jzdziarski
Registered
Yes, I watched his keynote. He stated quite clearly that the transition would be complete by 2007, which means no more PPC products - the processor will be end-of-life.
Mac to use Intel Chips!
- Thread starter ecnanez
- Start date
CreativeEye
Registered
jzdziarski -
by the time leopard should be released (according to jobs) at the end of 2006 - intelmacs will only have been on market for 6 months...
so how many people here actually believe that developers etc will suddenly stop making stuff for the HUGE market on PPC for the sake of a few hundred thousand who would have bought intelmacs by that time???
eh? so who actually thinks that?
who actually thinks that by the end of 2007 - when essentially the user base on PPC will STILL be larger than those on intelmacs those same developers will again turn their backs on such a huge market?! even by mid 2008!?!
full transition of OS (to intel / hardware and full 64-bit OS) by end of 2008 at a minimum...
by the time leopard should be released (according to jobs) at the end of 2006 - intelmacs will only have been on market for 6 months...
so how many people here actually believe that developers etc will suddenly stop making stuff for the HUGE market on PPC for the sake of a few hundred thousand who would have bought intelmacs by that time???
eh? so who actually thinks that?
who actually thinks that by the end of 2007 - when essentially the user base on PPC will STILL be larger than those on intelmacs those same developers will again turn their backs on such a huge market?! even by mid 2008!?!
full transition of OS (to intel / hardware and full 64-bit OS) by end of 2008 at a minimum...
brianleahy
Colonel Panic
Microsoft's success has, without question, led to Apple switching to Intel. It is this unbroken line of causality, rather than any specific technical concern, that bothers me most about this whole thing. Intel isn't Microsoft; but Intel wouldn't be where they are without Microsoft.
In the same way that the global AIDS epidemic has been a windfall for the latex industry (sales of both condoms and surgical gloves have boomed) so has the success of Windows been a boon to Intel.
Windows runs on Intel CPUs, so Intel has had the profits required to do lots of R&D. As a result, Intel CPUs are powerful, efficient, inexpensive, and available in large quantities. And for THAT reason, Apple is making the switch.
Don't dog-pile me; I will be the first to acknowledge that the switch makes all the sense in the world from a practical standpoint. I will readily admit that the biggest issues I have are not practical ones.
In the same way that the global AIDS epidemic has been a windfall for the latex industry (sales of both condoms and surgical gloves have boomed) so has the success of Windows been a boon to Intel.
Windows runs on Intel CPUs, so Intel has had the profits required to do lots of R&D. As a result, Intel CPUs are powerful, efficient, inexpensive, and available in large quantities. And for THAT reason, Apple is making the switch.
Don't dog-pile me; I will be the first to acknowledge that the switch makes all the sense in the world from a practical standpoint. I will readily admit that the biggest issues I have are not practical ones.
Oscar Castillo
Registered
There's more to it than that, at least I would hope. I think IBM has to take care of business and Apple just isn't a large part of that business anymore with all their Sony and Microsoft contracts. I'm just disappointed that there must of been some way to use Cell or Xenon in a Mac and why not go that route. No mention of either one whatsoever. And what's all these great PPC products in the pipeline he mentioned?pjeski said:
Oscar Castillo
Registered
It was one factor for me purchasing a Mac. The other was the OS. The architecture was/is brilliant engineeing even though CPU always takes center stage. If the new x86 Macs had something similar now that would be something.Carlo said:
jzdziarski
Registered
I hope they've removed "designed for microsoft windows" from their latest chips, is all i have to say.
Lt Major Burns
"Dicky" Charlteston-Burns
they stopped making the powermac g3 6 years ago. it's still supported by everything. Tiger supports G3 and it came out 6 weeks ago. CS2 supports G3 and that came out 4 weeks ago. a six year old, completely obsolete machine is still completely supported by apple, and the software developers. those with a g3 are in the ideal place to buy a new intel mac.
chemistry_geek
Registered
Transition III
Satan Inside
CEO of Intel: The Dark Side of the Force is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be unnatural.
Steve Jobs: Is it possible to learn this power?
