In his blog today, Paul Thurrott reported that he heard a rumor from colleges at WinHEC that Apple may switch to an Intel Architecture.
"This one's bizarre, but we heard at lunch today that Apple is unhappy with the PowerPC production at IBM and will be switching to Intel-compatible cheaps this very year. Yeah, seriously." (Thurrott WinHEC Blog)
Suppose there's truth to this? [/QUOTE PPC hasnt scaled very well over the years and im sure Apple is pissed at moto & ibm but it would be to hard and kill off those mac suppoorters. Since Apple is such a great Software company and such a poor performing hardware company i think its more likely they release OSX for those windows machines. Anyways they wont do either is my guess.
Not after all of the R&D Apple has dumped into IBM and the PowerPC platform.
Apple may start putting out feelers for x86 stuff, but you know sure as shit they have had this groundwork laid out for quite some time now.
This is one of the lamest rumors in awhile. What next iWalk is real?
You can put all the money into repairs you want, but eventually you have to realize the ship is going down and you best jump off before you go down too. Two years after the G5 there is still no replacement for the elderly G4 in low voltage situations and PowerMac sales are at all time low.
What with the conception that the G5s are behind in any way? AMD (the fastest/best you can get for PC) is only at 2.6GHz, and who even takes Intel frequencies seriously?
Apple just needs to adopt a ratings system like AMD and Intel, instead of being stuck on frequency. There are other factors to performance, and the G5s are already comparable and competitive with the Wintel world.
How many times do the people who continue to trumpet on and on about "OS X on x86" have to be told that if Apple did jump to x86, none of the existing apps out there would work, and that all current developers would be forced to rewrite their software?
Thurott is just another blowhard who posts stories like that to get hits from annoyed Mac users. I used to think that John Manzione and John C. Dvorak were the worst "Mac pundits" on the Internet...clearly, I was horribly wrong.
i think dawg hit it on the head. (wintel fan boy syndrome.)
if there's any substance to such a rumor, my take is that it's not apple abandoning PPC, but rather considering going cross-platform to expand it's user base into x86 land.
the complexities therein have been discussed enough here over the years. i'm doubtful, myself, but it also seems foolish to underestimate steve jobs' ego, and the decisions it might make. ie: taking the OS battle to gates' backyard before longhorn gets out of beta.
Whatever drugs are being passed out that cause these bi-annual hallucinations please pass this way.
Let's see. Apple is too cowardly to even develop an Office Suite/Groupware application for their "own" platform because of Microsoft intimidation yet they are going to go head to head with Microsoft on X86?
And for feckin' what people? It took 5 %^&*() years for OS X to run properly on PPC. I wish computer users would stop the maddness and dementia and come back to reality.
the complexities therein have been discussed enough here over the years. i'm doubtful, myself, but it also seems foolish to underestimate steve jobs' ego, and the decisions it might make. ie: taking the OS battle to gates' backyard before longhorn gets out of beta.
Problem is, Microsoft is far too powerful for Apple to tangle with head to head. Microsoft not only has money, market inertia on their side, but also lax enforcement of government regulations, all three branches of the government that do not believe in free and fair market competition (well, two for sure), and, to be fair, a somewhat competitive product. Apple would get killed if they simply tried to offer OS X for intel boxes, in fact they wouldn't even get out of the gate, because Microsoft already forbids any manufacturer who sells x86 boxes with Windows installed to sell the boxes with anything else installed. It's not free market capitalism, but it's here to stay.
Dell PrecisionTM n series1 workstations deliver maximum workstation performance. Smart for businesses with proprietary software images or special Linux needs, these systems come without a Microsoft® operating system. PrecisionTM n series systems are available with factory installed Linux.
Although, I think that if Apple did try to compete with MS on their own turf, you'd see the gloves come off real quick. It's just not going to happen.
Problem is, Microsoft is far too powerful for Apple to tangle with head to head. Microsoft not only has money, market inertia on their side, but also lax enforcement of government regulations, all three branches of the government that do not believe in free and fair market competition (well, two for sure), and, to be fair, a somewhat competitive product. Apple would get killed if they simply tried to offer OS X for intel boxes, in fact they wouldn't even get out of the gate, because Microsoft already forbids any manufacturer who sells x86 boxes with Windows installed to sell the boxes with anything else installed. It's not free market capitalism, but it's here to stay.
