For what it's worth, the Wall Street Journal article said that Apple would move the Mac Mini to Intel first, and the PowerMac last.
Which I take as indirect confirmation that the 970MP is coming. If we were waiting on simple speedbumps, there would be little reason to hold the PM update to 2007. And of course this is all speculation...
well, you already can get a PowerMactel (PMT) P4 3.6GHz, but it'll run you 1000 dollars and you need to be an ADC paid member. But the first consumer Mactel will be a Powerbook with a Pentium M.
edit: and the PowerMactel will be taken away from you an a year or two.
Also the software that people buy to use on Powermacs, like FCP, Motion, Logic, etc, etc. has been heavily optimized for the G5 (At least Apple's software has) so it makes sense to keep the Powermac changeover till last, to give time to optimize the software for Intel. That way Apple can get the kind of generational speed jumps that they love to pull out of the hat. I still believe we will see the 970MP this year, just dont expect it to be fast......
To me, it seemed like 75% of the motivation for the switch was to breathe some life into Apple's stagnating mobile lines. For a good long while the mobile G3's and G4's were world-beaters, but those days ended almost two years ago. So I expect to see PowerBooks and iBooks (hopefully simultaneously) with Pentium M's just as soon as Apple can squeeze them out the door. There isn't nearly as much pressure on the consumer desktops, and even less on the PowerMac. Dual G5's still kick plenty of ass, and dual-core PM's are probably at least as far away as dual-core G5's.
In fact, keeping the flagship line PPC for a while might help convince developers to dual-build everything, and keep Apple's options open. Given how high-level Cocoa is, Apple might be able to get away with just using the best architecture for any particular task (laptops, desktops, appliances, iPods, fantasy tablets, etc.).
Look down a CPU price list, Intel is NOT cheaper...
It's not about price or power as typically defined in these fora. Sometimes Intel is faster, sometimes PPC is faster, there have been times when either has been cheaper...
Apple is looking for a supplier whose interests synchronize with Apple's interests. Intel makes "computer chips" (they make other stuff too, but they make a lot of money selling the basic parts of a computer, not a router, not a console, not an appliance.
With Intel Inside they're never going to leapfrog the other guy's HW, but they ain't ever going to be slower either! They will compete on the strength of their OS, 1st party software, 3rd party support, and retail experience...
It's a nice chip. Given the time frame I am certain Apple has switched for this chip. I am certain the mac mini and Powerbook will be two of the first to switch as well.
Heh. Apple may only use Pentium-M chips in all of the machines. The Netburst Pentium 4 chips will be no more in a year or so.
Yonah will likely be the 1st Intel chip Apple uses for small form factor machines (laptops and Mac minis and iMacs). Then in 2007, they'll use Merom and Conroe.
Yonah = dual-core Banias architecture
Merom = next gen Banias type architecture (dual core)
Conroe = high performance (high Watt) Merom (dual core)
Merom supposedly will have 30% more performance than Yonah per clock cycle. Yonah is simply the current Pentium-M but dual core. The Merom architecture is likely what appealed most to Apple.
The Pentium-M has about the same integer performance per clock as the G5, less FPU per clock, and who knows about SIMD. It's a bit like the G4. Big difference that will directly effect OS X is x86 memory performance is very good, which means snappier UI.
Heh. Apple may only use Pentium-M chips in all of the machines. The Netburst Pentium 4 chips will be no more in a year or so.
Yonah will likely be the 1st Intel chip Apple uses for small form factor machines (laptops and Mac minis and iMacs). Then in 2007, they'll use Merom and Conroe.
Yonah = dual-core Banias architecture
Merom = next gen Banias type architecture (dual core)
Conroe = high performance (high Watt) Merom (dual core)
Merom supposedly will have 30% more performance than Yonah per clock cycle. Yonah is simply the current Pentium-M but dual core. The Merom architecture is likely what appealed most to Apple.
The Pentium-M has about the same integer performance per clock as the G5, less FPU per clock, and who knows about SIMD. It's a bit like the G4. Big difference that will directly effect OS X is x86 memory performance is very good, which means snappier UI.
Is Intel going to make their dual-core chips like AMDs where each core can communicate with the other directly, rather than needing to go out to the system bus and back in again?
Is Intel going to make their dual-core chips like AMDs where each core can communicate with the other directly, rather than needing to go out to the system bus and back in again?
Yes.
Performance-wise, there isn't going to that big of a difference though. So, there is not that much pressure to do so.
Heh. Apple may only use Pentium-M chips in all of the machines. The Netburst Pentium 4 chips will be no more in a year or so.
Yonah will likely be the 1st Intel chip Apple uses for small form factor machines (laptops and Mac minis and iMacs). Then in 2007, they'll use Merom and Conroe.
