Apple To Use Intel? Macs On X86?

[red930]

wel i read a rather short article on techconnect magazine that was talking about Apple moving over to Intel processors. idk if we have any industry insiders or well informed readers, but i was wondering if that would be indicative of Apple switching to an x86 platform, or intel producing Power PC chips?

i know the article mentions the lack of power the Power PC chips have brought to the Mac line, but it doesn't necessaraly say that it will be goin X86.

 

http://www.tcmagazine.info/comments.php?id=9860&catid=2

[InvaderTrax]

I'd much rather see Mac's with AMDs

[cybergrunt69]

AMD is still an x86 technology. I don't see AMD or Intel building any type of other architecture (sp?) - but yes, there have been some rumors of Mac running on X86 - but I kinda doubt it's going anywhere.

[oralpain]

I think it would take far too much effort for no benifit.

[bigred]

I think it would take far too much effort for no benifit.

481618[/snapback]

 

 

much to the contrary. it would be EASY for them to port the basics (OS X is Unix and can be compiled to run x86). it would also be a good thing for them as far as the future is concerned. no more need to write "mac" only software. no more "mac" only hardware. if the stuff all speaks the same hardware language it's a hell of a lot cheaper for them to do everything.

[red930]

much to the contrary.  it would be EASY for them to port the basics (OS X is Unix and can be compiled to run x86).  it would also be a good thing for them as far as the future is concerned.  no more need to write "mac" only software.  no more "mac" only hardware.  if the stuff all speaks the same hardware language it's a hell of a lot cheaper for them to do everything.

481636[/snapback]

 

 

the only thing is; do you know steve jobs to be a person that goes with the grain and makes things his company creates be compatible.

i know there are times where it has to be compatible or its bad business, but jobs is a stubborn man, and like to have Apple's products be unique and better than the rest. its his ego

[bigred]

well, the thing is he's seeing the light (ipod for windows anyone?). he realized that there comes a time to swallow your pride and go with the flow.

 

on the same note he may not have much of a choice anymore. IBM does not actually "build" the power pc chips. and with motorola out of the game, it's down to 2 supliers of the chips. 90% of the power PC chips come from AMD's Dresden facility... and IBM is more than likely not going to renew that license after it's 2 year run. Hence a 90% drop in production of the power PC chips unless national semi conductor can keep up. and we all know what happens in a situation when the supply drops like that while demand stays the same... price goes UP. so he's left with once choice at that point before pricing himself out of the game. also think of it this way. the simpletons who use macs are afraid of windows, they're afraid of linux. what if you could sell those same simpletons Mac OS X to put on thier HP? or sell a Mac computer that could run windows (not that emulated crap) to the folks that dont' like your OS? what if you could really become a large thorn in microsoft's side by doing so? a legitimate mass market competator to the desktop OS... you think he's going to let that go?

[markiemrboo]

(OS X is Unix and can be compiled to run x86).

481636[/snapback]

 

Not as far as I am aware. It's still the Mach kernel, just with some UNIX userland stuff from FreeBSD to make it appear like UNIX.

[NCC10281982B]

That would make to much business sense... I wouldn't mind being able to run mac OS on my PC just to play with it. The expirence could come in handy some day. Sounds good.

[red930]

idk it may be better for the consumer. if microsoft finally does have a competitor maybee they will be a little more keen on what the consumer wants and security will be even bigger of an issue.

[CNUco2007]

i actually own a new iBook and i love OS X. its soo much better than windows. i never have stability problems. although ive only had it like a month. one thin ive noticed is its better at managing memory. OS X is based entirly on UNIX. in fact i use the UNIX Terminal quite often, primarily for programming. i have all the compilers and SDK's that i use at school on the Solaris machines. I also have X11 installed which is an XWindows environment for OS X that allows special programs to use GUI's and stuff. its pretty interesting. If i could run OS X on my PC, i would prolly never run Windows again lol (assuming OS X could run games then just as good. Obviously my laptop is not a gamers laptop.

[CPU_Cooker]

Based on comments in this thread,

it won't surprise me if Apple goes to Intel chips. But if Apple goes to Intel chips, then couldn't it just as easily use an AMD chip?

And, if Apple goes Intel then AMD can stop making Power PC chips, which will free up capicity for Dual Core athlons and optrons!

That could be a huge deal for AMD as I know AMD would rather use all of their capicity to make Athlons and take market share from Intel.

 

As for Apple, once upon a time, and correct me if I am wrong on this, Didn't Apple have a major upgrade that more or less left their installed base incompatible with the new lineup? The point being, Jobs should not have a problem leaving all the die hard apple fans high and dry as he has done it before.

 

This is one thing that Bill Gates always understood. Everything has to be backward compatible as much as possible in order to maintain a loyal following. This is part of the reason Windows use to have so many problems was that it could handle just about any combination of off the shelf PC parts anyone put together.

 

My guess is, in a few years, Apple goes with Intel x86 parts, abandons PowerPC and OS X for Power PC. Apple fans rebel due to abandonment and buy windows, which despite claims to the counter, keeps getting better and better and better. Apple finally goes away leaving Apple as another victm / casualty, money whipped by the likes of Wintel.....

 

CPU_Cooker