Actually, there have been a number of articles which all but beg Apple to release X for X86 as people (and corps) are feed up with all the problems of Windows. These articles suggest that there is a substantial demand for this. It continues to be an interesting concept...Apple as software company which also happens to make some interesting hardware. Will it happen under Jobs? Probably not. Will the people wanting this change to Apple hardware? Probably not. They just do not like it or being restricted the way Apple continues to restrict things.
Just look at today's releases. Apple dummies up most of the G5 towers with slower FSB speeds and such. It would be a great deal simpler (and undoubedly more cost effective) to use the same FSB speed and make the price point differences simply a matter of which CPU, graphics card, and so on go into the box. It's really sad.
Apple won't license or sell OS X for anything but their own hardware. Why, you ask? Simple! Money. End of story.
If anyone can crunch the numbers to show why or how Apple would make more money by licensing or selling OS X for "beige" box hardware, please step forward. Otherwise, another old rumor bites the dust. We can safely ignore all pleads, politics and higher callings and focus on where the money is.
That isn't to say that Apple couldn't switch to x86 CPU chips, just that they won't be used in an open hardware platform, nor easily (or legally) reverse engineered. There's more to hardware than just a CPU.
Just look at today's releases. Apple dummies up most of the G5 towers with slower FSB speeds and such. It would be a great deal simpler (and undoubedly more cost effective) to use the same FSB speed... It's really sad.
What's really sad is your understanding of the G5.
At most Apple "dummies up" the current 1.8 GHz model, with its 600 MHz bus speed. Other than that... please note the following hopefully painfully obvious pattern:
2.0 GHz model: 1.00 GHz bus
2.3 GHz model: 1.15 GHz bus
2.7 GHz model: 1.35 GHz bus
Had it occurred to you that perhaps a G5 can't support bus speeds over exactly one half of the processor speed? That no one has "dummied up" the 2.0 GHz model by not giving it a 1.35 GHz bus that it can't possibly use?
What's really sad is your understanding of the G5.
At most Apple "dummies up" the current 1.8 GHz model, with its 600 MHz bus speed. Other than that... please note the following hopefully painfully obvious pattern:
2.0 GHz model: 1.00 GHz bus
2.3 GHz model: 1.15 GHz bus
2.7 GHz model: 1.35 GHz bus
Had it occurred to you that perhaps a G5 can't support bus speeds over exactly one half of the processor speed? That no one has "dummied up" the 2.0 GHz model by not giving it a 1.35 GHz bus that it can't possibly use?
Apple sells crippled hardware all the time. Wake up!
Although, I think that if Apple did try to compete with MS on their own turf, you'd see the gloves come off real quick. It's just not going to happen.
Ok, maybe Linux, but I remember back in the days of BeOS, M$ forced x86 box makers to sign contracts forcing them to install ONLY Windows. Maybe something has changed, or M$ simply doesn't see Linux as a threat, I don't know.
One thing is for sure, Microsoft would NEVER permit anyone to sell an x86 box with both Windows and/or OS X installed. It just wouldn't happen. Worst came to worst, M$ would just pay congress to make Windows the "standard" OS for America, in order to "cut operating costs and make US corporations more competitive, thereby staunching the flow of jobs overseas." Don't think they could buy off congress? Microsoft already OWNS congress when it comes to tech business. M$ is exactly the sort of monopoly that these laissez-faire assholes idolize.
What with the conception that the G5s are behind in any way? AMD (the fastest/best you can get for PC) is only at 2.6GHz, and who even takes Intel frequencies seriously?
Apple just needs to adopt a ratings system like AMD and Intel, instead of being stuck on frequency. There are other factors to performance, and the G5s are already comparable and competitive with the Wintel world.
Comments
Originally posted by audiopollution
What!? Steve's geting a sex change?!
Am I at the right website? This is insane!
Yes this is insane, and only at Apple Insider
Originally posted by audiopollution
What!? Steve's geting a sex change?! This is insane!
You heard it here first!
In his blog today, Paul Thurrott reported that he heard a rumor from colleges at WinHEC that Apple may switch to an Intel Architecture.
