I think if intel were to start fabbing PPC chips for Apple it would make sense to start at the low end like the article says. This would give intel a chance to work out kinks in their manufacturing process before moving to high end powermacs and whatnot.
I have to respectfully disagree with this statement. I switched back in early May. I used PCs for the past 18 years. I have been a software developer on the PC for 16 of those last 18 years.
I think that what makes the Mac the Mac is the entire package; hardware, software, etc. If Apple goes the way of the Intel chips, then what we will have is just another Wintel box loaded with a variant form of Linux with a nice GUI on top of it. It will not be a Mac.
yeah, kinda like a BMW on a Toyota chassis...
... and i'd assume Apple support of HyperTransport is out the window now.
Look, all of the news for the past two weeks points to an Apple/Intel partnership.
it is common knowledge that the Microsoft/Intle partnership has gone south and MS is looking like jumping on the IBM bandwagon-actualy even going so far as endorsing AMD over Intel for Windows 64.
Intel is smarting and Apple is smarting from IBMs decisionto favor the game consoles as they will surely bring in more revenue since combine, they will sell around 200 million units in 5 years vs 10 million (on a good day) in the same time frame.
Apple not beign on the Power.org partner list is telling as is the Intel CEO basically calling Windows junk and telling people to buy a Mac if they want security.
This points to Intel in a Mac. Which Macs? We don't know. What kind of Intel CPU? X86 (unlikely)? IA64? PPC? Somehting new? We have no idea, but we sure will next week. Not only wil Jobs inform the crowd about Intel, but you can be sure he will not do that without a product to show for it. We wil be able to buy an Apple branded, Intel centered hardware product withing 3 months time. It might be a Mac and it might be something else. A little smaller and a little sleeker. Like an Apple tablet/PDA. although I am really just hoping for a G5 Powerbook.
Not only wil Jobs inform the crowd about Intel, but you can be sure he will not do that without a product to show for it. We wil be able to buy an Apple branded, Intel centered hardware product withing 3 months time. It might be a Mac and it might be something else. A little smaller and a little sleeker. Like an Apple tablet/PDA. although I am really just hoping for a G5 Powerbook.
How about a little device created by Intel that is "not competing" with the Mac mini?
A) the whole thing is bogus so they dont report it.
or
They have no clue because Apple fired their sources. and/or they are too scared because Apple will sue them to death.
Exactly!
I really doubt this is going to happen. Just another rumor. And for those of you that think Apple will stop making hardware and concentrate only in software, WAKE UP!
One of the marvels of Apple is their hardware and design of their machines that kick ass any competitor out there. Maybe Apple doesn't have the fastest chips out there but come on their machines are beautiful and more reliable in comparison to the others. They are Apple's biggest pride.
If they were to phase intel chips into the mac line starting at one end (the bottom apparently) and moving to the other, wouldn't that mean they would have to immediately offer an OS X for intel AND an OS X for mac and continue to develop these to OS platforms in parallel? I know nothing about programming, but this would seem daunting in terms of man power, economics and customer service (when all the lay-people call up not knowing which version they have and which drivers they need, etc.) It would seem an across-the-hardware-line switch to intel chips would be less chaotic.
an OS X for intel AND an OS X for mac and continue to develop these to OS platforms in parallel? I know nothing about programming, but this would seem daunting in terms of man power, economics and customer service (when all the lay-people call up not knowing which version they have and which drivers they need, etc.) It would seem an across-the-hardware-line switch to intel chips would be less chaotic.
Making OS X work on Intel is no problem if they've used good coding practices. The user/driver issues are what I have been saying will cause real problems. Supporting two simultaneous platforms would be extremely confusing to the user. "It works on my Mac, why won't it work on yours?"
My first reaction is that with my new G5 2.0 dually,
I'm glad to now own one of the last real PowerMacs.
The CNet article indicates that Apple will first use an Intel processor
in their products like the Mac mini by mid 2006.
What I think we'll actually see is a replacement for the G4 series across the board using the dual core Pentium D ported to OSX in a new line of consumer models.
What I hope to hear from SJ next week is that they have designed an entirely
new motherboard and system architecture to take advantage of Intel's Dual Core extreme chips for their Pro workstations
Running OSX on those systems may boost the efficiency by leaps and bounds
over similarily equipped models running Windows 64.
