Apple is going to Intel Processors!
The Creator
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 37,950
Likes: 8
From: Albany, NY
Originally Posted by JimmyCarter
Jessica Alba's boobs one thread away and Soopa's still harping on this :shakehead
likes it raw
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 10,133
Likes: 1
From: 42.4°N, 71.1°W
Originally Posted by soopa
im at work man ... this is as close as i can get to pr0n while still having a job
"Adam, we checked our logs and found you were on an Apple forum earlier today... I think we need to have a discussion about appropriate internet usage"
Racer
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
From: SO CAL
Good move for Apple long term. Nobody can remotely match Intel in R&D dollars. I agree with what Jobs said: This will allow Apple to create much more revolutionary stuff over time. And a lot cheaper. Again, nobody can match Intel on cost. Yeah, lots of shit to work out, but a great strategic move. My question is -- can I hold out on getting new hardware until these babies come to market -- I hope so! Figure aapl sales will slow bigtime with every month closer to intro of Intel machines.
The Creator
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 37,950
Likes: 8
From: Albany, NY
yeah most everyone says that this is going to cost far more long run then the partnership with IBM.
this is why many speculate that IBM is indifferent or the one doing the pushing... IBM is getting little out of the deal with Apple.
this is why many speculate that IBM is indifferent or the one doing the pushing... IBM is getting little out of the deal with Apple.
The Creator
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 37,950
Likes: 8
From: Albany, NY
wow, apple sure writes fast 
http://developer.apple.com/
everything you ever wanted to know about writing universal binaries. xcode 2.1 download available
http://developer.apple.com/
everything you ever wanted to know about writing universal binaries. xcode 2.1 download available
Cost Drivers!!!!
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 19,392
Likes: 1
From: burbs of philly
Originally Posted by Scrib
I read that IBM was selling the G5s to apple less than what Intel was selling the newst pentium 4s to Dell...
dunno, i heard on program this morning 20% price drop on mac hardware with x86 switch.
The Creator
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 37,950
Likes: 8
From: Albany, NY
Originally Posted by Zapata
dunno, i heard on program this morning 20% price drop on mac hardware with x86 switch.
whereas general speculation seems to conclude that the cost of switching and the relatively low cost at which apple was obtaining ibm chips would mean the switch will be more expensive.
the only way apple could really cut costs by ditching ibm is ditching their entire powerpc unit... which they wont
4dr & I like it that way
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,612
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally Posted by soopa
the Intel vs AMD decisions is looking to be a capacity issue. speculation seems to be that AMD would not be able to keep up, especially with Intel having just built new plants.
Cost Drivers!!!!
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 19,392
Likes: 1
From: burbs of philly
Originally Posted by soopa
nobody could possibly say that at this point... so im guessing that was pure speculation.
whereas general speculation seems to conclude that the cost of switching and the relatively low cost at which apple was obtaining ibm chips would mean the switch will be more expensive.
the only way apple could really cut costs by ditching ibm is ditching their entire powerpc unit... which they wont
whereas general speculation seems to conclude that the cost of switching and the relatively low cost at which apple was obtaining ibm chips would mean the switch will be more expensive.
the only way apple could really cut costs by ditching ibm is ditching their entire powerpc unit... which they wont
yea def....just speculation.
The Creator
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 37,950
Likes: 8
From: Albany, NY
Moderator Alumnus
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 9,263
Likes: 2
From: Lenexa, KS
Originally Posted by soopa
huh?
OSX has supported X86 all along they claim. they confirmed the existence of the Marklar project which we mentioned from 2002.
in production, assuming Apple still controls the hardware, they won't have to worry about supporting additional video cards / etc.
all that will change is the motherboard/cpu (which is significant) but apparently they can handle that as they seem to have been doing so all along.
i guess only time will tell, i highly doubt stability will be an issue though.
the only question mark i see is how well the PPC emulation will be for legacy apps. it looks good at the keynote but i cant imagine a PPC emulator being "as good as if the app were natively compiled".
but again, well see. they ship the dev kits in two weeks and then they have a year to let developers tweak and tinker alongside another osx revision that they can improve in any which way they like...
thats alot of time to get it right. especially in mac land where changes tend to come quick..
OSX has supported X86 all along they claim. they confirmed the existence of the Marklar project which we mentioned from 2002.
in production, assuming Apple still controls the hardware, they won't have to worry about supporting additional video cards / etc.
all that will change is the motherboard/cpu (which is significant) but apparently they can handle that as they seem to have been doing so all along.
i guess only time will tell, i highly doubt stability will be an issue though.
the only question mark i see is how well the PPC emulation will be for legacy apps. it looks good at the keynote but i cant imagine a PPC emulator being "as good as if the app were natively compiled".
but again, well see. they ship the dev kits in two weeks and then they have a year to let developers tweak and tinker alongside another osx revision that they can improve in any which way they like...
thats alot of time to get it right. especially in mac land where changes tend to come quick..
Supporting the processor at this point is easy, that's not what I'm addressing...
It's billy's P4 processor with a made in tiwan MOBO and some whack ass SATA controller.