"This one's bizarre, but we heard at lunch today that Apple is unhappy with the PowerPC production at IBM and will be switching to Intel-compatible cheaps this very year. Yeah, seriously." (Thurrott WinHEC Blog)
Suppose there's truth to this? [/QUOTE PPC hasnt scaled very well over the years and im sure Apple is pissed at moto & ibm but it would be to hard and kill off those mac suppoorters. Since Apple is such a great Software company and such a poor performing hardware company i think its more likely they release OSX for those windows machines. Anyways they wont do either is my guess.
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Not a snowball's chance in hell.
Not after all of the R&D Apple has dumped into IBM and the PowerPC platform.
Apple may start putting out feelers for x86 stuff, but you know sure as shit they have had this groundwork laid out for quite some time now.
This is one of the lamest rumors in awhile. What next iWalk is real?
You can put all the money into repairs you want, but eventually you have to realize the ship is going down and you best jump off before you go down too. Two years after the G5 there is still no replacement for the elderly G4 in low voltage situations and PowerMac sales are at all time low.
Why hasn't anyone ever suggested this before??
Thurott is a freakin' prophet!
(it's not going to happen for reasons explained here in about a billion prior threads)
Apple just needs to adopt a ratings system like AMD and Intel, instead of being stuck on frequency. There are other factors to performance, and the G5s are already comparable and competitive with the Wintel world.
How many times do the people who continue to trumpet on and on about "OS X on x86" have to be told that if Apple did jump to x86, none of the existing apps out there would work, and that all current developers would be forced to rewrite their software?
Thurott is just another blowhard who posts stories like that to get hits from annoyed Mac users. I used to think that John Manzione and John C. Dvorak were the worst "Mac pundits" on the Internet...clearly, I was horribly wrong.
IBM has a v8 that makes thunderous horsepower using lower rpm.
IBM is (and has been) here to stay.
if there's any substance to such a rumor, my take is that it's not apple abandoning PPC, but rather considering going cross-platform to expand it's user base into x86 land.
the complexities therein have been discussed enough here over the years. i'm doubtful, myself, but it also seems foolish to underestimate steve jobs' ego, and the decisions it might make. ie: taking the OS battle to gates' backyard before longhorn gets out of beta.
Let's see. Apple is too cowardly to even develop an Office Suite/Groupware application for their "own" platform because of Microsoft intimidation yet they are going to go head to head with Microsoft on X86?
And for feckin' what people? It took 5 %^&*() years for OS X to run properly on PPC. I wish computer users would stop the maddness and dementia and come back to reality.
I sure as hell wouldn't be running these two Quicksilver 733s in my studio and browsing AI on a 450MHz iMac ! ! ! ! !
indeed murchie, someone pass the bong !
Originally posted by imiloa
the complexities therein have been discussed enough here over the years. i'm doubtful, myself, but it also seems foolish to underestimate steve jobs' ego, and the decisions it might make. ie: taking the OS battle to gates' backyard before longhorn gets out of beta.
Problem is, Microsoft is far too powerful for Apple to tangle with head to head. Microsoft not only has money, market inertia on their side, but also lax enforcement of government regulations, all three branches of the government that do not believe in free and fair market competition (well, two for sure), and, to be fair, a somewhat competitive product. Apple would get killed if they simply tried to offer OS X for intel boxes, in fact they wouldn't even get out of the gate, because Microsoft already forbids any manufacturer who sells x86 boxes with Windows installed to sell the boxes with anything else installed. It's not free market capitalism, but it's here to stay.
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
[...] Microsoft already forbids any manufacturer who sells x86 boxes with Windows installed to sell the boxes with anything else installed.
Really?
Dell PrecisionTM n series1 workstations deliver maximum workstation performance. Smart for businesses with proprietary software images or special Linux needs, these systems come without a Microsoft® operating system. PrecisionTM n series systems are available with factory installed Linux.
Although, I think that if Apple did try to compete with MS on their own turf, you'd see the gloves come off real quick. It's just not going to happen.
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
Problem is, Microsoft is far too powerful for Apple to tangle with head to head. Microsoft not only has money, market inertia on their side, but also lax enforcement of government regulations, all three branches of the government that do not believe in free and fair market competition (well, two for sure), and, to be fair, a somewhat competitive product. Apple would get killed if they simply tried to offer OS X for intel boxes, in fact they wouldn't even get out of the gate, because Microsoft already forbids any manufacturer who sells x86 boxes with Windows installed to sell the boxes with anything else installed. It's not free market capitalism, but it's here to stay.