CEO of Intel: Not by using 64-bit PowerPC CPUs from IBM. You have to use 32-bit CPUs based on out-dated 25-year old technology from Intel.
Slashdot Community: Twisted by the Dark Side Steve Jobs becomes.
Macintosh Community: Steve!!! YOU were the chosen one.
From Slashdot:
"I felt something, a disturbance in the network, as if a million mac zealots cried out in horror and were suddenly silenced."
OK, enough with the edited Star Wars quotes. My personal reaction was disbelief, horror, shock, and then anger. I woke up several times at night in horror and disbelief the week this was announced, as if a family member died, thinking "man this ain't happening." People in high places really screwed up for this to happen; our team lost something, part of its ideology, it's uniqueness, it's modern, efficient, and high-tech edge. Part of Apple and Macintosh technology is about to die forever, this is a serious loss; I can only hope that Apple will maintain PowerPC builds of its operating system the way it did with ~25 year-old Borg technology. This is bad, really bad, no matter what positive spin Steve and Co. puts on this news. This news indicates nothing more than failure of the relationship between Apple and IBM to make this technology work, which in my opinion is superior to Intel technology. Apple has a lot of money, it should have taken more responsibility to develop the PowerPC processors, taking on research & development of reducing heat and increasing core frequency. Market forces are at work here. Simply put, IBM just didn't want the PowerPC architecture to succeed and compete against Wintel's the way Apple intended. Sure, the PowerPC architecture is more efficient, i.e. work done per clock cycle, but the chip is a freakin' radiator which is why we don't have 3.0 GHz PowerMac G5's and PowerBook G5's; it is still too Power4-centric. IBM would rather fulfill orders for Sony Playstation 3's and Microsoft XBox 360's than to see something very close to their vaunted Power architecture reach acclaim and stature as a serious technology for multipurpose use on an operating system that is very close to the Linux, which it is pushing on to its customers. Apple wanted more from IBM (higher clock rates, lower heat dissipation, and lower costs) to compete against Intel and Microsoft, IBM said to wish in one hand and poop in the other, and see which one fills up faster; Steve gave Big Blue the bird and the 'just in case' scenario which we all knew about and feared came to be. Now PowerPC is relegated to specialty purposes: mobile phones, network gear, game consoles, and the cores of Cell processors. Some of the PowerPC architecture is Apple technology and is about to die. This is, in my well thought-out opinion, a serious error in judgement by Steve Jobs. As an Apple stockholder, I am frankly more than angry - this is a waste of money and resources!!! Speaking of which, since Steve indicated in his keynote address that sales of Macintoshes and iPods have increased significantly, where's my dividend payment?
So what's this all really mean? Apple and Microsoft are about to go head to head, and like it or not, Mac OS X will be hacked by some slick Slashdotter or script-kiddie to run on beige commodity junk 'ka-neechie-wa' chinese hardware (Linovo - IBM's recent sale of its PC business to the largest Chinese PC manufacturer), Dull, and HP brethren. Apple will no longer be the Mercedes Benz, Jaguar, BMW, Volvo, or Saab of the personal computing world; it will instead take its place among the Cadillac (not a real luxury/performance brand), Buick, Pontiac, Chevy, and dare I say GMC or Ford Crown Victoria, or worse - a 1976 AMC Gremlin. I liken this transition to outsourcing, it looks the same, performs almost as good, but costs less, doesn't require health care and retirement benefits and at the end our lives who's really going to know the difference? With the current George W. Bush and goon path we are on, we're all going to be retiring at age 70 living on pennies. Believe me when I say this, Bill Gates and his goons took note of this news and it is not a little blip on the radar screen. In fact, I'm willing to bet that Bill Gates actually dreamed about this in his sleep, whether or not the dream was of good or bad nature is not the issue, the fact that this news probably influenced his subconscious at some level is to be expected. In short, these are fightin' words. Microsoft is in deep poop as far as direct competition with Apple/Linux; Longhorn development is getting long in the tooth and M$ knows this. Every young teeny bopper lusts after Mac OS X the way older guys, i.e. Al Bundy's, lust after Playboy playmates. These script-kiddies have even made Winders look like Mac OS X, with many hacks of course, but to actually run the operating system complete and unemulated on Borg hardware? This is general population's dream come true. Piracy will run rampant, Mac OS X will be 'unsupported' on Borg hardware and gain momentum, but it will run and it will dethrone Microsoft because Bill Gates and his goons are lazy lethargic cave trolls with IV lines pumping green compounds into the veins of their bodies, and too buzzed to actually think straight and produce a good solid product. Linux is going to take a serious hit, to IBM's disgruntlement, which it is pushing and will likely fail, which it brought upon itself by not supporting Apple in its endeavors. The switch to Intel sucks, I mean really sucks, this is a serious step backwards in technology; 64-bit chip to a 32-bit chip. This does not make any sound or reasonable sense. Steve and Co. no longer want to be different, he is hell bent on being No. 1, using cheap commodity hardware by the metric hind-load from China, which is not a bad thing to want; it's just the manner in which he's doing it that bothers me. I liked living in my isolated cozy high-tech cutting edge Macintosh Universe. I have successfully converted several Borg Drones to the Light Side of the Force. Why did Steve and Big Blue have to mess it up?
