f13.net forums - Macs to have Intel Inside

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 23, 2025, 10:33:58 AM

we're back, baby

The reason why Apple is switching to Intel is because IBM can't deliver enough processors, and the 3Ghz G5's/G5 Laptops just weren't coming.

The reason they aren't using AMD is because Intel can produce a fuckton more chips than AMD. Period.

Quote from: Fabricated on June 06, 2005, 03:03:46 PM

To meet the massive demand for iMacs and powerbooks?

Alkiera

Quote from: Alkiera on June 06, 2005, 03:38:09 PM

Quote from: Fabricated on June 06, 2005, 03:03:46 PM

To meet the massive demand for iMacs and powerbooks?

Alkiera

Likely it's more about flexibility than quantity per se. Apple has a history of screwing themselves by under/overestimating demand and getting caught in shortages/inventory backlogs. Intel as a supplier is probably a more sophisticated partner to help Apple manage these issues than either IBM or AMD. Or they just want to put those blue and orange stickers on the boxes. Either way...

Quote from: schild on June 06, 2005, 06:31:19 AM

About time. The other processors just weren't cutting it.

My G5 Xserve disagrees with you.

Regarding Moto, sure, but not IBM.

Quote from: Alkiera on June 06, 2005, 03:38:09 PM

Quote from: Fabricated on June 06, 2005, 03:03:46 PM

The reason they aren't using AMD is because Intel can produce a fuckton more chips than AMD. Period.

To meet the massive demand for iMacs and powerbooks?

Public relations - Intel needs all the positive investor news they can flood to PRNewswire. The volume is such a pittance Intel almost certainly contracted at a loss. Which IBM was on their Apple deal as well. THG's slam on HT isn't helping Intel either.

Forbes.com thinks they are doing it because Jobs is a dumbass.

Correlative, not causative... wink

Steve Jobs is definitely not a dumbass. He's up to something, I bet. Anyway... this was just the motivation we needed to run out and buy that G5 we've been hankering for. Might as well get one while they're still fast.

PS It's really, really purdee.

I can't think of a single reason I, or anyone else really, needs an Apple any more. Particularly not at the price they're at.

That said, If I was rich, I'd buy 2 G5s and an iRack and make an end table.

Edit: Of course, if I was REALLY REALLY REALLY rich, I'd make that table, and poop on it. Then sell it off at Sotheby's.

If anyone still cares about this, Anand has somewhat higher opinions of Jobs' business sense than Forbes. And pictures from WWDC. Seems like they are moving away from producing hardware. I'm not sure why I bother reading about this.

Honestly I think they're fifteen years too late. I suppose Tiger could become the Linux on the desktop everyone dreams of unseating Windows. And to be sure there are enough Anyone But Microsoft types out there to bleed themselves silly licensing to Apple. But it seems more of a last gasp initiative to get Apple execs optioned through the end of the decade.

I'd be more than happy to buy OS X in a box for use on my rig if I knew I could run all my shit on it. Of course, that is my current problem with Apple. Besides the cost, that is. If they divorce the operating system from proprietary hardware, I think they would benefit. Not sure they would do that, though.

According to http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050609.html its a bit bigger than we thought.

Course thats most likely pure speculative bs, but it sure would be interesting if it wasn't.

Cringley and his brother in mind Dvorak are complete nutjobs. They crank out "predictions" and "commentary" on every subject they heard of. Once upon a time one of these predictions is actually remotely true and they then spend the next three years telling everybody "I told you so". Cringely is even worse because he once was employed by Apple Computers and got fired by Steve Jobs himself so he probably has some old grudges against Apple

Cringely's analysis on the Apple/Intel situation is so far from the truth and so heavily inaccurate that it's not even funny anymore.

"Question 1: What happened to the PowerPC's supposed performance advantage over Intel?"

The PowerPC is still technically superior to Intel's offerings but for how long? IBM failed to deliver upgrades time and time again. According to IBM's roadmap we should have dual core 4 GHz PPC 980 by now and also an G5 mobile for laptops but so far they couldn't even deliver the 3 GHz they promised two fucking years ago. When Intel finally releases its Pentium D processors the supposed performance advantage will be zero. It's all about the future direction and not about the here and now.

"Question 2: What happened to Apple's 64-bit operating system?"

