Apple can't be stupid enough not to be planning for the eventual alienation of Intel, as a supplier. I assume they're already in secret talks with AMD. How long will it take? Will they burn through all the existing chip manafacturers before the dynamic changes? The problem with this is that we all suffer for Job's personality issues when we get stuck with obsolete equipment.
You can't take 'set free' as it is, anyway. Apple's management is probably far too infantile to realize that they missed a number of trains quietly departing - as in, making OS X adopt some really good AIX features and make it run on IBM servers and workstations; making OS X available on cheap beige boxes with lots of LEDs, extremely fast processors and industry strength casing; making OS X available on the smallest Dell notebooks available - none of this is happening, or will be happening anytime soon, if Apple continues like this.
So it's not 'set free'. It's 'imprisoned'. Apple imprisons these Intel chips, and I find that quite clear to see. There is nothing about the new Apple Intel computers that breathes a new "set free".
Thats probably how a WIndows user would think when seeing the commercial ("Why can´t I build my own mac?").
As a Mac user, who has traded the commodity of PCs for the flexibility of the OS, I and probably the large majority of Mac users know what they mean by "setting free".
So the commercial is probably not effective for wooing Windows users over. Its for the devotees.
Apple can't be stupid enough not to be planning for the eventual alienation of Intel, as a supplier. I assume they're already in secret talks with AMD. How long will it take? Will they burn through all the existing chip manafacturers before the dynamic changes? The problem with this is that we all suffer for Job's personality issues when we get stuck with obsolete equipment.
Since when is it Job's fault that Apple is switching to Intel? The fact remains that the intel macs are benchmarking better then the AMD. Its purely business. Steve my have personal issues but I doubt that at this point in his life he is basing design of future computers on whether or not he LIKES someone.
The funny thing is the comments (by another individual) about Apple is somehow in the debt of Intel and should be made fun of because they didn't use PC chips... Since when did Apple use x86 processors? If you know anything about computers then you know that there was never a time when Apple gave in to using PC processors... So what is this guy talking about? I don't know. He mentioned something along the lines of Apple switching every three years. Ok that also makes no sense. The last switch was from one manufacturer of PowerPC (Motorolla) to another (IBM).
If you are going to insult a company based on their past decisions make sure you know what those decisions are. Also make sure you know the motivation behind those decisions.
I guess I am "another individual" and "this guy" so I better answer
Quote:
Originally posted by drakethegreat
The funny thing is the comments (by another individual) about Apple is somehow in the debt of Intel and should be made fun of because they didn't use PC chips... Since when did Apple use x86 processors?
Since now? I don´t really understand your point
Quote:
Originally posted by drakethegreat
If you know anything about computers then you know that there was never a time when Apple gave in to using PC processors... So what is this guy talking about?
Well Apple just gave in. You never ask your developers to adopt to a new paradigm if you don´t need to. Especially not after having making classic->X and multiple API changes within a few years.
More to the point: The laptops just did not have any future with the PPC chips. They were dead in the water not now, but one year ago. The i- and PowerMac probably had up to a year of life in them yet, depending on the liquid cooling technique Apple was ready to use.
So yes, Apple gave in, they had no choice since there was no alternative.
Quote:
Originally posted by drakethegreat
He mentioned something along the lines of Apple switching every three years. Ok that also makes no sense. The last switch was from one manufacturer of PowerPC (Motorolla) to another (IBM).
If you are going to insult a company based on their past decisions make sure you know what those decisions are. Also make sure you know the motivation behind those decisions.
First of all, the last three years were referring to Apples switch from Mot to IBM and now to Intel. If Mot had delivered what Apple needed they would not have switched and had IBM delivered what Apple wanted they would NEVER have moved to Intel. The decisions was not a choice by Apple, it was necessity.
EDIT: OR rather: Mot and IBM made the decision for Apple by not dancing to their music.
Apple can't be stupid enough not to be planning for the eventual alienation of Intel, as a supplier. I assume they're already in secret talks with AMD. How long will it take? Will they burn through all the existing chip manafacturers before the dynamic changes?The problem with this is that we all suffer for Job's personality issues when we get stuck with obsolete equipment.
That is the dumbest commentary of assgas so far.
When you start equating your computer with literal human sufferance I find you really don't grasp the purpose of it--it's a tool.
Intel is a Chip manufacturer. AMD is a chip manufacturer. When Intel attempts to shape Apple as it's bitch which is hilarious to say the least, Apple will have the ability to switch chips.
OS X's architecture is chip agnostic. That's just intelligent development and vision knowing that in the land of silicon valley your friends are your enemies.
Does AMD have anything with the power of this new gen chips from Intel without demanding 0.21 nuclear power plant?