OSX is written to comply with a SMALL range of hardware at the moment.
Your forgetting all the mobo chipsets/USB chipsets/video chipsets/IDE/SATA/IO chipsets/PCI controllers
It's a LOT of drivers. And lots of quirky hardware to work with.
Being a app developer I don't think you see what I'm trying to say.
Who now write the drivers? Apple? 3rd party?
Who's responsible when the bad SATA driver flakes out and causes system crashes?
This is why windows has their certified drivers. Drivers that have been lab tested to work with the O/S.
It's a lot more complicated than I think your seeing. One bad hardware driver that doesn't release the IRQ line back will hose the box. It's easy to get those drivers right when you only support PowerPC and a few devices. It's a PIA trying to do what Windows does...
Just look at linux for example, takes time before drivers come out. And most have bugs when they initially do that cause instability.
I can remember when Linux would only run on specific pieces of hardware because of the lack of drivers that existed...
There's probably 10+ drivers to keep your puter running, none of them are standard. And they all differ from one MOBO to the next.
While I don't doubt they'll just take most of them from FreeBSD it's still going to be a challenge.
The Creator
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 37,950
Likes: 8
From: Albany, NY
i still have no idea what you're talking about?
they wont have to support that varried range of stuff because it will be on THEIR HARDWARE.
they are not giving out OSX for billy to use on his on his p4 with a taiwn mobo and whack ass SATA controller.
billy will have to buy a machine from Apple Store with Apple's choice of motherboard and sata controller.
they wont have to support that varried range of stuff because it will be on THEIR HARDWARE.
they are not giving out OSX for billy to use on his on his p4 with a taiwn mobo and whack ass SATA controller.
billy will have to buy a machine from Apple Store with Apple's choice of motherboard and sata controller.
Moderator Alumnus
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 9,263
Likes: 2
From: Lenexa, KS
Originally Posted by soopa
i still have no idea what you're talking about?
they wont have to support that varried range of stuff because it will be on THEIR HARDWARE.
they are not giving out OSX for billy to use on his on his p4 with a taiwn mobo and whack ass SATA controller.
billy will have to buy a machine from Apple Store with Apple's choice of motherboard and sata controller.
they wont have to support that varried range of stuff because it will be on THEIR HARDWARE.
they are not giving out OSX for billy to use on his on his p4 with a taiwn mobo and whack ass SATA controller.
billy will have to buy a machine from Apple Store with Apple's choice of motherboard and sata controller.
ohhh, I thought they wre trying to compete with MS. I see what your getting at now...
It'll be limited HW support.
When I was done reading that conference and they said it would run on both AMD and Intel it kinda leads to the point they will have support for a lot of chipsets.
Guess we'll find out, but I bet your right... it'll be like the early days of linux. I'll need brand X SCSI controller, and Brand Y mobo for support.
Moderator Alumnus
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 9,263
Likes: 2
From: Lenexa, KS
Originally Posted by Scrib
All of those apps are optimized for the Apple. Which is why they run faster... those charts are pretty bogus when given equal software to complete. And or the same optimizations.
not to mention the dual vs. single CPU I don't get.
The Creator
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 37,950
Likes: 8
From: Albany, NY
i think they were just trying to make the point that OSX has "lead a double life" and can run on ANY processor (theoretically)
i also think they didn't want to burn bridges with AMD, so they have some power with Intel ... "you'll do as we ask or we'll go to AMD!"
i also think they didn't want to burn bridges with AMD, so they have some power with Intel ... "you'll do as we ask or we'll go to AMD!"
Moderator Alumnus
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 9,263
Likes: 2
From: Lenexa, KS
Originally Posted by soopa
i think they were just trying to make the point that OSX has "lead a double life" and can run on ANY processor (theoretically)
i also think they didn't want to burn bridges with AMD, so they have some power with Intel ... "you'll do as we ask or we'll go to AMD!"
i also think they didn't want to burn bridges with AMD, so they have some power with Intel ... "you'll do as we ask or we'll go to AMD!"
Administrator Alumnus
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 26,326
Likes: 131
From: Northwest IN
Another great ARS article...
http://arstechnica.com/columns/mac/mac-20050607.ars
Some of the Q&A at the back was f00kin' funny...
Q: Did you notice that none of the pictures of PowerPC chips shown in the slides during the WWDC keynote presentation had the "G5" logo on them? Instead, they all had a generic purple badge with "PowerPC" written on it.
A: Yeah, I noticed that too. Steve angry! Steve smash IBM!
http://arstechnica.com/columns/mac/mac-20050607.ars
Some of the Q&A at the back was f00kin' funny...
Q: Did you notice that none of the pictures of PowerPC chips shown in the slides during the WWDC keynote presentation had the "G5" logo on them? Instead, they all had a generic purple badge with "PowerPC" written on it.
A: Yeah, I noticed that too. Steve angry! Steve smash IBM!
Administrator Alumnus
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 26,326
Likes: 131
From: Northwest IN
http://developer.apple.com/documenta...sal_binary.pdf
Read Appendix B... The SSE instruction sets are a fucking nightmare compared to Altivec.