All I can say is, this is bad, really bad. I still want my dividend payment Steve. My CUNA brokerage account has direct access to my credit union checking account, just deposit the payment there.
My hope is that IBM will somehow pull through and perhaps, Apple will offer both IBM PowerPC processors and Satan Inside to whoever wants which platform; that way everyone wins. I still think that PowerPC is the way of the future, not 25-year old x86 technology. This is so bad, REALLY BAD.
This might not be so bad if Intel offered something other than out-dated x86 technology. Going from modern design state-of-the-art 64-bit IBM PowerPC to ancient Intel design is a bad business choice.
Steve should have stayed with PowerPC.
Satan Inside
CEO of Intel: The Dark Side of the Force is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be unnatural.
Steve Jobs: Is it possible to learn this power?
CEO of Intel: Not by using 64-bit PowerPC CPUs from IBM. You have to use 32-bit CPUs based on out-dated 25-year old technology from Intel.
Slashdot Community: Twisted by the Dark Side Steve Jobs becomes.
Macintosh Community: Steve!!! YOU were the chosen one.
From Slashdot:
"I felt something, a disturbance in the network, as if a million mac zealots cried out in horror and were suddenly silenced."
OK, enough with the edited Star Wars quotes. My personal reaction was disbelief, horror, shock, and then anger. I woke up several times at night in horror and disbelief the week this was announced, as if a family member died, thinking "man this ain't happening." People in high places really screwed up for this to happen; our team lost something, part of its ideology, it's uniqueness, it's modern, efficient, and high-tech edge. Part of Apple and Macintosh technology is about to die forever, this is a serious loss; I can only hope that Apple will maintain PowerPC builds of its operating system the way it did with ~25 year-old Borg technology. This is bad, really bad, no matter what positive spin Steve and Co. puts on this news. This news indicates nothing more than failure of the relationship between Apple and IBM to make this technology work, which in my opinion is superior to Intel technology. Apple has a lot of money, it should have taken more responsibility to develop the PowerPC processors, taking on research & development of reducing heat and increasing core frequency. Market forces are at work here. Simply put, IBM just didn't want the PowerPC architecture to succeed and compete against Wintel's the way Apple intended. Sure, the PowerPC architecture is more efficient, i.e. work done per clock cycle, but the chip is a freakin' radiator which is why we don't have 3.0 GHz PowerMac G5's and PowerBook G5's; it is still too Power4-centric. IBM would rather fulfill orders for Sony Playstation 3's and Microsoft XBox 360's than to see something very close to their vaunted Power architecture reach acclaim and stature as a serious technology for multipurpose use on an operating system that is very close to the Linux, which it is pushing on to its customers. Apple wanted more from IBM (higher clock rates, lower heat dissipation, and lower costs) to compete against Intel and Microsoft, IBM said to wish in one hand and poop in the other, and see which one fills up faster; Steve gave Big Blue the bird and the 'just in case' scenario which we all knew about and feared came to be. Now PowerPC is relegated to specialty purposes: mobile phones, network gear, game consoles, and the cores of Cell processors. Some of the PowerPC architecture is Apple technology and is about to die. This is, in my well thought-out opinion, a serious error in judgement by Steve Jobs. As an Apple stockholder, I am frankly more than angry - this is a waste of money and resources!!! Speaking of which, since Steve indicated in his keynote address that sales of Macintoshes and iPods have increased significantly, where's my dividend payment?
