Apple to ditch IBM, switch to Intel chips **Updated 6/7** x86 Mac systems *should* run Windows

[thirdlegstump]

Is there a way to watch the keynote on quicktime?

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: deathkoba
Is there a way to watch the keynote on quicktime?

I was just about to ask the same thing...

 

[NFS4]

Close enough I guess...

http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/06/06/liveupdate/index.php

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: deathkoba
Is there a way to watch the keynote on quicktime?

They typically stream Jobs' keynotes from thier website, but I can't find one today.

 

[thirdlegstump]

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: deathkoba
Is there a way to watch the keynote on quicktime?

They typically stream Jobs' keynotes from thier website, but I can't find one today.

Yea I know. WTF!

 

[bharok]

for live updates check out http://www.macrumorslive.com/web/

 

[CombatChuk]

Also check out

http://www.macnn.com

 

[Argo]

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle
wow, if it happens that's bad news for MS. OS X on Intel could make Apple a real player on the desktop front.

Edit unless Intel goes with something other than x86 for Apple, that is

That won't happen because even if at assembly language byte-codes will be the same all the OS level stuff will be different. It's much easier to port a program using the same OS on 2 different architectures (just need to recompile it) than to port a program from one OS to another.

 

[XBoxLPU]

Originally posted by: bharok
for live updates check out http://www.macrumorslive.com/web/

http://live.macobserver.com/article/2005/06/wwdc2005_keynote.shtml

* CONFIRMED *

 

[ironcrotch]

w00t, i love it. It's like a nerd soap opera. :laugh:

 

[iwantanewcomputer]

ibm gets pwned in the pc world again...bwahahaha

 

[NFS4]

Mac OS X has been leading secret double life. Every Mac project build for Intel and PowerPC and Intel. Every release of Mac OS X has been built for both Intel and PowerPC-based Macs. For the last 5 years. Mac OS X is cross-platform by design. Apple's demo is on an Intel-based system. Jobs shows all Mac OS X Tiger features are already compatible with Intel-based processors.

FVCKING WOW :Q

 

[LiekOMG]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Mac OS X has been leading secret double life. Every Mac project build for Intel and PowerPC and Intel. Every release of Mac OS X has been built for both Intel and PowerPC-based Macs. For the last 5 years. Mac OS X is cross-platform by design. Apple's demo is on an Intel-based system. Jobs shows all Mac OS X Tiger features are already compatible with Intel-based processors.

FVCKING WOW :Q

This has been known for a long, long time. Its nothing new.

 

[MasterAndCommander]

Somehow, this theme seem appropriate for this disturbance in the Force:
http://www.fallenjedi.com/sounds/impmarch1.wav

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Looks like he said nothing about processor architecture

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle
Looks like he said nothing about processor architecture

Two major transitions for Mac: 68K to PowerPC. Next Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X. Now time for third transition. Transition to Intel-based Macs. Developers Now. Next year for users. "Because we want to make the best computers for our customers." No G5 PowerBook yet. Future products can't be build on IBM of PowerPC. Intel has performance and better performance per watt. Intel delivers much better performance per watt. Starting next year the first Macs with Intel processors. Shipping by next WWDC. Mostly complete by 2007 WWDC. Complete by the end of 2007. Two-year transition. [10:28 am]

Pretty obvious he's talking about Yonah

 

[FrustratedUser]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Mac OS X has been leading secret double life. Every Mac project build for Intel and PowerPC and Intel. Every release of Mac OS X has been built for both Intel and PowerPC-based Macs. For the last 5 years. Mac OS X is cross-platform by design. Apple's demo is on an Intel-based system. Jobs shows all Mac OS X Tiger features are already compatible with Intel-based processors.

FVCKING WOW :Q

Apple rocks, they always had. Jobs is no dummy.

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle
Looks like he said nothing about processor architecture

Two major transitions for Mac: 68K to PowerPC. Next Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X. Now time for third transition. Transition to Intel-based Macs. Developers Now. Next year for users. "Because we want to make the best computers for our customers." No G5 PowerBook yet. Future products can't be build on IBM of PowerPC. Intel has performance and better performance per watt. Intel delivers much better performance per watt. Starting next year the first Macs with Intel processors. Shipping by next WWDC. Mostly complete by 2007 WWDC. Complete by the end of 2007. Two-year transition. [10:28 am]

Pretty obvious he's talking about Yonah

so OS X on x86? Sounds a little surprising, maybe they'll be using some sort of DRM to prevent it from running on any desktop/laptop?

 

[ironcrotch]

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle
Looks like he said nothing about processor architecture

Two major transitions for Mac: 68K to PowerPC. Next Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X. Now time for third transition. Transition to Intel-based Macs. Developers Now. Next year for users. "Because we want to make the best computers for our customers." No G5 PowerBook yet. Future products can't be build on IBM of PowerPC. Intel has performance and better performance per watt. Intel delivers much better performance per watt. Starting next year the first Macs with Intel processors. Shipping by next WWDC. Mostly complete by 2007 WWDC. Complete by the end of 2007. Two-year transition. [10:28 am]

Pretty obvious he's talking about Yonah

so OS X on x86? Sounds a little surprising, maybe they'll be using some sort of DRM to prevent it from running on any desktop/laptop?

