View Poll Results: What do you think is better for Apple?

Voters
10. You may not vote on this poll
  • Intel

    5 50.00%
  • IBM

    5 50.00%
Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 140

Thread: G586?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Somewhere sweaty
    Posts
    86

    Exclamation G586?

    Based on this article at CNET, the next generation of Macs will be based on Intel processors.

    I lived, and purchased, my way through the last processor switch and it was expensive, but worth it. I hope this next transition, if actually true, is worth it as well.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,352

    Lightbulb Thread moved, poll added

    Maybe Steve is angry cuz M$ got 3+GHz before Apple from IBM.

    All developers have to recompile their software plus they now have to make two versions of the software for the Mac, X86 and PPC.

    And I think Apple will lose some developers by the switch too.

    Regards

    Nicolas
    Last edited by Nicolas; 06-03-2005 at 10:30 PM.
    Custom Configurations! Rad Hacks and Mods!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Mobius Strip
    Posts
    13,045

    Lightbulb

    Intel makes lots of things besides cpus, including a new FW800 chip that it seems will get into Intel systems.

    IBM uses intel Xeon in servers, but it doesn't mean they've dropped PPC or POWER5/6. If Apple/IBM can't get a G5 into a laptop, and they don't want the Freescale 2GHz... so what if they experimented with some kind of mobility Intel chips for their engineers to play with? Microsoft used G5s to help bring out the Xbox, but is M$ switching to PPC?

    IBM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Somewhere sweaty
    Posts
    86

    Default In more news

    Now The Wall Street Journal (subscription only) is reporting the same info. They're speculating that Apple will migrate all apps to x86 code.

    It's all speculation at this point, but the WSJ has convincing market analysis of the situation.

    My hope is that Intel manufactures a RISC chip for Apple. I'm in the camp that believes RISC computing is mo' betta.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Chicago, IL 60610
    Posts
    339

    Default

    Not to mention Tiger: PPCs were 64-bit from day one and Intel does have a recent history of not-so-good efforts at 64-bit support (the much-heralded, but poorly performing Itanium).

    No sense in switching for a quick-payoff in GHz but then bad behaviour for 64-bit apps.

    Also, you'd think that quad-processor machines would be simpler...at least as an intermediate step...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    on the landline, Mr. Smith
    Posts
    7,787

    Default

    I will believe it when I see it.

    What I don't get is, if they were going to switch, I would thing AMD would be a better fit, as the Opteron is kicking serious 64 bit ass these days, not to mention the notion that one would think AMD would be more eager and accomodating than big ol' Intel.
    "Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody thinks of complaining." -- Jef Raskin

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,352

    Default

    Or........

    Apple and Intel are going to build a faster PB/iBook based on the XScale (they are at 2.0GHz AFAIK).

    we are getting an Itanic based PMac (sarcasm)

    Regards

    Nicolas
    Custom Configurations! Rad Hacks and Mods!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Chicago, IL 60610
    Posts
    339

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by unclemac
    I will believe it when I see it.
    This is truly the bottom line.



    Quote Originally Posted by unclemac
    What I don't get is, if they were going to switch, I would thing AMD would be a better fit, as the Opteron is kicking serious 64 bit ass these days, not to mention the notion that one would think AMD would be more eager and accomodating than big ol' Intel.
    I agree here too. While Big Steve is a cat I greatly admire and consider way more prescient than Billy-Boy, Steverino and Apple have made a couple of...and rather notable...hardware gaffes/mis-guesses in the past (though some, like the Newton, just happen to represent being too far ahead of the curve). I'm hopin' that he's not reacting out of anger to IBM...first it was they couldn't make enough, now it's that they can't make 'em fast enough,...


    More for the grist mill...

    http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050603-4970.html

    http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post...932.html?40008

    I reckon we'll find out on Monday.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Mobius Strip
    Posts
    13,045

    Lightbulb My thoughts day before WWDC...

    They lose some developers, but then, some vendors already have to do both platforms now, and aren't too pleased with that. Apple would gain developers, access to software and hardware choices. AMD prices are high, but better optimized for duals than Intel I think. Sell their $1000 Pro applications to a wider audience (services and software has higher margins today than hardware).

    I see this as doing what IBM does in the Xeon and Intellistation which comes in Intel or POWER. IBM did a lot of work helping with optimizing and reducing latencies in the Xeon 3 recently, which drew my attention.