AMD is pretty good at the power consumption in the desktop realm, quite a bit better than Intel's current desktop chips, and until IBM released the 970MP, AMD's chips were considerably cooler operating than the equivalent IBM chip.
Quote:
Originally posted by macFanDave
Ho-hum, we got the clean-room bunny suit.
Did you seriously expect the other options from the CEO of a chip company, one previously known to use those clean-room bunny suits in ads?
The long rumoured Taylor Dual Core followons to the original Lancaster Turions are due to arrive in Q1 of 2006. Information has only recently surfaced that Taylor will indeed appear initially in low TDP Socket S1, also known as Socket 638, and will feature additional power saving technologies, such as dynamic cache activation. Taylor core will also use DDR-II memory controller from the outset. As the release date draws near, more information should surface about the well guarded specifications, when some reports pinned the inital maximum frequencies to be somewhere between 2.20 and 2.66 GHz.
AMD Taylor will first appear on IBM's 90nm Silicon on insulator (SOI) process, but will migrate to 65nm, likely with Silicon-Germanium (SiGe) stressed process which was recently achieved through the combined effort of IBM and AMD, with 40% improvement over comparable 65nm processes.
Apple is Intels bitch now. Or rather Apple is a customer for Intel like anyone else.
Ottellini said that a thousand people worked at Intel to make this transition (Apple's switch to Intel) happen.
He might be referring simply to all people who worked on the new Intel Core Duo chips or more likely to all people involved in EFI or to those helping Apple design a new motherboard (or adjust an Intel one) but to me this does not sound like "a customer like anyone else".
My old work place (mobile company) tried to marked themselves by our supposely great customer service: "We have hundreds of customer service workers just waiting to help YOU set up YOUR phone"
There is lies, there is statistics and then there is marketing speak
Well Intel is use to be in control of the adverstising and paying thier customers like Dell and such to advertise and as such they got to control the ad content.
Well, as someone put it welcome to working with Apple.
And making Otellini wear the bunny suit only proves who is the bitch here.
Jobs does it to every person who comes on that stage with him.
Soooo......Roz Ho (sp?) makes MS steves bitch?!?!?!? I DONT THINK SO!
Comments
So it's not 'set free'. It's 'imprisoned'. Apple imprisons these Intel chips, and I find that quite clear to see. There is nothing about the new Apple Intel computers that breathes a new "set free".
As a Mac user, who has traded the commodity of PCs for the flexibility of the OS, I and probably the large majority of Mac users know what they mean by "setting free".
So the commercial is probably not effective for wooing Windows users over. Its for the devotees.
Originally posted by Ptrash
Apple can't be stupid enough not to be planning for the eventual alienation of Intel, as a supplier. I assume they're already in secret talks with AMD. How long will it take? Will they burn through all the existing chip manafacturers before the dynamic changes? The problem with this is that we all suffer for Job's personality issues when we get stuck with obsolete equipment.
Since when is it Job's fault that Apple is switching to Intel? The fact remains that the intel macs are benchmarking better then the AMD. Its purely business. Steve my have personal issues but I doubt that at this point in his life he is basing design of future computers on whether or not he LIKES someone.
The funny thing is the comments (by another individual) about Apple is somehow in the debt of Intel and should be made fun of because they didn't use PC chips... Since when did Apple use x86 processors? If you know anything about computers then you know that there was never a time when Apple gave in to using PC processors... So what is this guy talking about? I don't know. He mentioned something along the lines of Apple switching every three years. Ok that also makes no sense. The last switch was from one manufacturer of PowerPC (Motorolla) to another (IBM).
If you are going to insult a company based on their past decisions make sure you know what those decisions are. Also make sure you know the motivation behind those decisions.
Originally posted by Anders
Does AMD have anything with the power of this new gen chips from Intel without demanding 0.21 nuclear power plant?
Turion.
Originally posted by drakethegreat
The funny thing is the comments (by another individual) about Apple is somehow in the debt of Intel and should be made fun of because they didn't use PC chips... Since when did Apple use x86 processors?
Since now? I don´t really understand your point
Originally posted by drakethegreat
If you know anything about computers then you know that there was never a time when Apple gave in to using PC processors... So what is this guy talking about?
Well Apple just gave in. You never ask your developers to adopt to a new paradigm if you don´t need to. Especially not after having making classic->X and multiple API changes within a few years.
More to the point: The laptops just did not have any future with the PPC chips. They were dead in the water not now, but one year ago. The i- and PowerMac probably had up to a year of life in them yet, depending on the liquid cooling technique Apple was ready to use.
So yes, Apple gave in, they had no choice since there was no alternative.
Originally posted by drakethegreat
He mentioned something along the lines of Apple switching every three years. Ok that also makes no sense. The last switch was from one manufacturer of PowerPC (Motorolla) to another (IBM).
