Apple To Debut Intel-Based Computers At MW SF 2004?
According to this from www.Smarthouse.com.au
Quote:
Apple set to go Intel
August 2003
By David Richards
Apple is set to announce an Intel based PC that will run on an Apple operating system.
The first system is expected to shown at Macworld San Francisco in January 2004 according to an Apple US source. The initial plan will involve Apple offering both existing RISC processor systems and an Intel based system with the RISC processor from IBM system being phased out as new software is developed. An original idea to release a duel platform MAC has been scrapped according to Apple insiders in San Francisco.
Software companies like Adobe, who develop for the Mac platform and Intel based system have already been briefed on the proposed move. One victim of the move could be Apple?s relationship with Microsoft. Currently Microsoft develops the Office suite of programs for the Mac platform however Microsoft are not happy with sales and have asked Apple to invest in further development of the Mac Office offering.
This could trigger a move by Apple to offering the Star Office suite of software from Sun particularly if Microsoft refuses to develop for an Intel based PC running a Mac operating system
If Apple were to go solely with the Intel based system the biggest problems would be that every existing Mac program would have to be recompiled to work under Intel. For new versions of current programs that would be fairly simple, but for older software it would not be worthwhile.
By releasing an Intel based system Apple will be able to offer the best of both worlds.
A gradual adoption by Apple of the Intel architecture would give time for the costs to drop and software to be upgraded. Eventually all Macs would be Intel.
An Apple source told SmartHouse Magazine ?Apple and Intel have been in discussions for a while. We are looking at delivering a series of solutions that run on Intel's Itanium chip. The issue right now are software related as a great deal of code will have to be re written for both the Mac operating system and the Intel Itanium chip?. They added ?This initiative is will happen, but when depends on how quickly the software issues are resolved?.
Apple set to go Intel
August 2003
By David Richards
Apple is set to announce an Intel based PC that will run on an Apple operating system.
The first system is expected to shown at Macworld San Francisco in January 2004 according to an Apple US source. The initial plan will involve Apple offering both existing RISC processor systems and an Intel based system with the RISC processor from IBM system being phased out as new software is developed. An original idea to release a duel platform MAC has been scrapped according to Apple insiders in San Francisco.
Software companies like Adobe, who develop for the Mac platform and Intel based system have already been briefed on the proposed move. One victim of the move could be Apple?s relationship with Microsoft. Currently Microsoft develops the Office suite of programs for the Mac platform however Microsoft are not happy with sales and have asked Apple to invest in further development of the Mac Office offering.
This could trigger a move by Apple to offering the Star Office suite of software from Sun particularly if Microsoft refuses to develop for an Intel based PC running a Mac operating system
If Apple were to go solely with the Intel based system the biggest problems would be that every existing Mac program would have to be recompiled to work under Intel. For new versions of current programs that would be fairly simple, but for older software it would not be worthwhile.
By releasing an Intel based system Apple will be able to offer the best of both worlds.
A gradual adoption by Apple of the Intel architecture would give time for the costs to drop and software to be upgraded. Eventually all Macs would be Intel.
An Apple source told SmartHouse Magazine ?Apple and Intel have been in discussions for a while. We are looking at delivering a series of solutions that run on Intel's Itanium chip. The issue right now are software related as a great deal of code will have to be re written for both the Mac operating system and the Intel Itanium chip?. They added ?This initiative is will happen, but when depends on how quickly the software issues are resolved?.
Comments
Originally posted by MacsRGood4U
According to this from www.Smarthouse.com.au
That is completely bogus. Has to be.
There is absolutely no reason whatsoevah for Apple to go with Intel now that the IBM relationship is real.
Nothing to see here. Move on.
we invest in a totally new motherboard, pipes, G5, serial ata etc.pp.
then we compile our unix to another processor type... why not... just for fun... it's easy, especially all that stuff which connects a gazillion hardware possibilities in this world.
one word:
NEVEREVER
this is besides the point.
As previously said, apple is not going to have spent the past 3 years developing the g5 to use it for half a year.. come on
Nothing to see here, people, move on. Just the annual "Apple goes intel" thread.
The purpose of "Manic", like the soon-to-occur switch from the G5 to x86, would serve the dual purpose of driving up R&D costs while also giving Mac-users an extremely incoherent roadmap. Under Manic, instead of making significant changes every few years or so, Apple will be making major changes to both hardware and software every few days.
We've already seen the precursor to "Manic": Within the span of 18 months Apple went from the Apple VGA port, to the standard VGA port, to the DVI port to the ADC. While these changes occurred in PowerMacs, similar changes did not take place in PowerBooks until sometime later; and though changes occurred in the monitor lineup, there was no cosmetic change to the monitors alerting users as to which monitor was right for their computer. This constant state of tranisition and port confusion was an early implementation of "Manic", code named "Wha??!"