    Could Apple turn into an entertainment and software company while still bringing out better servers and management software for IT?

    Or, just have Intel build PPCs? IBM was busy with the Xbox when Jobs was sitting tapping his toes.
    I'm sorry, I just doubt that Apple will switch to X86, but I agree with some that it's very possible that Apple will partner with Intel to create PPC chips. That bypasses the whole software compatibility issue, and Intel would love to kick some sand in IBM's face by producing a faster-than-IBM PowerPC chip. A wholesale change to X86 would be extremely painful, and I think some developers would get tired of chasing Apple's tail and drop production of some Apple software. It may happen yet, but I'll have to hear it from Job's on Monday before I'll believe it! - forums.xlr8yourmac.com "Intel?"
    Things move quickly. Having to do your own R&D is expensive and takes longer. Maybe it would make it easier for ATI and NVIDA, as well as bring PCI-Express or even PCI-X 2.0 (266MHz bus).

    No more "Mac tax" for Radeons, and access to more cards sooner?

    Apple Intel Darwin and Linux. Easier to sell to government and military contracts for a secure platform. The FBI, military, even the IRS as well as FAA are in serious need and have plans to do major upgrades in the coming years.

    It took 5 yrs (or more) for the transition to OS X. And Tiger does seem to me to be the best fruit of that effort. (Look for 10.4.2 it seems "soon" too.)

    They've had good run with iPod's popularity, so except for the early battery issue (2 million customers @ $50 rebate each has to hurt and washes away much of the profit on those units).

    Double the market share in short period.

    With the cost and R&D of every new transition to smaller (65mm and 45mm in the next decade) and building plants, etc. and faced with competition from China, and now India is seeking to build their own chip plant, maybe in the bigger picture, there is some logic.

    I'm trying to find parts and if I could use anything off the shelf I wouldn't have to worry as much.

    Less problems with compatibility of RAM, PCI cards, video cards, or is that a dream and reality is it will always be a nightmare to achieve?

    One blogger is saying Apple is seeking BIOS software engineer.
    Last edited by TZ; 06-05-2005 at 09:48 AM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Chicago, IL 60610
    Posts
    339

    Default If this is true...

    TZ,

    There sure is potential for some upside (yepper, the "Mac Tax" that you very accurately refer to is a real drag).

    So, get a load of this:

    "Intel is rolling out a new line of processors. It will
    have multiple cores, NOT x86-based, 3 GHz and up, will license the
    AltiVec/Velocity Engine from Apple, will not require any software
    rewrites. This is from my good friend who is one of the chief
    engineers at Intel."

    Now, _that_ could be interesting!

    iw

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Mobius Strip
    Posts
    13,045

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    on the landline, Mr. Smith
    Posts
    7,787

    Default

    Oh, Revi....please don't pull our collective legs at this late date!

    I swear I was just thinking that before I logged in...just cause Intel (or whoever) builds the chip, it doesn't have to be an X86 unit does it? They have the $$ to go in what ever direction they want, so it really depends on what they want to do, and if it means stepping on MS's toes too much.

    Fingers crossed!
    "Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody thinks of complaining." -- Jef Raskin

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,352

    Default

    AFAIK the G5 only takes 5% of the capacity at IBM's fab. in East Fishkill.

    Apple, IBM and Freescale have the rights on the PPC.
    If intel goes in production of a RISC based, compatible PPC they have to pay royalties and the the CPU would be higher priced than IBM's.

    Today, the PPC is cheaper than the P4.

    Regards

    Nicolas
    Custom Configurations! Rad Hacks and Mods!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Mobius Strip
    Posts
    13,045

    Lightbulb

    I.B.M. supplies about 50 percent of the microprocessors used by Apple, providing them for desktop and server computers. Freescale makes the processors used in Apple's notebook and new Mac mini computers.

    For years, according to industry analysts, the work for Apple has been barely a break-even business for I.B.M. When the two companies were negotiating a new contract recently, Mr. Jobs pushed for price discounts that I.B.M. refused to offer. For I.B.M., "the economics just didn't work," said one industry executive who was briefed on the negotiations. [...]
    And, laptops now out-sell desktops for first time.

    So it seems to be pretty much a done-deal.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,352

    Question Intel and RISC = XScale (ARM) and Aplha (DEC)

    AFAIK Intel bought all rights on the Alpha CPU from Compaq.