So what's this all really mean? Apple and Microsoft are about to go head to head, and like it or not, Mac OS X will be hacked by some slick Slashdotter or script-kiddie to run on beige commodity junk 'ka-neechie-wa' chinese hardware (Linovo - IBM's recent sale of its PC business to the largest Chinese PC manufacturer), Dull, and HP brethren. Apple will no longer be the Mercedes Benz, Jaguar, BMW, Volvo, or Saab of the personal computing world; it will instead take its place among the Cadillac (not a real luxury/performance brand), Buick, Pontiac, Chevy, and dare I say GMC or Ford Crown Victoria, or worse - a 1976 AMC Gremlin. I liken this transition to outsourcing, it looks the same, performs almost as good, but costs less, doesn't require health care and retirement benefits and at the end our lives who's really going to know the difference? With the current George W. Bush and goon path we are on, we're all going to be retiring at age 70 living on pennies. Believe me when I say this, Bill Gates and his goons took note of this news and it is not a little blip on the radar screen. In fact, I'm willing to bet that Bill Gates actually dreamed about this in his sleep, whether or not the dream was of good or bad nature is not the issue, the fact that this news probably influenced his subconscious at some level is to be expected. In short, these are fightin' words. Microsoft is in deep poop as far as direct competition with Apple/Linux; Longhorn development is getting long in the tooth and M$ knows this. Every young teeny bopper lusts after Mac OS X the way older guys, i.e. Al Bundy's, lust after Playboy playmates. These script-kiddies have even made Winders look like Mac OS X, with many hacks of course, but to actually run the operating system complete and unemulated on Borg hardware? This is general population's dream come true. Piracy will run rampant, Mac OS X will be 'unsupported' on Borg hardware and gain momentum, but it will run and it will dethrone Microsoft because Bill Gates and his goons are lazy lethargic cave trolls with IV lines pumping green compounds into the veins of their bodies, and too buzzed to actually think straight and produce a good solid product. Linux is going to take a serious hit, to IBM's disgruntlement, which it is pushing and will likely fail, which it brought upon itself by not supporting Apple in its endeavors. The switch to Intel sucks, I mean really sucks, this is a serious step backwards in technology; 64-bit chip to a 32-bit chip. This does not make any sound or reasonable sense. Steve and Co. no longer want to be different, he is hell bent on being No. 1, using cheap commodity hardware by the metric hind-load from China, which is not a bad thing to want; it's just the manner in which he's doing it that bothers me. I liked living in my isolated cozy high-tech cutting edge Macintosh Universe. I have successfully converted several Borg Drones to the Light Side of the Force. Why did Steve and Big Blue have to mess it up?
All I can say is, this is bad, really bad. I still want my dividend payment Steve. My CUNA brokerage account has direct access to my credit union checking account, just deposit the payment there.
My hope is that IBM will somehow pull through and perhaps, Apple will offer both IBM PowerPC processors and Satan Inside to whoever wants which platform; that way everyone wins. I still think that PowerPC is the way of the future, not 25-year old x86 technology. This is so bad, REALLY BAD.
This might not be so bad if Intel offered something other than out-dated x86 technology. Going from modern design state-of-the-art 64-bit IBM PowerPC to ancient Intel design is a bad business choice.
Steve should have stayed with PowerPC.
fjdouse
UNIX - Live Free or Die
I loved the Star Wars tie-ins, wierd thing is, it wouldn't have taken much for me to embrace the dark side, but there you go.. ;-) Red lightsabre, armies of stormtroopers, oooh.. you'd have to be a weak-a$$ pu$$y not to.