If you are going to insult a company based on their past decisions make sure you know what those decisions are. Also make sure you know the motivation behind those decisions.
First of all, the last three years were referring to Apples switch from Mot to IBM and now to Intel. If Mot had delivered what Apple needed they would not have switched and had IBM delivered what Apple wanted they would NEVER have moved to Intel. The decisions was not a choice by Apple, it was necessity.
EDIT: OR rather: Mot and IBM made the decision for Apple by not dancing to their music.
Originally posted by Ptrash
Apple can't be stupid enough not to be planning for the eventual alienation of Intel, as a supplier. I assume they're already in secret talks with AMD. How long will it take? Will they burn through all the existing chip manafacturers before the dynamic changes?The problem with this is that we all suffer for Job's personality issues when we get stuck with obsolete equipment.
That is the dumbest commentary of assgas so far.
When you start equating your computer with literal human sufferance I find you really don't grasp the purpose of it--it's a tool.
Intel is a Chip manufacturer. AMD is a chip manufacturer. When Intel attempts to shape Apple as it's bitch which is hilarious to say the least, Apple will have the ability to switch chips.
OS X's architecture is chip agnostic. That's just intelligent development and vision knowing that in the land of silicon valley your friends are your enemies.
Originally posted by Anders
Does AMD have anything with the power of this new gen chips from Intel without demanding 0.21 nuclear power plant?
AMD is pretty good at the power consumption in the desktop realm, quite a bit better than Intel's current desktop chips, and until IBM released the 970MP, AMD's chips were considerably cooler operating than the equivalent IBM chip.
Originally posted by macFanDave
Ho-hum, we got the clean-room bunny suit.
Did you seriously expect the other options from the CEO of a chip company, one previously known to use those clean-room bunny suits in ads?
Originally posted by Gene Clean
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athlon_64_X2
Power Consumption (TDP): 110 Watt max
Is that a "no"?
Originally posted by Gene Clean
I updated my answer: Turion64.
Wow. That one actually sound impressive (from the wiki entry).
Is it dual core?
Originally posted by Anders
Is it dual core?
Not yet, but soon.
AMD Taylor
The long rumoured Taylor Dual Core followons to the original Lancaster Turions are due to arrive in Q1 of 2006. Information has only recently surfaced that Taylor will indeed appear initially in low TDP Socket S1, also known as Socket 638, and will feature additional power saving technologies, such as dynamic cache activation. Taylor core will also use DDR-II memory controller from the outset. As the release date draws near, more information should surface about the well guarded specifications, when some reports pinned the inital maximum frequencies to be somewhere between 2.20 and 2.66 GHz.
AMD Taylor will first appear on IBM's 90nm Silicon on insulator (SOI) process, but will migrate to 65nm, likely with Silicon-Germanium (SiGe) stressed process which was recently achieved through the combined effort of IBM and AMD, with 40% improvement over comparable 65nm processes.
Originally posted by Maestro64
And making Otellini wear the bunny suit only proves who is the bitch here.
Paul Otellini is not opposed to wearing costumes. He has done it for dramatic effect at a number of presentations.
Originally posted by AppleInsider
Intel Vice President Deborah Conrad said: "Never would we characterize our customers that way."
Allow me to reframe:
Soon-to-be Intel Ex-Vice President Deborah Conrad said: "Never would we characterize our customers that way."
Originally posted by Anders
Apple is Intels bitch now. Or rather Apple is a customer for Intel like anyone else.
Ottellini said that a thousand people worked at Intel to make this transition (Apple's switch to Intel) happen.
He might be referring simply to all people who worked on the new Intel Core Duo chips or more likely to all people involved in EFI or to those helping Apple design a new motherboard (or adjust an Intel one) but to me this does not sound like "a customer like anyone else".
Originally posted by Mike Moscow
Otellini would have worn a glittery thong, see-through stripper heels and nipple pasties with tassle's if Jobs would have told him to.
thats hilarious, and yet true! Jobs rules!
There is lies, there is statistics and then there is marketing speak
Originally posted by inslider
Allow me to reframe:
Soon-to-be Intel Ex-Vice President Deborah Conrad said: "Never would we characterize our customers that way."
HAH! you think AAPL hasTHAT much power????? Dell buys more from Intel in a day than does Apple in a week.
Originally posted by Maestro64
Well Intel is use to be in control of the adverstising and paying thier customers like Dell and such to advertise and as such they got to control the ad content.
Well, as someone put it welcome to working with Apple.
And making Otellini wear the bunny suit only proves who is the bitch here.
Jobs does it to every person who comes on that stage with him.
Soooo......Roz Ho (sp?) makes MS steves bitch?!?!?!? I DONT THINK SO!