Recent Widgets


Register for DashboardWidgets

Recent Forums Posts

Partners


iCompositions

MacDesktops.net

RSS Showcase
RSS Comments
RSS Forums

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Posted in: Lounge
Goto page 1, 2  Next

Apple+Intel: Wow

Author Message
pm
Administrator


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 398

Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 - 1:19 pm    Post subject: Apple+Intel: Wow Reply with quote

Well, it's finally happened. I find it interesting that Apple has said they'll release the Intel-powered Mac by June 6, 2006 (or 6/6/06 or 666) Razz Think there's anything to that?
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Widgets
gnome
Administrator


Joined: 26 Sep 2004
Posts: 145

Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 - 2:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

April fools! AHAHAHAHHAA...wait.

They aren't switching to x86 processors though, are they? That would be suicide. They can't do that.
View user's profile Send private message Widgets
pm
Administrator


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 398

Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 - 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

They said it was the Pentium 4 so yeah, it would seem that they're looking at x86.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Widgets
gnome
Administrator


Joined: 26 Sep 2004
Posts: 145

Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 - 3:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Impossible. It can't work...

EDIT: Can you give us a link to your source?
REEDIT: Never mind. Found it. http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html
EDIT TO REEDIT: Fsck. I'm not gonna support Intel! Why, Apple?
View user's profile Send private message Widgets
islayer



Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Posts: 66

Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 - 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

this is the best move apple could have done.
we will get better hardware from a better vendor and intel know what they are doing in the future unlikde ibm

who cares if itsd intel.support apple and you know we will still have the best system
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Widgets
gnome
Administrator


Joined: 26 Sep 2004
Posts: 145

Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 - 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[long (and relatively naive) rant on the switch]

I was worried about the Intel switch, but it seems that rather than major pain, Apple has just caused small developers some dull headaches. As Haplo kindly pointed out, you don't need to pay $999 for the system - with the 3.6Ghz machine that's not such a bad deal.

What it comes down to is this -- it's not the Mac I grew up with. That's what shocked me. Sad But I do not think it's the best move Apple has ever made. It means nothing for me except bigger file sizes for Mac apps (hey, not such a big deal) and envying the latest, fastest (but likely equally expensive) new Macs. Oh well.

[edited 7:06]
View user's profile Send private message Widgets
pm
Administrator


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 398

Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 - 8:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

gnome wrote:
Ouch for small devs like me Sad $999 + $500 for Select for a small freeware app. Uhhh no.


Well, it's actually $999 for the software, the sample code, support, AND a Powermac with a P4 (or at least the use of one). Not just a small app Razz
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Widgets
Haplo
Guest





Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 - 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Uh, no it's not $999 for XCode2.1. It's $999 for a G5 case with a 3.6GHz P4 inside, XCode2.1 installed, and a doc apple has compiled guiding you on how to transition. Furthermore, they're introducing a technology called "rosetta" which allows PPC applications to run on the x86 processors. Keep in mind that this is far more efficient than emulating Windows since there you're emulating an entire OS. Here, all of the system calls and things are the same, and the OS itself will be running natively. It will run slower, though, and won't be able to utilize altivec or any of the nice things like that.

I don't know where this is going.. but I'll throw up a comparison and we'll see if it can calm anyone down.

PPC:
AltiVec
64 bit processing
~2.7GHz right now.

Intel:
Cheaper to produce (they have 598736289 huge fabrication facilities)
~3.6GHz right now.
PCI Express (which means better video output.
x86

The decision to use pentiums is something I disagree with. The decision to convert to x86 is almost disgusting. However, the good news is that we're probably going to see cheaper, more powerful macs. It is my hope that apple and intel will work together to create a chip designed specifically for the macs (with nicer features of course, since apple will actually USE them, and then help further expand their usage through XCode, WWDC, and apple's dev section). I'm not sure what this will bring in the long run, and nobody can see that now, but I think what we may be looking at is the mac gaining all of the advantages PCs have now, meaning cheaper construction, higher upgradability, and the ability to run PC programs far better than they can now. Also, this will probably mean that gfx cards will be for mac much faster, and we'll have all of the latest from intel (like PCIe system architecture).

What this will also mean is that OSX will be released for x86, meaning any PC user who cares enough will be able to run it natively, alongside windows possibly. I don't know if they will support OS switching or not, but it'd be a nice alternative to emulation. In my opinion, this will put macs in a good position, as people know and trust the intel name (although more like mindless lemmings than for any other reason) and the cost reduction will also put them much higher up in the desktop competition. As long as they work closely and develop amazing processors that the OS and apps can take advantage of, there won't be much reason to stay behind with the PPC chips, but if they just use the same old P4s, then it could be quite annoying trying to decide what to go with.

In other news, why the hell did they do this instead of cell? I mean christ, one cell chip is like 700 G5s (according to the numbers in the latest reports from sony), and cell = ibm. Cell ? intel. Argh.
Widgets
gnome
Administrator


Joined: 26 Sep 2004
Posts: 145

Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 - 9:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Haplo wrote:
The decision to use pentiums is something I disagree with. The decision to convert to x86 is almost disgusting.


My initial reaction as well.

Haplo wrote:
However, the good news is that we're probably going to see cheaper, more powerful macs. It is my hope that apple and intel will work together to create a chip designed specifically for the macs (with nicer features of course, since apple will actually USE them, and then help further expand their usage through XCode, WWDC, and apple's dev section).


