Mac to use Intel Chips!

Oh, the hummer thing is viscerally true, but illogical, I admit.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Pentium's architechture partly to blame for windows' vulnerability to worms and viruses?
 
brianleahy said:
Oh, the hummer thing is viscerally true, but illogical, I admit.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Pentium's architechture partly to blame for windows' vulnerability to worms and viruses?
Click to expand...
No you are wrong. But it is to be blamed for windows' slowness...

AMD was much better in (x86) chip development.
 
Apple took a pounding with Motorola for years because of their failure to deliver. IBM promised Apple the world with the G5, much like Motorola did with the G4. We all saw how the G4 turned out with it's failure to scale so maybe Apple saw the writing on the wall with the G5 this time around way before we did.

Do we really want Apple to sit still like they did with the G4 and not make any major advancements for years? I think the nail in the coffin was that the G5 just isn't going to make it's way into a PowerBook. At least not one to Apple's specs. Looking to the future notebooks are taking over desktop sales. If Apple didn't move now, they might have missed the boat.

I think Steve is getting smarter is his old age. Years ago he was hell-bent on being "different." Now he's hell-bent on being #1 and is taking the necessary steps to achieve just that.
 
Here's an observation: 10.4 loudly trumpeted it's 64-bit capabilities. Yet, mainstream pentium chips aren't 64bit.

This certainly seems to suggest that today's pentiums will NOT be in macs.
 
brianleahy said:
Here's an observation: 10.4 loudly trumpeted it's 64-bit capabilities. Yet, mainstream pentium chips aren't 64bit.

This certainly seems to suggest that today's pentiums will NOT be in macs.
Click to expand...

I agree, but after today's annoucement we cannot be sure of anything. Can we ?
 
Something just occurred to me.

Are we likely to see the next upgrade of OS X to 10.5 on the new machines? All released at the same time?

That would be a major marketing blitz for Apple. New OS, and new chips all in one go.
 
brianleahy said:
Here's an observation: 10.4 loudly trumpeted it's 64-bit capabilities. Yet, mainstream pentium chips aren't 64bit.

This certainly seems to suggest that today's pentiums will NOT be in macs.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing Apple will tout dual core as a trump to 64-bit computing with the introduction of the first Macs with Intel. Intel is all about dual core now and has taken a back seat to AMD's 64-bit x86.
 
Based on the quotes I read, Jobs did his very best to spin this whole thing positively. But frankly, I think nobody's going to remember how he said it. What they'll remember is that Macs - as a different hardware option - are going away -- even though it's not technically true.

Jobs has nuked his hardware AND software sales between now and the release of the penti-mac. He's made his most passionate defenders - many of them here on this board - look like fools. This is because, although Intel and Microsoft are not one and the same, to the general public they might as well be. To most people, it will appear that the computer wars have been decisively won, by wintel. Mac fans like us will become Jay Leno punchlines.

Jobs may be a visionary, but he is famously not a people-person. I think he may have badly misjudged the PR fallout that may result from this move.
 
It makes sense for the laptops but not for the tower machines. Another thing that sucks is now we'll be stuck with Intel's DRM built into the chip. There goes your rights out the door.
 
64-bit Pentium 4s have been shipping for a little while now. the 6xx series Pentium 4s have the 64-bit instruction set capabilities. If Steve was demoing on a 3.6GHz P4, then that was like the 660 since that's the 3.6GHz 64-bit capable chip.

Of course, we know OS X already works with both a 32- and 64-bit chip without problems, so no reason to limit themselves to the 64-bit only Intel chips if they need a certain hardware application.... I'm thinking the Pentium M chips for their tablet and laptops will be without 64-bits for a while.
 
Captain Code said:
It makes sense for the laptops but not for the tower machines. Another thing that sucks is now we'll be stuck with Intel's DRM built into the chip. There goes your rights out the door.
Click to expand...

Intel denies their chips will have DRM:

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23708


Although, I don't see what rights it would take away anyway, your right to pirate software?


If the chips do have DRM - it could be the very thing that stops people running OSX on non-Apple machines.
 
brianleahy said:
Jobs may be a visionary, but he is famously not a people-person. I think he may have badly misjudged the PR fallout that may result from this move.
Click to expand...
Ha, he's an idiot. But in his eyes, dissapointing 5% of the total computer market share and gaining the rest is not much damage.

i said this thousand times before and i shall say it again: i want cell.
 
Then buy cell and stop whining about it? It seems _pretty_ clear that Apple won't use it.
 
Wiz - we get the point. I know squat about Cell, and in any event, it's not happening.

You want cell, I want this all to be a bad dream, but neither of us is getting his wish.
 
I'm just worried about ppc support in the future. Like a lot of people I have invested a lot of cash in Apple hardware and software. A year and a half from now I don't want to be facing problems getting updates to expensive software I purchased recently. I don't want my dual G5 tower to run expensive and G5 optimized software slowly because it has to run in some sort of emulation mode. If the transition (yet another one!) isn't handled with the customer in mind it will burn Apple badly. It would make me reconsider a few things too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top