It is still there. Just because current Intel offerings are 32 Bit that doesn't mean that they will scrap their 64 Bit OS. On the one hand all Intel desktop processors which will be released this year will have EMT64 extensions (just like AMD's X86-64) and on the other hand Apple has a huge installed base of computers which still are 32 bit. Even Longhorn will not be purely 64 bit because by the End of 2006 80% of all PCs will still use 32 bit processors.

At the 2004 developers conference Apple has stated that not even Leopard (as 10.5 has been named) will be pure 64 bit beacuse there will still be too many machines out there which use 32 bit processors.

"Question 3: Where the heck is AMD?"

They have a capacity problem at the moment. Their factories are already at 100% and there is still a shortage of processors. Why sack IBM because they are unable to deliver enough processors and go to AMD where you will most probably have the same problem. A part from that Apple is more interested in mobile processors. More than 50% of the merchandise sold this year are laptops or devices which use laptop chips (iBooks, Powerbooks, Mac Mini). This will be the first year where Laptops will outsell desktops so what use is the best desktop processor (Athlon64) when AMD doesn't have a competitive mobile offering?

Intel has the Pentium M and a very good roadmap regarding mobile and energy efficient processors, something AMD lacks at the moment.

"Question 4: Why announce this chip swap a year before it will even begin for customers?"

Duh! So that developers have the time to adapt to the switch? This should be a no brainer. Yes Steve has aaid that you could be going with a recompile IF you exclusively use Cocoa as your framework. But quite a few companies still have many carbon apps or evne have an old CodeWarrior Codebase. For those companies the switch to Cocoa and Intel will take weeks or even months. Apple might want to have most big packages on Intel when they ship their first Intel Mac so one year might be even too short for some companies to port their code. As slow as they usually are Quark will probably have an Intel Version by the end of 2008.

Yes Apple has most certainly heard about the Osborne Effect but you can't keep something like that secret for long. They would have to NDA every software company and every developer who subscribed to an Select or Premium ADC membership. This is impossible someone will leak the info and after that all hell breaks loose. Apples sales will suffer from the announcement but there is no better time than now to announce the switch. Apple can still offset weak sales by iPod sales and has still huge cash reserves to get through the next year also it is a lot better for Apples stock price since analysts are forewarned. Suppose that there would be no new IBM processor until 2006 and nobody would know of the switch. Apples stocks would be rated to hell and beyond by nervous stock analysts.

Cringely hasn't got a clue. What he doesn't get is that the switch is about the future of Apple not the present. At the moment the G5 is still going strong, but what about one year from now? With the advent of the Pentium D and Yonah processors will anybody still buy a G4 Powerbook with 166 MHz frontside bus? What if IBM decides to kill Apple development altogether (If you read between the lines this might already have happened)? What about freescale which promised a dual core 2 GHz G4 with higher bus speed for 2004?

No Apple had to switch to Intel because two years from now they would still be stuck with the current crop of G5s and G4s and by then not even the worst Apple fanboi would buy something so outdated. IBM has already announced that they will cut down development on the PPC970 and beyond because profits are not good enough and the next gen consoles offer more bottom line.

The only thing certain so far is that OS X will not run on standard PC Hardware and Apple might be Intels show pony for the future but Intel will most probably not buy Apple (never say never) because they would not gain much from it but sure as hell will lose support from microsoft if that happens.

Sory for the rant

I don't know what that guy is talking about. We have dual core Power chips... but you don't because they are fucking expensive.

Quote from: Yegolev on June 15, 2005, 10:54:10 AM

I don't know what that guy is talking about. We have dual core Power chips... but you don't because they are fucking expensive.

Well they are fucking expensive, run really fucking hot and need a degree in applied thermodynamics to cool them properly. Apart from that a Power4 is not a PPC970. IBM had to modify their Power design quite a bit to make it desktop worthy. Well I wouldn't mind a Powermac the size of an AS/400 for heavy duty photoshop and Avid work but the power bill would most probably kill me. ;-)

Quote from: Jeff Kelly on June 16, 2005, 01:23:52 AM

Apart from that a Power4 is not a PPC970. IBM had to modify their Power design quite a bit to make it desktop worthy. Well I wouldn't mind a Powermac the size of an AS/400 for heavy duty photoshop and Avid work but the power bill would most probably kill me. ;-)

You got that right. =) The bulk of these machines is power regulators and air movement devices (IBM's term for "fan"). Producing chips for a low-cost, low-volume market is probably not on IBM's worry list. They will move those dev resources into something else dumb, like Linux. Just to piss me off.