I can't imagine that SJ would consider a move to Intel chips unless he knows
beyond any doubt that running OSX on these systems will kill ANY system running Windows period!
I'm sure that Intel also can't ignore the shreeks of consumers who are sick to death of Windows security issues.
That word transition should not be ignored.
Keep in mind that both consumers and the enterprise will be forced one way or another to transition away from Windows XP in the near future and it could just be that Intel would rather put their faith in OSX rather than risking everything on yet to be released Longwait.
My first reaction to this news is EEEK!
but I suppose I should reserve judgement until we hear what's in store
Making OS X work on Intel is no problem if they've used good coding practices. The user/driver issues are what I have been saying will cause real problems. Supporting two simultaneous platforms would be extremely confusing to the user. "It works on my Mac, why won't it work on yours?"
Exactly right. For Apple to reset OS X for an intel chip seems risky at best but to transition the switch and therefore set themselves up for simultaneously chaperoning two OSs seems insane--a customer service and technological nightmare. I would think the myriad problems the average user would experience would quickly translate into OS X gaining a new, less "user-friendly" rep.
A change as big as going from PPC to X86 would take a long preparation, but these talks with Intel have not been going on for long. If true, we wouldn't find out about it for another year, at least.
On the other hand, go over to the AppleInsider thread and read what Programmer has to say. It sounds like a PPC from Intel might not be that hard to do.
Comments
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/05...ini_buy_apple/
Originally posted by kwsanders
I have to respectfully disagree with this statement. I switched back in early May. I used PCs for the past 18 years. I have been a software developer on the PC for 16 of those last 18 years.
I think that what makes the Mac the Mac is the entire package; hardware, software, etc. If Apple goes the way of the Intel chips, then what we will have is just another Wintel box loaded with a variant form of Linux with a nice GUI on top of it. It will not be a Mac.
yeah, kinda like a BMW on a Toyota chassis...
... and i'd assume Apple support of HyperTransport is out the window now.
it is common knowledge that the Microsoft/Intle partnership has gone south and MS is looking like jumping on the IBM bandwagon-actualy even going so far as endorsing AMD over Intel for Windows 64.
Intel is smarting and Apple is smarting from IBMs decisionto favor the game consoles as they will surely bring in more revenue since combine, they will sell around 200 million units in 5 years vs 10 million (on a good day) in the same time frame.
Apple not beign on the Power.org partner list is telling as is the Intel CEO basically calling Windows junk and telling people to buy a Mac if they want security.
This points to Intel in a Mac. Which Macs? We don't know. What kind of Intel CPU? X86 (unlikely)? IA64? PPC? Somehting new? We have no idea, but we sure will next week. Not only wil Jobs inform the crowd about Intel, but you can be sure he will not do that without a product to show for it. We wil be able to buy an Apple branded, Intel centered hardware product withing 3 months time. It might be a Mac and it might be something else. A little smaller and a little sleeker. Like an Apple tablet/PDA. although I am really just hoping for a G5 Powerbook.
Originally posted by 9secondko
Not only wil Jobs inform the crowd about Intel, but you can be sure he will not do that without a product to show for it. We wil be able to buy an Apple branded, Intel centered hardware product withing 3 months time. It might be a Mac and it might be something else. A little smaller and a little sleeker. Like an Apple tablet/PDA. although I am really just hoping for a G5 Powerbook.
How about a little device created by Intel that is "not competing" with the Mac mini?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/02/mini_vs_mini/
Originally posted by sc_markt
Where the heck is the ThinkSecret guy on this?!!
Just what I have been wondering.
Two scenarios:
A) the whole thing is bogus so they dont report it.
or
Originally posted by 9secondko
Just what I have been wondering.
Two scenarios:
A) the whole thing is bogus so they dont report it.
or
Exactly!
I really doubt this is going to happen. Just another rumor. And for those of you that think Apple will stop making hardware and concentrate only in software, WAKE UP!
One of the marvels of Apple is their hardware and design of their machines that kick ass any competitor out there. Maybe Apple doesn't have the fastest chips out there but come on their machines are beautiful and more reliable in comparison to the others. They are Apple's biggest pride.
