| Author | Message | ||
     DeborahG Citizen Username: Deborahg Post Number: 1429 Registered: 5-2001  |
It's official: They're switching. Here's the info: (Live via MacObserver.com. Start at the bottom and scroll up!) Steve confirmed all this, BTW, by saying the rumors have been true about how Apple had an Intel project. [1:33 PM] Today's demonstration has been done entirely on an Intel Mac. Steve is showing us how everything works. [1:33 PM] Every project done at Apple has been mandated to work on PowerPC and Intel. [1:33 PM] "This has been going on for the last five years." Every release of OS X has been compiled and run on Intel processors. [1:32 PM] "Mac OS X has been leading a secret double life. There have been rumors to this effect...(laugh). We've had teams working on the just in case scenario." [1:32 PM] Said there are two challenges, which made the audience laugh. [1:30 PM] It will begin a Mac with Intel processors by June 6th, 2006, as reports said. It should be complete by June 2007. [1:30 PM] Says that Intel offers a better roadmap for the markets that Apple services. [1:29 PM] Why? Because we want to be making the best computers for our customers. - [1:29 PM] He talked about IBM missing the 3 GHz mark for the G5, and in not being able to put one in a PowerBook. - [1:27 PM] Moving on to "Transitions." This is clearly the Intel news we've been expecting. - | ||
| DeborahG Citizen Username: Deborahg Post Number: 1430 Registered: 5-2001 |
So...I was about to make the switch from PC to MAc.Does this change anything? Or should I go ahead and pop that $3K for the fancy Powerbook? | ||
| DeborahG Citizen Username: Deborahg Post Number: 1431 Registered: 5-2001 |
Live coverage: http://live.macobserver.com/article/2005/06/wwdc2005_keynote.shtml | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 7309 Registered: 1-2003  |
This does not look like a good strategy for Apple at all. But what do I know? The problem is that you will now have an option of buying MacOS and plunking it on any old PC. Any old PC is cheaper than a Mac. Why would you buy a Mac in that case? The difference in quality, if it remains, will not be noticeable. Which leaves Apple out of the hardware business and in the operating system business. And once that is the case, their OS will have to work on a much bigger variety of hardware. One reason MacOS works so well is that they don't have to test and verify it with such variety. And Apple has control over the quality of the hardware. There's some really lousy hardware out there, yet when it fails, it often appears to be an OS problem. Deborah, no, this announcement doesn't mean anything to you yet. They're probably not going to start shipping their Intel based stuff for a while. Buy what you need now, not what you think you'll need in the future. | ||
| AlleyGater Citizen Username: Alleygater Post Number: 439 Registered: 10-2004 |
I haven't read nor seen the footage you are discussing but I have to wonder if you guys are interpretting the info correctly. I read that to mean that Mac OSX can run on an Intel chip. Not on an Intel box. In other words, Apple moved away from using Motorola to IBM to make their processors. Now they are going to move from IBM to Intel. I'm sure Intel will make a CUSTOM chip for the Mac OS with all sorts of optimized routines. MacOSX uses Altivec for instance when handling graphics routines. Intel will add these to their chips and make a Mac-specific chip. That chip will be supplied to Apple who will STILL sell proprietary computers. I agree with Tom, buy your mac now if you need it. | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 6578 Registered: 4-1997  |
A change in a chip is going to be of more interest to developers and investors than end users. Who cares what the chip is as long as it works? More thoughts in 2007… | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 7317 Registered: 1-2003 |
Dave, from a technical standpoint, you are right. I am not arguing that the PowerPC is superior or inferior to the Pentium. But see my points above. Sun has been floundering to come up with a strategy. We still don't know if they're a hardware or software company. | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 6579 Registered: 4-1997 |
Apple will always be a hardward & software company. Why do you think that would change? | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 7321 Registered: 1-2003 |
If MacOS runs on generic PC's, people will stop buying Apple computers. Alleygater says they won't make it run on generic PC's. That may be true. We'll see. I doubt they will make a custom processor, but maybe they will make a custom BIOS or something. Processors take lots of development and tooling. They are not profitable unless volume is huge. That's why I predict there will be no custom processor. | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 6580 Registered: 4-1997 |
From one person attending the conference
| ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 7324 Registered: 1-2003 |
As to number 1, good! Number 2 is not news. Computer makers don't generally try to prevent any software from running on their hardware. I don't believe Microsoft has an interest in porting Windows to Apple hardware, though. | ||
