Macs to use Intel processors...confirmation at last?

[Psyche911]

How reliable is c-net news.com?

http://news.com.com/Apple+to+ditch+IBM% ... &subj=news

They're reporting that the new low end Macs will start coming with Intel processors in 2006, and high end in 2007.

Is this the beginning of the end? IBM wouldn't license PowerPC chips to Intel, would they?

[Canis]

I wouldn't doubt an apple device based on intel hardware is around the corner, but I dont know if Apple would risk another architecture change, especially after all the investment in the PPC.

[4g3nt_Smith]

We'll know for sure Monday, according to the first line of the article, which is all I read. :icon25:

[bag0shite]

IBM wouldn't license PowerPC chips to Intel, would they?

IBM have no choice in the matter if one of the other partners in the AIM alliance (Apple, IBM, Motorola) was to approach Intel to help design/fab PowerPC chips. Apple did work closely with IBM in the G5 design so they could probably quite easily headhunt what talent they need and away they go... I think a move to *86 is likely (steve to crowd at WWDC *hi guys, you made OSX great, now go make it work on *86* lol) but a new partner to produce PPC seems plausible. Plus it would give Apple that recognisable Intel Inside branding so coveted by businesses :icon31:

[Dave]

This has to be one of the dumbest rumors of all time. Apple would be commiting corporacide if they moved to an intel platform. I can't believe cnet ran this story. Next they're going to hire Dan Rather

[ajerara]

That's what they're saying on the news tonight, that Apple is going to announce that they're switching to Intel on Monday. I rarely hear anything about Apple like that on the news even though Apple is only 40 minutes from here. All you hear is a tidbit about iPod here and there, or when Macworld convention is in town. They must be pretty confident about their source if they are blatting about it on the TV news.

[Geebs]

Back when they couldn't get the G4s to scale, this would have seemed more sensible. Now that the g5 has done a great job of catching up, it seems ludicrous. And as has been pointed out, making an announcement at WWDC that all of the current Mac developers are going to get put out of business seems a little odd.....

Plus why the hell would apple want half of their line on x86 and the other half on PPC? And why, if performance is the issue, switch the consumer line before the pro line?

[NCG_Mike]

I'm not sure the rumor is far off the mark. They used to ship OpenStep on HP Vectra kit and the package format of applications allows fat binaries - I used to build for 68k and x86 on NeXTSTEP.

Perhaps Apple are going after Microsoft as there's been a lot of dissatisfaction voice over XP in the last year or so, a lot of Windows users have iPods.

Perhaps importantly, Apple can have Tiger out on Intel kit before Longhorn arrives meaning Longhorn is obsolete before it ever ships.

[Geebs]

Hmmm. "Think OS/2"?

[Geebs]

Plus, Apple would lose ALL of their reputation for reliability if they were coding for the PC base. MS does an amazing job considering that every PC user in the world, whatever their hardware (and even if they've inexpertly slapped together a few components by themselves), expects it to work out of the box. No way could Apple compete with that.

[Therac-26]

Something like 80% of Apple's income is based upon selling high-markup hardware. A switch to (basically) selling software ontop of commodity hardware is an exit strategy, not a growth strategy.

Don't forget, Apple probably uses Intel chips for gigabit ethernet, maybe for wireless, the Airport wireless AP is (I think) primarily an Intel 486. Intel makes other things than CPUs.

[codey-]

Plus, Apple would lose ALL of their reputation for reliability if they were coding for the PC base.

Doubt Apple would make a OSX that 'works' on any standard pc even if they switch to x86 procs - they would probably still rely on proprietary hardware just like now, ie; few specific models that they build themselves.

cheers

[Canis]

I'd think about stuff like the Intel Mac Mini look-a-like, the rumored iHome device from Apple, as well as the iPod and other non-Mac hardware from Apple. At most they might try appealing to businesses with the Intel label, though I doubt Apple will scrap the PPC for intel at this point. Apple's G5 is still a pretty new item.

[ajerara]

here's a link to an article in the NY times with info:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/06/techn ... yt&emc=rss

[Dave]

If this doesn't pan out cnet loses all its credibility

[NCG_Mike]

I think that any Intel based OS will be tied to Apple hardware which, essentially, was the case with the HP Vectras of NeXTSTEP. There'll not likely be MacOS for any other platforms.

Having closed hardware makes is cheaper to develop software as you don't need to deal with all the driver issues and so forth. With NeXTSTEP, you were required to use SCSI drives and a particular hardware configuration to get the OS running.

It doesn't mean that the hardware couldn't run XP too, which would be great for me.

If they do an Intel MacOS, I bet it'll be hacked to work on regular PCs with some limitations (drivers).

Anyway this is all speculation, as interesting as it is, but we'll hear in another six hours.

[saturn]

i've been hearing this rumor for months now, but i'm not sure if it's wise for Apple to make this step.

*checks news sites*

[Doombrain]

It’s not a rumor

[NCG_Mike]

Migration path:

- WINE for Windows users, so they can run their current applications.
- Transitive for PowerPC application owners, so they can run their current applications.

[Canis]

It’s not a rumor

It's not, but what specifically does it entail?

[saturn]

It’s not a rumor

it WAS a rumor

[Canis]

OOOOHhhhh....nit-picky details!!! gg Doc!

[saturn]

i can play that game too

[NCG_Mike]

Well, so much for hardware sales.

[Therac-26]

Hopefully two weeks is still inside of the return policy at the Mac store here.

No point in owning a system without a future.