I hope this is NOT a



http://news.com.com/Apple+to+ditch+I...?tag=nefd.lede

Apple Computer plans to announce Monday that it's scrapping its partnership with IBM and switching its computers to Intel's microprocessors, CNET News.com has learned.

Apple has used IBM's PowerPC processors since 1994, but will begin a phased transition to Intel's chips, sources familiar with the situation said. Apple plans to move lower-end computers such as the Mac Mini to Intel chips in mid-2006 and higher-end models such as the Power Mac in mid-2007, sources said.

The announcement is expected Monday at Apple's Worldwide Developer Conference in San Francisco, at which Chief Executive Steve Jobs is giving the keynote speech. The conference would be an appropriate venue: Changing the chips would require programmers to rewrite their software to take full advantage of the new processor.

IBM, Intel and Apple declined to comment for this story.

The Wall Street Journal reported last month that Apple was considering switching to Intel, but many analysts were skeptical citing the difficulty and risk to Apple.

That skepticism remains. "If they actually do that, I will be surprised, amazed and concerned," said Insight 64 analyst Nathan Brookwood. "I don't know that Apple's market share can survive another architecture shift. Every time they do this, they lose more customers" and more software partners, he said.

Apple successfully navigated a switch in the 1990s from Motorola's 680x0 line of processors to the Power line jointly made by Motorola and IBM. That switch also required software to be revamped to take advantage of the new processors' performance, but emulation software permitted older programs to run on the new machines. (Motorola spinoff Freescale currently makes PowerPC processors for Apple notebooks and the Mac Mini.)

The relationship between Apple and IBM has been rocky at times. Apple openly criticized IBM for chip delivery problems, though Big Blue said it fixed the issue. More recent concerns, which helped spur the Intel deal, included tension between Apple's desire for a wide variety of PowerPC processors and IBM's concerns about the profitability of a low-volume business, according to one source familiar with the partnership.

Over the years, Apple has discussed potential deals with Intel and Advanced Micro Devices, chipmaker representatives have said.

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.

The move also raises questions about Apple's future computer strategy. One basic choice it has in the Intel-based PC realm is whether to permit its Mac OS X operating system to run on any company's computer or only its own.

IBM loses cachet with the end of the Apple partnership, but it can take consolation in that it's designing and manufacturing the Power family processors for future gaming consoles from Microsoft, Sony and Ninendo, said Clay Ryder, a Sageza Group analyst.

"I would think in the sheer volume, all the stuff they're doing with the game consoles would be bigger. But anytime you lose a high-profile customer, that hurts in ways that are not quantifiable but that still hurt," Ryder said.
Is your laptop a pain in the neck?
A century later, Einstein's first ideas still hold power
SBC ups the ante in broadband war
Is the new .xxx domain a good idea?
Sun's last big gamble
Previous Next

Indeed, IBM has a "Power Everywhere" marketing campaign to tout the wide use of its Power processors. The chips show up in everything from networking equipment to IBM servers to the most powerful supercomputer, Blue Gene/L.

Intel dominates the PC processor business, with an 81.7 percent market share in the first quarter of 2005, compared with 16.9 percent for Advanced Micro Devices, according to Dean McCarron of Mercury Research. Those numbers do not include PowerPC processors. However, Apple has roughly 1.8 percent of the worldwide PC market, he added.

Apple shipped 1.07 million PCs in the first quarter, and its move to Intel would likely bump up the chipmaker's shipments by a corresponding amount, McCarron added.

CNET News.com's Michael Kanellos and Richard Shim contributed to this report.

 

https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...ht=apple+intel

 

Not really, its confirmed this time as opposed to "may"


To me this is important as I want OSX on a lower cost computer that i can build/modify.

 

semi-

 

wow that's a bomb shell and a half................

 

Thats pretty big news in the world of apples

 

i still don't see what the :w00t: is about. bad news if you ask me.

 

hmmm, so whats the difference now between the mac and pc? with the exception of the GUI

 

 

Hell = Frozen Over

 

Not really, if anything Apple will reach an even broader audience AND will FORCE Micro$oft to be more innovative. Its a win-win situation for the consumer.

 

I remember hearing the same argument when Linux was poised to take over the world a few years ago.

We shall see...

 

And in that case Microsoft HAS taken notice and has been forced to compete in the server market.

 

Well I was speaking more of Linux in the home/PC environment. I think it will take more than Apple switching processors before consumers see any real innovation from Redmond.

 

Apple can do it in my opinion, Microsoft will take notice when people stop paying $300 for a crumby OS that is 5 years behind everyone else.