I agree it's bad, I don't think it will dethrone Billy Boy Gates, I think a direct move agains't MS would not be prove sucessful, to use a bit of Dune:
Reverend Mother "Many have tried"
Paul "They tried and failed?"
Reverend Mother "They tried and died"
I'm not upset by the processor change, I AM upset by the hardware shift closer to PCs, nice ones, but a pig is a pig, even with the pretty bow.
I agree it's bad, I don't think it will dethrone Billy Boy Gates, I think a direct move agains't MS would not be prove sucessful, to use a bit of Dune:
Reverend Mother "Many have tried"
Paul "They tried and failed?"
Reverend Mother "They tried and died"
I'm not upset by the processor change, I AM upset by the hardware shift closer to PCs, nice ones, but a pig is a pig, even with the pretty bow.
I don't know why you think we're going backwards to 32 bit. We still have 32 bit G4s in most of Apple's computers.
64 bit Intel chips are on the way and by 2007 there may even be 64 bit chips in the Powerbooks(or whatever they call them).
64 bit Intel chips are on the way and by 2007 there may even be 64 bit chips in the Powerbooks(or whatever they call them).
fjdouse
UNIX - Live Free or Die
Considering you're SUPPOSED to be a moderator, that comment is beneath you, you should be ashamed of yourself. A forum is supposed to accomodate varying views even if *you* don't agree. If someone has something to say, let them if they want to whine, let them say their bit, it's not your place to come down heavy on people with divergent views, I've no time or respect for that. If you can't handle that, you should reconsider moderating.fryke said:
You're right. I'm sorry. I take it back.
What you have to understand though, is that I'm a user, too, not just a moderator. And the whining that just repeats itself in new forms _does_ get on my nerves. Imagine I'd just post to any such thread with messages like "I'm SO happy Apple did this! It was the ONLY right move to do..." and would find movie quotes to support that message etc. ...
But you're right. I shouldn't put oil into the fire by calling people whiners.
What you have to understand though, is that I'm a user, too, not just a moderator. And the whining that just repeats itself in new forms _does_ get on my nerves. Imagine I'd just post to any such thread with messages like "I'm SO happy Apple did this! It was the ONLY right move to do..." and would find movie quotes to support that message etc. ...
But you're right. I shouldn't put oil into the fire by calling people whiners.
fjdouse
UNIX - Live Free or Die
Fryke, I understand, but you have to understand some people do have strong feelings about this (I've not hidden my fears). If people want to spout off about it, then let them, get it out of the system and once spent, let reason or just acceptance set in. It is PROOF that Mac users care passionately about their machines, that's a GOOD thing. End of subject ;-)
Lt Major Burns
"Dicky" Charlteston-Burns
fryke, a debate is a display of opposite opinons... but i see what you mean. this, though, is a place for people to vent their misgivings, and it's also a good place to see the general public opinion on a particular matter. it was interesting, for example, that within 24 hours of tigers release, we already had a huge scope on what the new os was like. because people were vocal. now that this has happened in this thread, we now know the general opninion of what people feel about this news. it was the constant throwing of opinions that led us to the dignified agreement we are currently in. if you remember, at the start homunqlus and fjdouse were saying they would never use a mac again. after the bickering, we now share a far more informed view on the matter. long live the forum! forum meaning a place anyone can voice their opinion, naturally
Lt Major Burns
"Dicky" Charlteston-Burns
sorry. i forgot to read the whole page, just the last post. damn IE flicked down and this lo res (800x600) shielded my view of the rest of the page. apologies to everyone
I continue to be entertained by those of us who pretend we can actually run a multi-billion dollar company better than the current staff. It's not exactly as if Apple have been floundering since Steve's return. I trust the chosen one.
I haven't seen this much ill-informed mis-hype since Y2K. Remember those people who, during Y2K, bought underground bunkers to survive. That's what some of you sound like!
Everyone take a deep breath and count to ten
I haven't seen this much ill-informed mis-hype since Y2K. Remember those people who, during Y2K, bought underground bunkers to survive. That's what some of you sound like!
