apple switching to intel. announcement monday

[her34]

Text

future of intel msft and apple should be interesting

 

[butch84]

Yea, I saw that on /. Freakin crazy.... I really doubt apple would switch over to x86.... however if Intel were to build PPC or risc style chips for apple, that could be really sweet. Finally some decent supply for apple - you know Intel can deliver wehre IBM and Motorola couldn't. As long as apple stays away from x86, I think they should survive..... if not, I have my doubts.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: butch84
Yea, I saw that on /. Freakin crazy.... I really doubt apple would switch over to x86.... however if Intel were to build PPC or risc style chips for apple, that could be really sweet. Finally some decent supply for apple - you know Intel can deliver wehre IBM and Motorola couldn't. As long as apple stays away from x86, I think they should survive..... if not, I have my doubts.

Look at their business. They lure consumers(not professionals) in with style. See the ipod, etc. They could easily compete as a PC manufacture, and OSX could most certainly compete with Windows, as OSX is VASTLY superior. Its VASTYLY superior to what Longhorn currently is as well.

 

[DerelictDev]

Originally posted by: digitalsm
Look at their business. They lure consumers(not professionals) in with style. See the ipod, etc. They could easily compete as a PC manufacture, and OSX could most certainly compete with Windows, as OSX is VASTLY superior. Its VASTYLY superior to what Longhorn currently is as well.

I guess you own a apple and like it "VASTLY"
I dont.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: butch84
Yea, I saw that on /. Freakin crazy.... I really doubt apple would switch over to x86.... however if Intel were to build PPC or risc style chips for apple, that could be really sweet. Finally some decent supply for apple - you know Intel can deliver wehre IBM and Motorola couldn't. As long as apple stays away from x86, I think they should survive..... if not, I have my doubts.

You're suggesting that Intel would create a new set of chips for a different architecture just for apple? :roll:

 

[kamper]

Gotta love how cnet quotes reliable sources: "CNET News.com has learned" and "sources said" and "according to one source familiar with the partnership."

Has anybody read articles that have something more substantial? At any rate, I don't think this can really be taken seriously until we hear something from Apple.

 

[TWills]

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: butch84
Yea, I saw that on /. Freakin crazy.... I really doubt apple would switch over to x86.... however if Intel were to build PPC or risc style chips for apple, that could be really sweet. Finally some decent supply for apple - you know Intel can deliver wehre IBM and Motorola couldn't. As long as apple stays away from x86, I think they should survive..... if not, I have my doubts.

Look at their business. They lure consumers(not professionals) in with style. See the ipod, etc. They could easily compete as a PC manufacture, and OSX could most certainly compete with Windows, as OSX is VASTLY superior. Its VASTYLY superior to what Longhorn currently is as well.

But we all know Microsoft would win, and then there would be no one to challenge them anymore. I think apple is in the best position it can be in right now...

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: kamper
Gotta love how cnet quotes reliable sources: "CNET News.com has learned" and "sources said" and "according to one source familiar with the partnership."

Has anybody read articles that have something more substantial? At any rate, I don't think this can really be taken seriously until we hear something from Apple.

Cnet isn't The Register, they actually have journalistic standards. I can't think of any time Cnet's posted something concrete like this and it didn't happen.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: DerelictDev

Originally posted by: digitalsm
Look at their business. They lure consumers(not professionals) in with style. See the ipod, etc. They could easily compete as a PC manufacture, and OSX could most certainly compete with Windows, as OSX is VASTLY superior. Its VASTYLY superior to what Longhorn currently is as well.

I guess you own a apple and like it "VASTLY"
I dont.

No I run windows. But yes OSX as an OS is vastly superior to anything MS currently has or will have in the nexr 12-18 months.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: kamper
Gotta love how cnet quotes reliable sources: "CNET News.com has learned" and "sources said" and "according to one source familiar with the partnership."

Has anybody read articles that have something more substantial? At any rate, I don't think this can really be taken seriously until we hear something from Apple.

Cnet isn't The Register, they actually have journalistic standards. I can't think of any time Cnet's posted something concrete like this and it didn't happen.

Agreed, but that's what made the article so weird. Normally when they quote anonymous sources it's for fairly mundane stories that nobody has much reason to doubt anyways. But this is pretty serious and I'd like to see more proof than just their reputation and anonymous sources.

 

[ai42]

Does anyone else perhaps find it curious that there were these announcments to an x86 Mac Mini clone which apparently Intel requested of the channel at Computex?! And if you saw the pics of it, it is uncannaly similar to the Mac Mini down to the rear port connectors.

Perhaps there is something more to it than that Of course Apple would never directly ask for an OEM to build them something. And of course if this story is true undoubtly Apple and Intel have been talking... And of course it is in Intel's intrests to get another huge operating system like Mac OS (Honestly its the ONLY OS that doesn't run on x86 after all, so Intel will rule the earth except for your PS2/3).

 

[gobucks]

i'm totally stoked. I just hope Apple doesn't make it so that AMD chips won't work, cause that would really put a kink in my dual-boot plans. I've always wanted to try OSX out as a home platform, and maybe I'll just get my shot after all. I really hope Apple does what Sega did in the console market, and just abandon hardware to focus on software. Apple's hardware is outdated relative to PCs; even if you remove the CPU question, you still have dated graphics, RAM, hard drives, etc. Just letting guys like me configure our own hardware and then selling us a copy of Tiger would be great for their bottom line. I also expect that if the hardware was standard, and the only difference was paying $150 for a copy of winXP and $130 for a copy of Tiger, I think a lot more people would be willing to give OSX a try. Who knows, maybe it'll put some much needed pressure on Microsoft, and make them release a better OS - after all, Firefox's release seems to have spurred a much needed revamp of IE.