Yeah, it sounds like it will be an Intel Mac only. The developers are getting a transition kit that is a 3.64ghz p4 in a Power Mac enclosure. I guess theres a lot of transparency between the two architectures now. And most apps just need to be recompiled to work on the Intel Mac's. Alot of this is due to a new univeral binary called FAT. And for PPC only software there will be an emulation layer called Rosetta that will do it all real time. I'm excited for one now.

 

[ironcrotch]

**OFFICIAL PRESS RELEASE***
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html

 

[ViRGE]

:music:It's the end of the world as we know it...:music:

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: ironcrotch

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle
Looks like he said nothing about processor architecture

Two major transitions for Mac: 68K to PowerPC. Next Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X. Now time for third transition. Transition to Intel-based Macs. Developers Now. Next year for users. "Because we want to make the best computers for our customers." No G5 PowerBook yet. Future products can't be build on IBM of PowerPC. Intel has performance and better performance per watt. Intel delivers much better performance per watt. Starting next year the first Macs with Intel processors. Shipping by next WWDC. Mostly complete by 2007 WWDC. Complete by the end of 2007. Two-year transition. [10:28 am]

Pretty obvious he's talking about Yonah

so OS X on x86? Sounds a little surprising, maybe they'll be using some sort of DRM to prevent it from running on any desktop/laptop?

Yeah, it sounds like it will be an Intel Mac only. The developers are getting a transition kit that is a 3.64ghz p4 in a Power Mac enclosure. I guess theres a lot of transparency between the two architectures now. And most apps just need to be recompiled to work on the Intel Mac's. Alot of this is due to a new univeral binary called FAT. And for PPC only software there will be an emulation layer called Rosetta that will do it all real time. I'm excited for one now.

Apple won't need DRM, they can cause hardware incompatibilities; they just have to use something other than the traditional PC BIOS for their motherboard underpinnings, throw in a ROM requirement, and you won't be running OS X on a PC any time soon. Oh, and FAT binaries have existed forever; Apple used them since the early 90's with the 68K->PPC transition, so they're not new.

 

[ironcrotch]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: ironcrotch

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle
Looks like he said nothing about processor architecture

Two major transitions for Mac: 68K to PowerPC. Next Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X. Now time for third transition. Transition to Intel-based Macs. Developers Now. Next year for users. "Because we want to make the best computers for our customers." No G5 PowerBook yet. Future products can't be build on IBM of PowerPC. Intel has performance and better performance per watt. Intel delivers much better performance per watt. Starting next year the first Macs with Intel processors. Shipping by next WWDC. Mostly complete by 2007 WWDC. Complete by the end of 2007. Two-year transition. [10:28 am]

Pretty obvious he's talking about Yonah

so OS X on x86? Sounds a little surprising, maybe they'll be using some sort of DRM to prevent it from running on any desktop/laptop?

Yeah, it sounds like it will be an Intel Mac only. The developers are getting a transition kit that is a 3.64ghz p4 in a Power Mac enclosure. I guess theres a lot of transparency between the two architectures now. And most apps just need to be recompiled to work on the Intel Mac's. Alot of this is due to a new univeral binary called FAT. And for PPC only software there will be an emulation layer called Rosetta that will do it all real time. I'm excited for one now.

Apple won't need DRM, they can cause hardware incompatibilities; they just have to use something other than the traditional PC BIOS for their motherboard underpinnings, throw in a ROM requirement, and you won't be running OS X on a PC any time soon. Oh, and FAT binaries have existed forever; Apple used them since the early 90's with the 68K->PPC transition, so they're not new.

Thanks for the correction ViRGE, I also doubt any bloke will be able to run OSX on their run of the mill white box. :thumbsup:

 

[vailr]

MAC OSX 10.4 runs fine on any 3.0+GHz x86 PC, using the PearPC emulator.
There's PearPC versions for Windows and Linux.
See http://www.pearpc.net/
I'm pretty sure that Apple's future "OSX-86" could also be enabled to run
(using workarounds, if necessary) on any generic Intel or AMD PC.

 

[ironcrotch]

Originally posted by: vailr
MAC OSX 10.4 runs fine on any 3.0+GHz x86 PC, using the PearPC emulator.
There's PearPC versions for Windows and Linux.
See http://www.pearpc.net/
I'm pretty sure that Apple's future "OSX-86" could also be enabled to run
(using workarounds, if necessary) on any generic Intel or AMD PC.

I doubt it, IMO PearPC is slower than duck balls and doesn't support many native features. I'm 99.9999% sure Steve Jobs won't allow any person to run OSX on any old system, that would negate their status as a hard ware company. According to the keynote Apple and Intel been at this secretly for the past few years. I'm positive that theres custom proprietary chipsets that won't allow you to run Osx on your home box.