I'd rather pay $129 for an OS that is up to date, easy to use and secure.

 

Remember, no one has said they are using x86 chips....yet.

I wonder if this means my G4 is now crap and abandoned?

 

Cool, now Apple will downfall again like they did in the 80's and Steve Jobs will have to work again.

 

My one poblem with apple has always been that the hardware was higher priced and basically unmodifiable by the end user (I know this is a genneralization). They have always had a better OS but this will give MS a run for it's money. Now MS will never go away, it's got too large of a foothold in coperate america to completely disappear, but it will give the end user a much cheaper choice.

 

I have to think software is at the heart of this move. If Apple ports OSX (or maybe it will just be XI) over in such a way that it becomes substantially easier for developers to code simultaneously for both platforms, then the whole argument of "I'd switch to a Mac, but I can't afford to re-buy all my software" could be thrown out the door.

 

What will all the fanatics that say "But a xGhz Mac is faster than a 10xGHz PC because the P4 sucks!!!!" do now?

 

I know that is going to take the arugment away from my co-worker.

 

lol but it was....nothing changes. It seems to be a business decision.

 

fuck me

 

 

Columnist John Yunker thinks that Apple may be in talks with Intel not about using Pentium processors in Macs, but rather about WiMAX, a next-generation home wireless technology. "There have been lots of speculation about Apple launching an A/V equivalent of iTunes. Now, connecting the cable or DSL modem to the TV is a hurdle we're seeing lots of companies tackle, with limited success." Yunker believes that WiMAX may hold the solution." That's because only WiMAX can stream multiple streams of HDTV content in difficult RF environments to all ends of the home. Apple may be trying to keep on top of the latest technology, as it did in 1997 when it introduced AirPort. "Apple likes to lead with wireless technology, not follow." (Background: last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that Apple and Intel were in talks.)

 

its




Please don't ban me

 

phew...i can step away from the ledge. This makes more sense.

 

:wtf:

AMD > powerPC in so many ways... intel.. well.. ya, then I agree.


At work I have a IBM powerpc workstation under my desk, same fuggin thing as a G5 mac just missing the prom. :ghey:

They are making moves in the right direction

 

why do you always jump into threads with a :wtf: only to make a point totally in the opposite direction?

read the title... "... going to Intel...".

:ghey: indeed.

 

how did AMD come into this convo?

 

If it's going to run on PC archtecture thats the best of whats available for PC's today.

Or is it going to be on some other processor thats not x86 based? I didn't see that...

Rumors of a x86 based OSX have been going on for years now...

AMD is just the better choice of the x86 processors today.

 

because thats my opinion on it. Powerpc architecture isn't the end all be all of designs.

When they go intel (x86), they'll be more HW upgrades and they'll be released faster. 1/2 the reason G5 powerbook isn't out is because apple doesn't like using fans, and the power consumption of the G5 processor.

I see lots of pluses...


Sorry for my difference of opinon :middlefinger:

I'll try to always agree with you to make things easier soopa

Who knows I'm sure they'll be a PROM like their is now, and it'll be required to run the O/S on intel hardware only. But I'm sure hacks will come out for it...

For someone new to owning a Mac you sure seem to have a strong opinion yourself.

 

I agree, this is the 3rd year in a row I have heard rumors about this... but who knows.


If it happens I think it's great.

 

you seem to have totally missed the point...

you quoted my post and posted your opinion which had absolutely NOTHING to do with what was in my post.

worse, what you actually quoted you agreed with yet included a wtf. :thick:

 

 

All I have to say is...

If Apple pulls this, I can't see how this is going to help them. Every single piece of third-party code will have to be altered in some way. It's not going to be a simple change of a compiler flag (-arch 486) in the makefile.

What's the incentive for Abode, Microsoft, etc. to move all their shit over to x86??? It'll take time and probably some major money... Users will be alienated. Developers will be pissed.

meh

I'll admit there are some technical issues right now with the PPC platform, but is now the right time to jump ship?

 

Thats just it, OSX can be easily put on an x86 processor.

 

I'm sure that's not an issue.

But again, all apps are compiled for PPC architecture, not x86. You'll need to make x86 binaries.

All the altivec code optimizations... There are instruction sets that will have to be re-tooled for x86 compilation.

This will not be like flipping a light switch.


I'll believe it when I see it.

 

All the application code relies on the OS, not the underlying hardware. If apple uses the same OS with a new processor, that should mean nothing more than recompiling hella lotta code.

 

little endian/big endian issues... I could go on.