 

[AnandThenMan]

So MAYBE Intel is going to partner with Apple and take on Microsoft? (crazy I know) Think custom processor based on the P-M running OSX. Big kick in the crotch to Microsoft. And Microsoft can't very well tell Intel to go pound sand, Intel is their bread and butter when it comes to moving volume.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: AnandThenMan
So MAYBE Intel is going to partner with Apple and take on Microsoft?

What reason could intel have for wanting to damage Microsoft?

 

[obeseotron]

News.com is as good as it gets as far as online journalism, they cross publish with the New York Times. This doesn't make them infallible (Jason Blair...) but name another site that gets republished by a media outlet with half the credibility. As good as a story in any major newspaper as far as I'm concerned.

You would have to figure apple would maintain some kind of hardware exclusivity, if not for marketing/business reasons than simply for practical/technical ones. Across the board compatibility with all x86-64 PC's would require an immense amount of work and would almost certainly result in an un-apple like user experience. More likely some kind of lockout would be implemented (DRM chip or different chipset or something) and only apple or apple licensed PC's would be certified to run. Going x86 as your cpu architecture is not exactly the same as announcing full x86 support. Apple could charge a flat or percentage based (to allow for cheap mini-mac type stuff) to Dell and others so that they could offer apple-certified models at a premium price point that would give peope the advantages of the mac operating system with a windows dual boot fallback. Virtualization on the desktop, much less good implementation of it is still a ways off, but you could see a major application for it here.

 

[gsaldivar]

Originally posted by: digitalsm
No I run windows. But yes OSX as an OS is vastly superior to anything MS currently has or will have in the nexr 12-18 months.

Yeah, ok.

Of course it really depends on what you plan to actually DO with your OS...

 

[vegetation]

I don't see what the big deal is, other than Apple can grow a better marketshare due to more competitively priced computers due to economies of scale of the Pentium M processor (what they were eyeing from what I've seen). Just because it will use the same PC processor doesn't mean you're going to be able to stick in a windows xp bootup cd and get it installed; nor vice versa. The Mac 68k and Amiga used the same cpu for years and guess what, they were more than unique to their own and switching OSs was not an easy task (or even impossible for the Mac). Heck, even the Apple // and C64 used the same cpu. Oh, and for all cases, Microsoft profited big time on ALL platforms regardless of who was making what. Doesn't anyone read ancient history here?

 

[AnandThenMan]

Microsoft didn't profit from the Amiga. OR the Motorola based Mac. And there were Mac emulators for the Amiga LOL. But I get your point.

 

[Budman]

One advantage Apple has this time: The open-source FreeBSD operating system, of which Mac OS X is a variant, already runs on x86 chips such as Intel's Pentium. And Jobs has said Mac OS X could easily run on x86 chips.

if it would run on any X86 chip it would be fun to try it out on my A64.

 

[SVT Cobra]

very wierd......it might make apple more competetive if they do it right...but i would still go with a DC operton no question.....

 

[Woody419]

This probably has more to to with a market grab than what chip the OS runs on, sort of. I'm thinking affordable dual processors for the next big thing. Steve probably made the switch to get access to a lot more Intel chips than the 5% market segment Mac users would ever use. He wants every household to have a Mac product, and that is a lot of chips.

What is the next big thing? It's iMovies. Just like iTunes took over the music segment, Apple is poised to take over the movie segment, and for that you need a set top box. Just like the music players, there is no profit in selling hardware anymore. the big money is selling content, and for that you need a set top box in every house, download-and-play hd movies for $6.99 per month.

 

[jdogg707]

The one big problem with the move would be, if they moved to x86, who in their right mind would buy annything Apple for the next year or two until the transition was complete? The iPod would be the only thing sellling, as all Apple software and hardware that is purchased would be rendered incompatible once the new architecture took over. Hopefully this is a call for Intel to prodce PPC chips, based on current Intel designs. That way Apple could transition the move much easier, while also keeping sales hits to a minimum. If the rumors are true, and Apple is switching to a PPC derivative of Intel chips, this would be an excellent move and I look forward to it...if they are moving to x86, the next two years could be long ones for Steve Jobs and Co.

 

[LiekOMG]

If Apple did decide to use x86 chips, I am almost 100% sure that they would do everything in their power to keep OSX running only on Macintosh computers, and not just any old system slapped together in someone's basement. A majority of their revenue comes from hardware sales, and I doubt they are going to just give that up. Just because they plan to switch to x86, don't plan on running OSX on your cheapo DELL. That would put them head to head with MS, and that is surely a battle they would lose.

 

[JBird7986]

On the contrary, they don't have to "win." If they sell an x86 version of OSX, many people who don't like Windows may be tempted to switch to Apple's OS. Additionally, while Apple's hardware sector may be hurt for the next two years, after that, the computers which they build may sell better than ever. Especially those which are sleek, such as an iMac. I'm willing to bet that most people would love to have a one piece computer, and the thing stopping them is the incompatibility with the software they already own.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: DOACleric
If Apple did decide to use x86 chips, I am almost 100% sure that they would do everything in their power to keep OSX running only on Macintosh computers, and not just any old system slapped together in someone's basement. A majority of their revenue comes from hardware sales, and I doubt they are going to just give that up. Just because they plan to switch to x86, don't plan on running OSX on your cheapo DELL. That would put them head to head with MS, and that is surely a battle they would lose.

Well I don't think they will have to go to great lengths to make sure it works on a cheapo dell but if it works, it works.