Yonah = dual-core Banias architecture
Merom = next gen Banias type architecture (dual core)
Conroe = high performance (high Watt) Merom (dual core)
Merom supposedly will have 30% more performance than Yonah per clock cycle. Yonah is simply the current Pentium-M but dual core. The Merom architecture is likely what appealed most to Apple.
The Pentium-M has about the same integer performance per clock as the G5, less FPU per clock, and who knows about SIMD. It's a bit like the G4. Big difference that will directly effect OS X is x86 memory performance is very good, which means snappier UI.
"Yonah"?
"Merom"?
"Conroe"?
"Banias"?
"Pentium"?
Man, someone's gotta give Our New Intel Overlords some guidance on Cool Names.
they state they have a source saying apple will use the pentium m chip in 2006 and beyond...
whats everyones thoughts on this particular chip?
This is the chip that Apple wants to start the new games with for sure!
Don't be *SHOCKED* if Apple and it's DEV's are ready BEFORE the June 2006 timeline. Apple would be smart to suggest this timeline is out to 2 years in order to create higher sells of their current PPC's and less preassure on current DEV community not aligned with Xcode.
Intel is very optimistic about the "M" chip being ahead of schedule and I am sure that Apple has already worked out a solution to keep OS X running elculsively on it's creations and off of others.
We may see NEW AppleTel products in January of 06 cause I think the final link at this point (as Stevo said) truely lies in the hands of the DEV's and also at this point most are starting to see the light of this transition thanks to Apple's excellent behind the scenes work with transformation tooling and such. Intel has the ability to rapidly respond to anything Apple needs to make this work.
Maybe the MacTel mini or a MediaCenter variation followed by the Powerbooks and then the iBooks are first out with PowerMacs to follow.
Currently, I think the PowerMac's will see dual 3 Ghz proc's by Jan 06 and possibly one more minor bump by June 06 but that will finish PPC. This could change if IBM begins to play games with Apple (as I think is/will be going on)
and Intel is ready with their chip it will happen sooner cause Steve don't take no shit! I am only going by gut feeling so don't flame me anyone!
Apple's new tagline - "Think Alike...BE Different!"
I say PowerBook, and I say this because Steve knows how pissed off we are that we don't have a G5 in them yet: he made special mention of it in his speech.
I would really like to have an SIMD unit. I was just reminded today when I ripped a CD on my 3.2GHz P4 at work. . . It's about as fast at this as my old 1GHz Powerbook G4.
Comments
Originally posted by BRussell
For what it's worth, the Wall Street Journal article said that Apple would move the Mac Mini to Intel first, and the PowerMac last.
Which I take as indirect confirmation that the 970MP is coming. If we were waiting on simple speedbumps, there would be little reason to hold the PM update to 2007. And of course this is all speculation...
edit: and the PowerMactel will be taken away from you an a year or two.
In fact, keeping the flagship line PPC for a while might help convince developers to dual-build everything, and keep Apple's options open. Given how high-level Cocoa is, Apple might be able to get away with just using the best architecture for any particular task (laptops, desktops, appliances, iPods, fantasy tablets, etc.).
Originally posted by AquaMac
Ohh, Come on!! Maybe not the eMac, but a winning switchover product gone just because of a chip change? I don't think so.
Just becasue it may not survive the switch-over doesn't mean that the switch over is the reason why it possibly wouldn't survive...
Look down a CPU price list, Intel is NOT cheaper...
It's not about price or power as typically defined in these fora. Sometimes Intel is faster, sometimes PPC is faster, there have been times when either has been cheaper...
Apple is looking for a supplier whose interests synchronize with Apple's interests. Intel makes "computer chips" (they make other stuff too, but they make a lot of money selling the basic parts of a computer, not a router, not a console, not an appliance.
With Intel Inside they're never going to leapfrog the other guy's HW, but they ain't ever going to be slower either! They will compete on the strength of their OS, 1st party software, 3rd party support, and retail experience...
http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/06...iumm/index.php
they state they have a source saying apple will use the pentium m chip in 2006 and beyond...
whats everyones thoughts on this particular chip?
Originally posted by cubist
They'll definitely remove the Power. Maybe call them MacBook and MacTower ...
Definitely not. "Powerbook" is a registered trademark
which is apple's very own property. Same with "Power Mac".
They can do what they want with that "name".
And they dead sure won't switch-o-ditch it.
The resemblance to "PowerPC" is a coincidence,
- ironically now more than ever.
EDIT:
Apple Trademark List
Yonah will likely be the 1st Intel chip Apple uses for small form factor machines (laptops and Mac minis and iMacs). Then in 2007, they'll use Merom and Conroe.