You make some good points here.

Haplo wrote:
What this will also mean is that OSX will be released for x86, meaning any PC user who cares enough will be able to run it natively, alongside windows possibly. I don't know if they will support OS switching or not, but it'd be a nice alternative to emulation.


Nope, it won't happen without major hacking. You can however run Windows on a Mac x86 with only minor tweaking. Steve Jobs won't dare reopen the clones business he shut down so long ago.
View user's profile Send private message Widgets
Haplo



Joined: 06 Jun 2005
Posts: 3
Location: Georgia

Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 - 9:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think it would require major hacking. Well, the bios could be a problem, it would all depend on the chipset they used. It would be advantageous for apple to release a general x86 version of OSX though, as it would expand the market for the OS considerably. The main thing I dislike about intel is the fact that their frontside busses are terrible compared to the G5's. Sure, they stuff 2 cores and hyperthreading into each processor (of which apple will more than likely put 2 in each high end box) but with 800/1066mhz frontside busses with horrible bandwidth (8GB/s per) it's really to no advantage. Intel boxes with DDR2 can't even keep up with the DDR2 bandwidth, but a G5 with DDR would run far faster than anything else on the market today. Also, intel 'boasts' that their newer chipsets support 8GB of RAM. It's been proven already that 2GB modules work perfectly well in a G5, meaning a G5 can have 16GB. If the intel-mac boxes have an 8GB limitation, I'll be dissapointed.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Widgets
gnome
Administrator


Joined: 26 Sep 2004
Posts: 145

Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 - 12:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Apple would make very little money off of releasing a generic x86 version of OS X. Not only would you lose the integration between hardware and software that Apple loves to advertise, but Apple is (mostly) a hardware company. Anyone who would want to use a Mac can. But Apple makes more money if that person pays $500 for a mini than if that person pays $129 for Leopard. And there's so few reasons why not to buy the mini if that is the only option.
View user's profile Send private message Widgets
Haplo



Joined: 06 Jun 2005
Posts: 3
Location: Georgia

Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 - 12:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, how do you think M$ got so rich? They have their OS purchased in super bulk and preinstalled on all dells and vaios and all of those other little PC companies' boxes. If apple did the same, they could make tons of money indirectly off of companies like dell who would buy their OS. If intel made a special chip for the intel-macs, then apple would still have a place in the hardware market (since their OS/apps would be able to take advantage of anything intel and apple decided to build into the chips) and give them an insurmountably larger share of the software market.

Also, if they decided to add a WineX type ability to rosetta, that would mean any mac, right off the shelf, could run both OSX and windows programs without ever taking a speed hit or using processor hogging software like VPC. The big reasons now for not getting a mac are-
A:They're expensive.
and
B:"I wouldn't be able to run all my old software".

Which with intel's far cheaper production and native full-speed windows application support would leave the argument hanging on the issues where macs have a clear advantage. ie NO SPYWARE OR VIRII, and if the PC users ever saw the cool crap we have like exposť, dashboard, and spotlight, they'd lay a brick. Especially if these cool new features came with super security and stability, the ability to run their old apps, and at an affordable price.

As I will now say before the world, and I hope I get quoted a bagillion times:
Sure, we may have converted to the dark side, but hey look, now we can shoot lightning from our fingers >:D.
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Widgets
gnome
Administrator


Joined: 26 Sep 2004
Posts: 145

Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 - 12:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's a bit late to be talking about preshipping Macintoshes onto Dells. Selling your operating system separately is completely different -- and is NOT how Microsoft got rich. Dells will never ever ever carry a Macintosh OS. (Of course, in exactly those words, I claimed Apple would never go Intel.)

If Macs had a full implementation of Windows code, then they would have the same virii as Windows. If the Mac got a true following, then Mac-specific virii would actually be made (gasp). Not that I don't wish the best for Apple, but I do secrety hope that the tiny 5% remains 5%. Flowers

//he asked for it
for (i = 0; i< bajillion; i++) {
Quote:
Sure, we may have converted to the dark side, but hey look, now we can shoot lightning from our fingers >Very Happy.

}
View user's profile Send private message Widgets
Haplo



Joined: 06 Jun 2005
Posts: 3
Location: Georgia

Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 - 1:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, running windows apps doesn't mean you are necessarily suseptible to windows virii. A lot of them rely on windows' horrible security to gain root access and do horrible damage. It may be necessary to put strict limits on windows programs in order to prevent crap like that from actually screwing with your files, but it could be done. One way or another if you run windows programs you're suseptible to windows virii to one degree or another, whether or not they can do the damage intended. You don't hear about anybody whining about windows virii when they run VPC though, now do you?
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Widgets
Barcode



Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Posts: 16
Location: New York, NY

Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 - 3:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The move makes sense. IBM is focusing on Microsoft and Sony as customers and has sacrificed developing PowerPC's for Apple.

Given IBM's G5 yeild, heat, and speed (Mhz) issues this makes even more sense.

Though the PowerPC architecture is an improvement over x86. That improvement is mute in light of other factors. Like a good roadmap, reliable yeild, and good power consumption.

I'm excited to see this development and cannot wait to hear more information on what specific processors they will use starting next year.
View user's profile Send private message Widgets
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.

 
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group