Actually, there have been a number of articles which all but beg Apple to release X for X86 as people (and corps) are feed up with all the problems of Windows. These articles suggest that there is a substantial demand for this. It continues to be an interesting concept...Apple as software company which also happens to make some interesting hardware. Will it happen under Jobs? Probably not. Will the people wanting this change to Apple hardware? Probably not. They just do not like it or being restricted the way Apple continues to restrict things.
Just look at today's releases. Apple dummies up most of the G5 towers with slower FSB speeds and such. It would be a great deal simpler (and undoubedly more cost effective) to use the same FSB speed and make the price point differences simply a matter of which CPU, graphics card, and so on go into the box. It's really sad.
If anyone can crunch the numbers to show why or how Apple would make more money by licensing or selling OS X for "beige" box hardware, please step forward. Otherwise, another old rumor bites the dust. We can safely ignore all pleads, politics and higher callings and focus on where the money is.
That isn't to say that Apple couldn't switch to x86 CPU chips, just that they won't be used in an open hardware platform, nor easily (or legally) reverse engineered. There's more to hardware than just a CPU.
Originally posted by RBR
Just look at today's releases. Apple dummies up most of the G5 towers with slower FSB speeds and such. It would be a great deal simpler (and undoubedly more cost effective) to use the same FSB speed... It's really sad.
What's really sad is your understanding of the G5.
At most Apple "dummies up" the current 1.8 GHz model, with its 600 MHz bus speed. Other than that... please note the following hopefully painfully obvious pattern:
2.0 GHz model: 1.00 GHz bus
2.3 GHz model: 1.15 GHz bus
2.7 GHz model: 1.35 GHz bus
Had it occurred to you that perhaps a G5 can't support bus speeds over exactly one half of the processor speed? That no one has "dummied up" the 2.0 GHz model by not giving it a 1.35 GHz bus that it can't possibly use?
Originally posted by shetline
What's really sad is your understanding of the G5.
At most Apple "dummies up" the current 1.8 GHz model, with its 600 MHz bus speed. Other than that... please note the following hopefully painfully obvious pattern:
2.0 GHz model: 1.00 GHz bus
2.3 GHz model: 1.15 GHz bus
2.7 GHz model: 1.35 GHz bus
Had it occurred to you that perhaps a G5 can't support bus speeds over exactly one half of the processor speed? That no one has "dummied up" the 2.0 GHz model by not giving it a 1.35 GHz bus that it can't possibly use?
Apple sells crippled hardware all the time. Wake up!
Originally posted by Gamblor
Really?
Although, I think that if Apple did try to compete with MS on their own turf, you'd see the gloves come off real quick. It's just not going to happen.
Ok, maybe Linux, but I remember back in the days of BeOS, M$ forced x86 box makers to sign contracts forcing them to install ONLY Windows. Maybe something has changed, or M$ simply doesn't see Linux as a threat, I don't know.
One thing is for sure, Microsoft would NEVER permit anyone to sell an x86 box with both Windows and/or OS X installed. It just wouldn't happen. Worst came to worst, M$ would just pay congress to make Windows the "standard" OS for America, in order to "cut operating costs and make US corporations more competitive, thereby staunching the flow of jobs overseas." Don't think they could buy off congress? Microsoft already OWNS congress when it comes to tech business. M$ is exactly the sort of monopoly that these laissez-faire assholes idolize.
Originally posted by JonE
What with the conception that the G5s are behind in any way? AMD (the fastest/best you can get for PC) is only at 2.6GHz, and who even takes Intel frequencies seriously?
Apple just needs to adopt a ratings system like AMD and Intel, instead of being stuck on frequency. There are other factors to performance, and the G5s are already comparable and competitive with the Wintel world.
Depends who you ask, I guess.
Premiere 6 sucks
Word 6 and above sucks
Quake III doesn't suck but isn't optimized for Macs
Photoshop 7 = dinosaur
Please PCworld update your freakin' apps.
This benchmark is useless. Well it does make for a good idiot alert. Anyone who cannot see the irony of these benches is surely an idiot.