Yonah = dual-core Banias architecture
Merom = next gen Banias type architecture (dual core)
Conroe = high performance (high Watt) Merom (dual core)
Merom supposedly will have 30% more performance than Yonah per clock cycle. Yonah is simply the current Pentium-M but dual core. The Merom architecture is likely what appealed most to Apple.
The Pentium-M has about the same integer performance per clock as the G5, less FPU per clock, and who knows about SIMD. It's a bit like the G4. Big difference that will directly effect OS X is x86 memory performance is very good, which means snappier UI.
Originally posted by THT
Heh. Apple may only use Pentium-M chips in all of the machines. The Netburst Pentium 4 chips will be no more in a year or so.
Yonah will likely be the 1st Intel chip Apple uses for small form factor machines (laptops and Mac minis and iMacs). Then in 2007, they'll use Merom and Conroe.
Yonah = dual-core Banias architecture
Merom = next gen Banias type architecture (dual core)
Conroe = high performance (high Watt) Merom (dual core)
Merom supposedly will have 30% more performance than Yonah per clock cycle. Yonah is simply the current Pentium-M but dual core. The Merom architecture is likely what appealed most to Apple.
The Pentium-M has about the same integer performance per clock as the G5, less FPU per clock, and who knows about SIMD. It's a bit like the G4. Big difference that will directly effect OS X is x86 memory performance is very good, which means snappier UI.
Is Intel going to make their dual-core chips like AMDs where each core can communicate with the other directly, rather than needing to go out to the system bus and back in again?
Will Steve do a "reverse bake-off" at some point, showing Intel smoking PowerPC? That would make for good theater.
Also I am sure once things are fully in place there will be Windows and OS X bake-offs.
Originally posted by pyr3
Is Intel going to make their dual-core chips like AMDs where each core can communicate with the other directly, rather than needing to go out to the system bus and back in again?
Yes.
Performance-wise, there isn't going to that big of a difference though. So, there is not that much pressure to do so.
Originally posted by THT
...
Yonah = dual-core Banias architecture
Merom = next gen Banias type architecture (dual core)
Conroe = high performance (high Watt) Merom (dual core)
...
Where do these names come from?
particularly "yonah" sounds good.
Could that mean apple will call its
Powerbook "Powerbook G5 Yonah"?
Originally posted by THT
Heh. Apple may only use Pentium-M chips in all of the machines. The Netburst Pentium 4 chips will be no more in a year or so.
Yonah will likely be the 1st Intel chip Apple uses for small form factor machines (laptops and Mac minis and iMacs). Then in 2007, they'll use Merom and Conroe.
Yonah = dual-core Banias architecture
Merom = next gen Banias type architecture (dual core)
Conroe = high performance (high Watt) Merom (dual core)
Merom supposedly will have 30% more performance than Yonah per clock cycle. Yonah is simply the current Pentium-M but dual core. The Merom architecture is likely what appealed most to Apple.
The Pentium-M has about the same integer performance per clock as the G5, less FPU per clock, and who knows about SIMD. It's a bit like the G4. Big difference that will directly effect OS X is x86 memory performance is very good, which means snappier UI.
"Yonah"?
"Merom"?
"Conroe"?
"Banias"?
"Pentium"?
Man, someone's gotta give Our New Intel Overlords some guidance on Cool Names.
V/R,
Aries 1B
Originally posted by jedifunk
just read this article over @ maccentral.
http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/06...iumm/index.php
they state they have a source saying apple will use the pentium m chip in 2006 and beyond...
whats everyones thoughts on this particular chip?
This is the chip that Apple wants to start the new games with for sure!
Don't be *SHOCKED* if Apple and it's DEV's are ready BEFORE the June 2006 timeline. Apple would be smart to suggest this timeline is out to 2 years in order to create higher sells of their current PPC's and less preassure on current DEV community not aligned with Xcode.
Intel is very optimistic about the "M" chip being ahead of schedule and I am sure that Apple has already worked out a solution to keep OS X running elculsively on it's creations and off of others.
We may see NEW AppleTel products in January of 06 cause I think the final link at this point (as Stevo said) truely lies in the hands of the DEV's and also at this point most are starting to see the light of this transition thanks to Apple's excellent behind the scenes work with transformation tooling and such. Intel has the ability to rapidly respond to anything Apple needs to make this work.
Maybe the MacTel mini or a MediaCenter variation followed by the Powerbooks and then the iBooks are first out with PowerMacs to follow.
Currently, I think the PowerMac's will see dual 3 Ghz proc's by Jan 06 and possibly one more minor bump by June 06 but that will finish PPC. This could change if IBM begins to play games with Apple (as I think is/will be going on)
and Intel is ready with their chip it will happen sooner cause Steve don't take no shit! I am only going by gut feeling so don't flame me anyone!
Apple's new tagline - "Think Alike...BE Different!"