The whole PDF is a good read...
Read Appendix B... The SSE instruction sets are a fucking nightmare compared to Altivec.
The whole PDF is a good read...
Administrator Alumnus
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 26,326
Likes: 131
From: Northwest IN
Cost Drivers!!!!
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 19,392
Likes: 1
From: burbs of philly
Originally Posted by Scrib
great article and good find.
The Creator
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 37,950
Likes: 8
From: Albany, NY
Macworld sums it up pretty well...
Apple wants a Pentium M, IBM wants an Xbox
Apple wants a Pentium M, IBM wants an Xbox
The first Apple systems in 2006 will use Intel’s Pentium M processor, according to sources familiar with the companies’ plans. The Pentium M uses the same x86 architecture as the Pentium 4, but consumes far less power than Pentium 4 chips and its design philosophy is expected to be the model for Intel’s future processors.
Industry analysts agreed that the Pentium M product Intel plans to launch in early 2006, the dual-core Yonah processor, could be an industry leader in performance per watt at that point.
Apple was also frustrated by IBM’s inability to supply it with sufficient processors last year as the chip maker struggled with yield problems while getting its new manufacturing facility in East Fishkill, New York, up and running.
Apple accounted for just around 2 percent of IBM’s chip wafer production in East Fishkill, according to industry sources, and IBM is moving away from making chips for the PC market in favor of gaming consoles and high-end servers.
Console makers like Sony Computer Entertainment Inc., Microsoft Corp., and Nintendo Co. Ltd. will sell tens of millions of units combined over the next couple of years, and it’s likely that IBM would rather focus its attention on the deals it has struck with all three companies, as opposed to taking on the engineering challenge of making a low-power G5 processor to suit Apple’s small market share.
Apple and AMD have indeed talked about a relationship at certain points in their histories, and have worked together as members of the Hypertransport Consortium, said Drew Prairie, an AMD spokesman.
However, Prairie was not able to comment on any recent talks between AMD and Apple.
However, Prairie was not able to comment on any recent talks between AMD and Apple.
Originally Posted by jlukja
Should Microsoft be worried? With seemingly no hardware difference OEMs could offer a choice of either Windows or MacOS.
Administrator Alumnus
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 26,326
Likes: 131
From: Northwest IN
Xlr8yourmac.com provides some detailed comments from one of the developers at WWDC describing the current development Intel-Mac which currently features a 3.6GHz Pentium 4.
Minor highlights:
- "the thing is fast". All iLife apps are already universal binaries
- Pentium 4 660 at 3.6GHz, but will not be used in the shipping product (of course, since the high end Intel-Mac is 2 years away)
- DDR-2 RAM at 533. SATA-2.
- Presently uses the Intel GMA 900 integrated graphics chip set which supports Quartz Extreme.
- Regular video cards will be supported, but need drivers
- No Open Firmware. Uses Phoenix BIOS.
Major highlights:
- "They run Windows fine. All the chipset is standard Intel stuff, so you can download drivers and run XP - on the box."
- Game devs optimistic. "They look forward to the day they don't have to support PPC."
- Cell and AMD were evaluated. Cell not intended for PCs; AMD with supply constraints.
Photos of the Intel PowerMac at WWDC.
Note: It is impossible to tell if final shipping Intel Macs will share features common with this development Mac.... there has been suggestions that the final Intel-Macs will not simply be PC Bios/Motherboards. We'll have to wait and see...
Minor highlights:
- "the thing is fast". All iLife apps are already universal binaries
- Pentium 4 660 at 3.6GHz, but will not be used in the shipping product (of course, since the high end Intel-Mac is 2 years away)
- DDR-2 RAM at 533. SATA-2.
- Presently uses the Intel GMA 900 integrated graphics chip set which supports Quartz Extreme.
- Regular video cards will be supported, but need drivers
- No Open Firmware. Uses Phoenix BIOS.
Major highlights:
- "They run Windows fine. All the chipset is standard Intel stuff, so you can download drivers and run XP - on the box."
- Game devs optimistic. "They look forward to the day they don't have to support PPC."
- Cell and AMD were evaluated. Cell not intended for PCs; AMD with supply constraints.
Photos of the Intel PowerMac at WWDC.
Note: It is impossible to tell if final shipping Intel Macs will share features common with this development Mac.... there has been suggestions that the final Intel-Macs will not simply be PC Bios/Motherboards. We'll have to wait and see...
Administrator Alumnus
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 26,326
Likes: 131
From: Northwest IN
The Creator
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 37,950
Likes: 8
From: Albany, NY
Darth Tator
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,336
Likes: 0
From: Southern California
Suzuka Master
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 7,083
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, CA
Originally Posted by soopa
Cost Drivers!!!!
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 19,392
Likes: 1
From: burbs of philly
Originally Posted by cusdaddy
Wow.. That guy is so far off on much of his analysis, I'd take anything he says with a grain of salt.
hmmm, so offer your analysis.....interested to see what you say. It's speculation but atleast he offers more than the 1-2 window that everybody else is saying.
Last edited by Zapata; Jun 10, 2005 at 07:55 AM.