Manic Revealed!
Under Manic, MacOS X.5.1.003 (expected release date 3/15/05) will not support any protocols implemented in MacOS X.5.1.002 (expected release date 3/12/05). X002 will have to be run in Classic mode inside of X003, and then only if you have a G5+ co-processor card that fits the custom made 1.2" PCI-X2 slot (not the 19.5mm PCI-YZ slot in your PowerMac Gx86 as some have said). Of course both the PCI-X2 and PCI-Y slots will only be available in the Rev C PowerMac Gx86 (release date 3/14/05) and neither will support standard PCI or PCI-X cards, nor will either slot be included on the PowerMac Gx86+ (release date 3/18/05).
BULLSHIT!
Two things came to my mind when I read this article.
1) The author is trying to put doubt into the minds of people who are thinking of buying a G5.
2) The article is true.
I agree with the reasons stated above on why the article is bs. But becuse the article sounds genuine, it has put some doubt in my mind on whether or not I should shell out 3 grand for a computer with a processor that Apple is going to phase out.
I guess the only thing I can do is call my local Apple stores (and Apple computer sales) and press them on why I should buy a G5 when they are going to phase it out in place of an Intel processor.
This is just more horsepuckey. Why would Apple phase out PPC in favor of Itanium? What on earth are the advantages to that strategy? Apple just got a robust, backward compatible, scalable, VMX-capable, high-performing, (relatively) cool and inexpensive 64 bit platform with a long-term roadmap, sporting a processor bus that Apple designed, and they just built a gorgeous architecture around it. So they're going to do what? What are the odds that Apple could persuade Intel to make a special version of Itanic with VMX and Apple PI on board? Would that realize Intel's economies of scale, or defeat them? Or would they use a stock Itanium, and eliminate any possibility of differentiating themselves performance-wise, or having any say in the nature and direction of the architecture they use? Would it benefit them to give Microsoft a tremendous say in the nature and direction of the architecture they use?
This rumor is dumb.
Now, as moki has pointed out, Apple could introduce a server based on another CPU family, with a special version of OS X Server. But again, why Itanium? Not for the applications! Not for a power/watt advantage. Not for cost reasons. Apple could be far more subversive by building an Opteron server. The advantage here is that the Opteron can run 32-bit x86 apps. Now, combine that with the Linux compatibility getting rolled into Panther, and you have an Apple machine that can run all Linux applications in binary form seamlessly. And then you have an effective trojan horse. (As well as yet another reason to keep the Other Side chained to the x86 legacy instead of adopting Itanium. Muahahahahahaha!)
1. No further supplies of PowerPc baseed processors.
2. They think they would make more money selling software than hardware.
Frankly I don't believe it will happen.
The initial plan will involve Apple offering both existing RISC processor systems and an Intel based system with the RISC processor from IBM system being phased out as new software is developed.
So let me get this straight-- the 970 is an interim processor? BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
This has got to be the stupidest damn rumor since... well, EVAR. Five or six months ago, this would have struck fear into the hearts of the Apple faithful everywhere, but now, it's just comic relief.
i dont believe it for a second,you know why?
its says apple is going to migrate to the ITANIUM architecture.WHAT!?
why would they move to a slower performing more expensive and not very popular chip?
they wouldnt.
if anything they would go with a more mainstream chip.
add to that the fact that it would piss off their developers.
what would apple put in their laptops? intel chips?
NOT HARDLY!
im not saying that if apple developed a non-PPC version of PANTHER it would be a bad idea,im just saying that it would be IN ADDITION TO ppc based macs.
very bad rumour indeed!
worst rumor ever
</comic book guy>
MmMMmmm....
As Nebagakid pointed out there is a technical, or simply grammatical error in the sub head (the OS runs on the processor, not the other way around).
"duel platform"
Mac spelled correctly and as "MAC"
Their Apple source quote "This initiative is will happen?" is a train wreck. Even if the source said exactly this, then the use of (sic) is required.
Basic editorial errors such as these are a dead giveaway. This is NOT a professionally written article. It's either very poor FUD or a pathetic attempt for cheap hits on the site.
As Gamblor said, the G5 is interim?! Puh-leeze!
We ignore any posts relating to Apple flirting with Intel, Intel flirting with Apple, or Steve Jobs flirting with Bill Gates.
The first two are always unfounded, provoke way too much discussion, and are basically ridiculous, and the last is just disgusting.
Agreed?