Originally posted by Existence
Intel CEO says Macs are a good alternative.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/05...ini_buy_apple/
GOOD catch Ex.
SEE !!! I told you, I was the ONLY guy arguing in the "Apple could use Intel" article thread that it would be good for Apple to do BOTH !!!
Jobs always hated IBM anyway.
Ever since Jobs came back Apple ALWAYS does what I tell them...
I can't wait for the PIXAR "MIND CONTROL MOVIE !!!"
Originally posted by MACchine
Ever since Jobs came back Apple ALWAYS does what I tell them...
Originally posted by Existence
How about a little device created by Intel that is "not competing" with the Mac mini?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/06/02/mini_vs_mini/
Wired had an article on this, a much BETTER one, which said THAT INTEL SAID it would cost $900 to make a clone of a Mac mini.
It was the best commercial for the Mac mini I have seen.
Originally posted by Gene Clean
http://www.macrumors.com/
Originally posted by surfacenuts
an OS X for intel AND an OS X for mac and continue to develop these to OS platforms in parallel? I know nothing about programming, but this would seem daunting in terms of man power, economics and customer service (when all the lay-people call up not knowing which version they have and which drivers they need, etc.) It would seem an across-the-hardware-line switch to intel chips would be less chaotic.
Making OS X work on Intel is no problem if they've used good coding practices. The user/driver issues are what I have been saying will cause real problems. Supporting two simultaneous platforms would be extremely confusing to the user. "It works on my Mac, why won't it work on yours?"
I'm glad to now own one of the last real PowerMacs.
The CNet article indicates that Apple will first use an Intel processor
in their products like the Mac mini by mid 2006.
What I think we'll actually see is a replacement for the G4 series across the board using the dual core Pentium D ported to OSX in a new line of consumer models.
What I hope to hear from SJ next week is that they have designed an entirely
new motherboard and system architecture to take advantage of Intel's Dual Core extreme chips for their Pro workstations
Running OSX on those systems may boost the efficiency by leaps and bounds
over similarily equipped models running Windows 64.
I can't imagine that SJ would consider a move to Intel chips unless he knows
beyond any doubt that running OSX on these systems will kill ANY system running Windows period!
I'm sure that Intel also can't ignore the shreeks of consumers who are sick to death of Windows security issues.
That word transition should not be ignored.
Keep in mind that both consumers and the enterprise will be forced one way or another to transition away from Windows XP in the near future and it could just be that Intel would rather put their faith in OSX rather than risking everything on yet to be released Longwait.
My first reaction to this news is EEEK!
but I suppose I should reserve judgement until we hear what's in store
from SJ himself.
Here's to the crazy ones.
The misfits.
The rebels.
The troublemakers.
The round pegs in the square holes.
The ones who see things differently.
They're not fond of rules.
And they have no respect for the status quo.
You can praise them, disagree with them, quote them,
disbelieve them, glorify or vilify them.
About the only thing you can't do is ignore them.
Because they change things.
They invent. They imagine. They heal.
They explore. They create. They inspire.
They push the human race forward.
Maybe they have to be crazy.
How else can you stare at an empty canvas and see a work of art?
Or sit in silence and hear a song that's never been written?
Or gaze at a red planet and see a laboratory on wheels?
We make tools for these kinds of people.
While some see them as the crazy ones,
we see genius.
Because the people who are crazy enough to think
they can change the world, are the ones who do.
From Apple Computer
Originally posted by MACchine
Here's to the crazy ones
Go away.
Originally posted by unixguru
Making OS X work on Intel is no problem if they've used good coding practices. The user/driver issues are what I have been saying will cause real problems. Supporting two simultaneous platforms would be extremely confusing to the user. "It works on my Mac, why won't it work on yours?"
Exactly right. For Apple to reset OS X for an intel chip seems risky at best but to transition the switch and therefore set themselves up for simultaneously chaperoning two OSs seems insane--a customer service and technological nightmare. I would think the myriad problems the average user would experience would quickly translate into OS X gaining a new, less "user-friendly" rep.
On the other hand, go over to the AppleInsider thread and read what Programmer has to say. It sounds like a PPC from Intel might not be that hard to do.