    Maybe we see a merge of an Aplha and a PPC with Altivec and stuff.

    The Alpha CPU was a great architecture with very high performance.
    Cray used it in the T3E and DEC and Compaq in Servers.
    Also EFI (Fiery) used it in their RIP's.

    Regards

    Nicolas
    Custom Configurations! Rad Hacks and Mods!

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Mobius Strip
    Posts
    13,045

    Lightbulb Video iPod and Hollywood

    So, was DRM the deciding factor? or IBM prices? or just the way the wind was blowing off the Bay?
    Apple -- or rather, Hollywood -- wants the Pentium D to secure an online movie store (iFlicks if you will), that will allow consumers to buy or rent new movies on demand, over the internet.
    www.wired.com

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    on the landline, Mr. Smith
    Posts
    7,787

    Default It's True!! It's True!!!!!!

    # INTEL RUMORS TRUE: Jobs says there have been two major transitions for Mac: 68K to PowerPC and then Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X. Now it's time for third transition to Intel-based Macs. Developers will begin to make the transition now. While users can begin to switch next year. Apple is making the move "because we want to make the best computers for our customers."

    # Mac OS X has been leading secret double life, Jobs proclaims. Every release of Mac OS X has been built for both Intel and PowerPC-based Macs over the last 5 years. Mac OS X is cross-platform by design. Jobs shows all Mac OS X Tiger running on Intel. All features are already compatible with Intel-based processors. It's not done yet, but will be put into the developer hands for finishing.

    # Under the transformation: Widget/Scripts/Java Just work, Jobs says. Cocoa apps will take a few days to update. Meanwhile, Carbon Apps will take a few weeks. Jobs tells carbon developers to start using Xcode. Over half of developers using Xcode. Next Xcode (version 2.1) will be delivered today. News Xcode generates a single "universal binary" that supports both PowerPC and Intel x86 processors. Available to everybody at registration desk following the keynote.

    # There is no G5 PowerBook yet. Future products can't be build on IBM PowerPC processors, Jobs says. Intel has better performance and delivers much better performance per watt. Starting next year the first Macs with Intel processors will debut. They'll begin shipping by next WWDC (June). The transition will be mostly complete by 2007 WWDC. It's a two-year transition.


    # Mac OS X "Leopard" is due at the end of 2006

    # Apple will call the next -- and 5th major -- version of Mac OS X:" Leopard."
    "Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody thinks of complaining." -- Jef Raskin

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    on the landline, Mr. Smith
    Posts
    7,787

    Default

    # The Mac OS X for Intel Develpoer Kit includes a 3.6GHz Pentium 4 and OS X 10.4.1 for Intel (preview release). Order today; ships in two weeks.

    # Jobs shows Rosetta: a dymanic binary translator. It runs PowerPC code on Intel-baesd Macs, transparently to the users. It's pretty fast. Jobs demos Rosetta used to run PowerPC macs on Intel-based Macs --shows Microsoft Excel/Word running on Intel-based Mac (without any porting and/or recompiling). Jobs also shows Photoshop CS2 with all plugins that are translated and run on Intel-based Mac without significant speed decrease.

    # Jobs says Intel is "passionate" about its products. Jobs invites Intel CEO Paul Otellini on stage to talk about Apple's transition.




    ....All the above are reported to be live comments from WWDC....
    "Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody thinks of complaining." -- Jef Raskin

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Mt. Holly, NJ USA
    Posts
    247

    Wink guess those g4 and g5 computers

    will be getting a longer workout than many of us expected!
    Tom Babb

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    on the landline, Mr. Smith
    Posts
    7,787

    Default

    OK, now that I have seen it, I believe it.

    Now the harder questions that TZ posed....will PC video cards plug in, or will we still be limited to special Mac cards?

    How will they lock in the use of their hardware? Larger ROM size like so many have a hard time with when they try to flash PC cards? Will some hackers desolder/solder ROM chips and sell "Mac" capable boards on ebay? Some hackers will "cut down" the firmware code for video cards to fit on the smaller ROM chips...will those types be cutting down the boot ROM to run on a Dell?

    Or perhaps a completely different way of locking the ability to boot OS X?

    Can I buy an X86 Mac (G6?) and also boot X86 Linux and Windows?

    ????????? Let the games begin!


    A huge day in the Apple world; good or bad remains to be seen.
    "Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody thinks of complaining." -- Jef Raskin

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •