?
Oh quick PS. This is all speculation on my part, since I've got about as much confidence in C|Net as I do in my ability to spit pink twinkies out of my ass.
Whats the point of getting a mac if its just got the same chip inside as all regular windows pc's?? this changes apple's whole marketing hype. The ONLY way this would be a good switch is if intel makes apple its own version of the powerpc or whatnot, NOT just transfering over the x86 chips
h0ax! That was the first thing what came up by me when I was reading were this message came from. Everytime CNet have something to report it is a h0ax, so it will be this time. Also, ThinkSecret reported the previous time sources didn't hear anything about Apple/Intel and IBM is also preparing chips @ 6 GHz for the upcoming years.
It's not going to happen, and the proof is in the news cycle this week:
1. Intel pre-announces, e.g. 16-24 months away, a dual core laptop chip. The last time they made a move like this was right before the G5.
Apple and IBM have news, but it's not involving Intel.
2. Intel demo'ing the Mac mini rip-off. If Intel had a deal with Apple, they would never be pulling this type of PR.
I don't know if it's good or bad to move to Intel. But, I'll take any and all action that it's not going to happen.
Now, there is a lot of misdirection going on right now. IBM and Apple have something huge up their sleeves, and this will keep the press and rumor sites busy for the last few days--when most leaks happen.
just wanted to throw the stock price movement on intel in the past 3 months. something suspicious?
edit:
Itanium2: no way, clock speeds are way too low to have any marketing value. technically they could be great, but people are idiots. current Itanium2s not touching 2ghz, forgettaboutit being considered by Apple.
just wanted to throw the stock price movement on intel in the past 3 months. something suspicious?
edit:
Itanium2: no way, clock speeds are way too low to have any marketing value. technically they could be great, but people are idiots. current Itanium2s not touching 2ghz, forgettaboutit being considered by Apple.
Well, there has been a recent rally in both tech stocks and the semis (take a look at the semi ETF, which is SMH, for a good measurement of this). More specific to Intel, their stock price has appreciated because they currently dominate the notebook sector, a sector which is currently seeing huge growth...
Next week, Steve announces that they've licensed the PPC platform to Intel who will supply Apple with G5s due to IBMs inability to supply sufficient numbers of chips and Intel's superiority and experience in mobile processors. In 2006, low power Intel G5s will roll out on low end machines such as the mac mini and powerbook. In 2007 Intel will roll out cutting edge desktop G5s for the powermacs.
intel is experienced in making a broad array of chips and processors, and they have capacity that IBM can only dream of.
Comments
Originally posted by solsun
This just does not make any sense..
If this were true... Why would Steve be announcing the news now? Seems like this would just about kill all current CPU sales. People won't buy now if the "new Macs" aren't coming until next year?
on contrarê, mon ami (excuse the french)
G4 and G5s would actually start to become a collectors item with an announcement of a switch to Intel in 1 year's time.
existing ranges would be snapped up because people will be getting something that works very well right now, people may not take the risk on the new "apple-tel" or 'Nipple as some have coined
plus Mac fans will shell out some extra bucks for <drum roll> dah-dah-dahhhh
the last g4 and g5s -- the end of an era...
btw, my guess is there is no way Apple will be using x86 architecture, very unlikely. custom intel-apple thingy with as smooth as possible a PPC-translation thingymajig
Yeah, right.
If people know that something brand-new and/or better and faster is in the pipeline, they will most likely hold off on purchasing a current machine. That is the very reason that Apple is so tight-lipped about future products and has never announced upcoming hardware until it is ready.
But yes, I do agree that OSX on x86 is very unlikely. Guess we will see on Monday.
Originally posted by iDave
I guess we'll soon see those goofy blue men dancing around Macs.
Yeah, right.
We already have seen that, Apple put the Blue Guys in Mac commercials FIRST, then Intel copied Apple !!!
As someone mentioned above, this most certainly would be a messy process. I remember all of the PPC, 68040 and/or FAT versions of software that were necessary for years after Apple switched to the PPC. I wonder how this would compare (Im guessing it would be worse)...
But a dramatic revolution in processing has to come at some point. Is it possible that Intel has something up their sleeves and Apple is in on it? Why and how would Apple be involved? It really all comes down to the almighty dollar. And with less than 5% marketshare, does Apple really have enough weight to partner with Intel?
On that same note, Apple does dominate the digital music player industry and obviously has enormous influence there. To me (I know others have mentioned it) something in this direction seems more likely. Could Apple have a new multimedia device up its sleeve (powered by an Intel processor or multimedia decoder)?
I suppose we shall see on Monday (or perhaps not, you never know with Apple)
As it stands with the scenario Forbes etc. is proposing for Apple on Intel, Apple as a company?it's priorities, business model, and pricing structures?will all have to drastically change. If done properly, however, it could be a huge coop for Apple as far as Apple vs. MS?especially given the current FUD surrounding MS and latent ill will.
But it would have to be masterfully orchestrated by all companies involved. Certainly much more so than either the 68k?PPC or OS 9?OS X transitions.
Basically we are currently in a situation where MS has pissed off Intel, Dell/HP etc. have a customer base at least partially unsatisfied with an OS they do not control, and Apple has a mature OS similar in nature to Linux, which has massive popularity and momentum in eastern countries (admittedly largely no doubt because it's basically free). If there were any time when Apple could most benefit from a strategic transition to Intel and a CHRP style resale, this is it. The lynchpin is does Jobs see iPod dominance and revenue as a strong enough foundation to risk cannibalizing it's 30% hardware margins. Since sales volumes are so low on the high margin machines, I'm betting it does.
And really, why not let someone else manufacture the low margin commodity boxes?
Oh quick PS. This is all speculation on my part, since I've got about as much confidence in C|Net as I do in my ability to spit pink twinkies out of my ass.
Originally posted by schmidm77
Itanium?
you know, that echoed at the back of my mind
iTanium
hmmm
i need to read up though wtf that is... nerd journey, launch..!!
1. Intel pre-announces, e.g. 16-24 months away, a dual core laptop chip. The last time they made a move like this was right before the G5.
Apple and IBM have news, but it's not involving Intel.
2. Intel demo'ing the Mac mini rip-off. If Intel had a deal with Apple, they would never be pulling this type of PR.
I don't know if it's good or bad to move to Intel. But, I'll take any and all action that it's not going to happen.
Now, there is a lot of misdirection going on right now. IBM and Apple have something huge up their sleeves, and this will keep the press and rumor sites busy for the last few days--when most leaks happen.
No big architecture shift, just a third supplier that might just have something better than mere x86 to offer!
I can dream...
edit:
Itanium2: no way, clock speeds are way too low to have any marketing value. technically they could be great, but people are idiots. current Itanium2s not touching 2ghz, forgettaboutit being considered by Apple.
Originally posted by nagromme
I would LIKE to see Intel, IBM, and Freescale ALL making PowerPC chips.
No big architecture shift, just a third supplier that might just have something better than mere x86 to offer!
I can dream...
yeah i'd like to see George Bush and Mahmood Abbas and Sharon all sharing a doobie too...
Originally posted by sunilraman
just wanted to throw the stock price movement on intel in the past 3 months. something suspicious?
edit:
Itanium2: no way, clock speeds are way too low to have any marketing value. technically they could be great, but people are idiots. current Itanium2s not touching 2ghz, forgettaboutit being considered by Apple.
Well, there has been a recent rally in both tech stocks and the semis (take a look at the semi ETF, which is SMH, for a good measurement of this). More specific to Intel, their stock price has appreciated because they currently dominate the notebook sector, a sector which is currently seeing huge growth...
Wow.
but, I am still dubious.
Next week, Steve announces that they've licensed the PPC platform to Intel who will supply Apple with G5s due to IBMs inability to supply sufficient numbers of chips and Intel's superiority and experience in mobile processors. In 2006, low power Intel G5s will roll out on low end machines such as the mac mini and powerbook. In 2007 Intel will roll out cutting edge desktop G5s for the powermacs.
intel is experienced in making a broad array of chips and processors, and they have capacity that IBM can only dream of.