ARTICLE: Apple keeps the torch lit with Marklar (x86)
- Thread starter MacLuv
- Start date
Javintosh
Meember
I don't think x86 is a good idea for apple. Why? well, the choices are really AMD and Intel. Both are so deep in Microsoft's grasp that they would put apple deep into Microsoft's grasp as well.
MS has apple by the balls with MS Office. There is no need to tighten MS's grip on Apple's future.
MS knows how to put Intel in it's proper place. Does anyone remember about Intel's plan to differentiate their processor's by adding OS-independent multi-media enhancements? Did anyone notice that Intel begrudginly went along the palladium route after AMD wholeheartedly endorsed it in exchange for MS support for their 64-bit procesors?
Where apple to go the intel route, the best we could hope for is parity. Worst-case scenario, we'd fall to MS's efforts to cut Linux out of the hardware picture. Those efforts are limited to certain pieces of hardware (e.g. winmodems), but they could easily extend to patentable procesor features.
Then there is AMD. If there is anyone that needs MS more than Intel it is AMD. In addition to all the concerns mentioned above (only more so), this route leaves a couple of other dirty secrets. AMD often has trouble getting yields of their fast performing chips. Isn't that the chronic story with AMD? get a better chip and then failt to get significant market share or tier 1 manufacturers because of yield problems? Hasn't AMD has trouble with several high profile laptop deals falling through in the last year or so for siilar reasons? (some of this is from memory) Apple already has these problems and they won't go away with AMD. Let's also not forget AMD's new processor labeling which is based on equivalent speed and not MHz. The Mhz myth is real and it will not go away with AMD. Frankly AMD takes surprisingly little flak (when compared to apple) for their Mhz disparity (although it *is* smaller than Moto's).
I definitely agree that the current PPC is turning into a disadvantage for apple. However, at the moment is is only a problem on the high end systems. This is somewhat alleviated by the fact that across the board people are increasingly buying systems in the lower end of the product offering range.
I think that something fairly drastic needs to happen. It would be great to have something happen in January, but I would not hold my breath. Certainly, something needs to happen by next summer at the absolute latest. If there is no significant change by the summer, apple will be in trouble.
For all we know, the Power4 variant will be ready sooner than IBM is letting on. Then again, the problem with this track might be cost (unless IBM is willing to do something radically different here).
I think that MOTO is largely played out, but any move away to a significantly different processor will be a huge pain until Cocoa becomes the norm.
Apple needs to differentiate itself from microsoft in both hardware *and* software.
I don't really see any good near-term solutions for apple. Then again, Steve does keep his cards close to his chest.
One thing that would be interesting to consider would be having apple use AMD chips in their native RISC mode. As I understand it, AMD's chips are RISC based and use software (or something like it) to emulate the x86 instruction set. Apple might be able to derive soem avantages by using AMD's processor in that way.
I'm sort of rambling, but I think that Steve had better have a coherent story for January. There is too much fretting about this.
MS has apple by the balls with MS Office. There is no need to tighten MS's grip on Apple's future.
MS knows how to put Intel in it's proper place. Does anyone remember about Intel's plan to differentiate their processor's by adding OS-independent multi-media enhancements? Did anyone notice that Intel begrudginly went along the palladium route after AMD wholeheartedly endorsed it in exchange for MS support for their 64-bit procesors?
Where apple to go the intel route, the best we could hope for is parity. Worst-case scenario, we'd fall to MS's efforts to cut Linux out of the hardware picture. Those efforts are limited to certain pieces of hardware (e.g. winmodems), but they could easily extend to patentable procesor features.
Then there is AMD. If there is anyone that needs MS more than Intel it is AMD. In addition to all the concerns mentioned above (only more so), this route leaves a couple of other dirty secrets. AMD often has trouble getting yields of their fast performing chips. Isn't that the chronic story with AMD? get a better chip and then failt to get significant market share or tier 1 manufacturers because of yield problems? Hasn't AMD has trouble with several high profile laptop deals falling through in the last year or so for siilar reasons? (some of this is from memory) Apple already has these problems and they won't go away with AMD. Let's also not forget AMD's new processor labeling which is based on equivalent speed and not MHz. The Mhz myth is real and it will not go away with AMD. Frankly AMD takes surprisingly little flak (when compared to apple) for their Mhz disparity (although it *is* smaller than Moto's).
I definitely agree that the current PPC is turning into a disadvantage for apple. However, at the moment is is only a problem on the high end systems. This is somewhat alleviated by the fact that across the board people are increasingly buying systems in the lower end of the product offering range.
I think that something fairly drastic needs to happen. It would be great to have something happen in January, but I would not hold my breath. Certainly, something needs to happen by next summer at the absolute latest. If there is no significant change by the summer, apple will be in trouble.
For all we know, the Power4 variant will be ready sooner than IBM is letting on. Then again, the problem with this track might be cost (unless IBM is willing to do something radically different here).
I think that MOTO is largely played out, but any move away to a significantly different processor will be a huge pain until Cocoa becomes the norm.
Apple needs to differentiate itself from microsoft in both hardware *and* software.
I don't really see any good near-term solutions for apple. Then again, Steve does keep his cards close to his chest.
One thing that would be interesting to consider would be having apple use AMD chips in their native RISC mode. As I understand it, AMD's chips are RISC based and use software (or something like it) to emulate the x86 instruction set. Apple might be able to derive soem avantages by using AMD's processor in that way.
I'm sort of rambling, but I think that Steve had better have a coherent story for January. There is too much fretting about this.