Everyone take a deep breath and count to ten
mindbend said:I continue to be entertained by those of us who pretend we can actually run a multi-billion dollar company better than the current staff. It's not exactly as if Apple have been floundering since Steve's return. I trust the chosen one.
I haven't seen this much ill-informed mis-hype since Y2K. Remember those people who, during Y2K, bought underground bunkers to survive. That's what some of you sound like!
Everyone take a deep breath and count to ten
No, I don't think it's like the Y2K thing at all. The anti-intel folks aren't predicting that intel chips won't work. It's more like the Time Warner/AOL "merger". The Pro-Time Warner types kept on with all the advantages of the deal. After all, AOL will have more content and alternative media! All those buzzwords must mean success! Most of them missed Ted Turner's statement about needing a cigarette after the deal. (After what he had done to AOL shareholders). Where is the value for AOL shareholders now? In the pockets of prior Time Warner shareholders. Hype did not help us. Apple cannot make the best computers with the same equipment everyone else has, no matter how much you would rather have that equipment.
Let's not talk Y2K or AOL/Warner, let's talk Apple and intel, rather. Comparisons are often wrong and then people start talking about the other instead of the original thing...
pjeski said: "Apple cannot make the best computers with the same equipment everyone else has, no matter how much you would rather have that equipment."
Well: Yes, they can. If everyone uses the same chips, one of the makers ends up making the best computers. And if they chose PPC, all that's different is that you can't compare them well. So the _real_ fear should only be whether Mac OS X is actually any good, once you can compare Apple with apples. And I think it is.
But if the PowerPC is actually a worse chip in 2006/2007, then Apple _can't_ make the best computers. And that's what's been said. Steve didn't say that current PowerPC processors were worse than what intel has to offer.
And: Apple had Mac OS X running on intel boxes for the past years. I guess _they_ always knew on which platform Mac OS X performed better. And they have info from IBM as well as intel about what processors will be available in 2006/2007 - according to their roadmaps. And I really don't think Steve would've made such a big step if it wasn't necessary. The fact that Steve Wozniak said he knew this was coming for the _same reasons_ tells me that Jobs hasn't lost his mind but is doing the right thing.
Sure, other things have been important in the decision, too. That IBM hasn't delivered 3 GHz or a notebook G5 chip. Steve said that on stage, too. That Apple had to pay money for IBM to even develop the chips (AND then pay for the chips), whereas with intel, that's entirely different, since intel's going to develop the chips anyway.
I just think that if a "good PC" can run Windows and Linux and FreeBSD etc. but a "good Mac" can run all of those plus Mac OS X, I think there's going to be quite a lot of people who choose the Mac. I'm one of them.
pjeski said: "Apple cannot make the best computers with the same equipment everyone else has, no matter how much you would rather have that equipment."
Well: Yes, they can. If everyone uses the same chips, one of the makers ends up making the best computers. And if they chose PPC, all that's different is that you can't compare them well. So the _real_ fear should only be whether Mac OS X is actually any good, once you can compare Apple with apples. And I think it is.
But if the PowerPC is actually a worse chip in 2006/2007, then Apple _can't_ make the best computers. And that's what's been said. Steve didn't say that current PowerPC processors were worse than what intel has to offer.
And: Apple had Mac OS X running on intel boxes for the past years. I guess _they_ always knew on which platform Mac OS X performed better. And they have info from IBM as well as intel about what processors will be available in 2006/2007 - according to their roadmaps. And I really don't think Steve would've made such a big step if it wasn't necessary. The fact that Steve Wozniak said he knew this was coming for the _same reasons_ tells me that Jobs hasn't lost his mind but is doing the right thing.
Sure, other things have been important in the decision, too. That IBM hasn't delivered 3 GHz or a notebook G5 chip. Steve said that on stage, too. That Apple had to pay money for IBM to even develop the chips (AND then pay for the chips), whereas with intel, that's entirely different, since intel's going to develop the chips anyway.
I just think that if a "good PC" can run Windows and Linux and FreeBSD etc. but a "good Mac" can run all of those plus Mac OS X, I think there's going to be quite a lot of people who choose the Mac. I'm one of them.