| Network & PC Care Citizen Username: Npccare Post Number: 6 Registered: 5-2005 |
It is a move they had to make. IBM has not been able to deliver. I remember 2 years ago when Jobs promised that they would have 3Ghz G5's in 1 year... 2 years later, and they still aren't there. I don't think Apple really wanted to make this move, I think they were not left with a choice. I hope it works out for Apple, and I expect that it will. (I really hoped that Jobs would come out on stage in a Darth Vader costume... the whole "dark side" thing)} | ||
| Earlster Supporter Username: Earlster Post Number: 1147 Registered: 8-2003  |
This is kind of like back in the NeXT days, when there was a version of NeXTStep that ran on PC's. (And isn't OSX at least loosely based on NeXTStep?). The biggest annoyance was, that when developing you had to compile your code twice, and it created a huge executable with binaries for both 68k and 386 processors. Remember the days when Apple sold the OS to a few independent hardware makers, and then really screwed them when they pulled out, just after these guys got running with machines that were faster and cheaper then original Macs. | ||
| monster Supporter Username: Monster Post Number: 814 Registered: 7-2002  |
Watch the Keynote presentation here, http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc05/ Apple will of course have the chip designed to operate within the hardware requirements they specify, you won't be able to just plunk the OS down on any old white box pc. The strange thing is that Apple is moving to intel chips, and Microsoft is using PPC chips. OS X.5, or Leopard, is slated for release at the end of 2006, alongside Longhorn. Apple has been planning on this for awhile now, after all, all of there most recent software (within the past 5 years) is compiled to work on both types of CPU. With Rosetta, PowerPC-compiled Mac apps (pre OS X) will still run on Intel-based systems,with a reported 5% speed loss (mush better than VPC). Read more about Universal Binary Programming here Apple's demo is on an Intel-based system. Jobs showed that all Mac OS X Tiger features are already compatible with Intel-based processors. It ran on a P4 3.6GHz chip. The Developer Transition Kit is available as of yesterday for $999 to all Apple Developer Connection Select and Premier members. Developer Kit includes 3.6GHz Pentium 4. OS X 10.4.1 for Intel (preview release). http://developer.apple.com/transitionkit.html Code will only have to be done once, just check off a button for dual compiling Intel should be really happy about this, they have been trying to show people that all of the viri, malware, etc. that have been wreaking havoc on Windows is because of the OS, not the chip. You'll be able to only run one OS on the chip, either Mac OSX or Windows, not both. To run both OS's on the same machine, you would need to segregate the CPU's and run seperate kernels, like an SGI box, http://tinyurl.com/9g98q Jobs said, " The Intel chips would give 70 units of processing power per watt over the projected 15 units of processing power per watt for the IBM PPC chip." Sounds like a good thing to me. This won't put the processor cycle argument to rest, it will just mean that the Wintel zombies who kept talking about clock cycles and couldn't wrap their heads around the idea of operations per cycle will think that they've won the argument. According to Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller Apple Macs will be able to run windows, but it would not be supported by Apple: " there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that." However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac." What happens to Altivec and the 64-bit CPU, and other proprietary Mac technologies? That new G5 is now yesterdays news, will there be a large class action lawsuit in the next few years over the fact that Apple led its customer base to believe that the G5 was the way to go, that they would continue developing along these lines? OF course the G5 will be supported for the next several years, but after that, I can just see the lawsuit by those who can't understand Job's philosophy that one must "pay to play". It's planned obsolescence, they knew this was coming when they came out with G5's. It will be several years before that G5 is not supported. Those G5's, and G4's are still useful, even if they won't run the latest & greatest, but who's to say they won't? third party upgrades! If you are thinking of buying a new Apple laptop, you may want to wait for the new line of Macs to come out, Macintel laptops may be the first out of the gate, with a significant speed increase. This change will take more money out of our pockets as we buy new hardware, and software, yet again, but that is the name of the game, keep the ball rolling. Pentium M, Mac laptops? Pentium D dual core chips? Hyperthreading Macs? Is Altivec gone, will SSE3 replace it ALTIVEC: The Velocity Engine, embodied in the G4 and G5 processors, expands the current PowerPC architecture through addition of a 128-bit vector execution unit that operates concurrently with existing integer and floating-point units. This provides for highly parallel operations, allowing for simultaneous execution of up to 16 operations in a single clock cycle. This new approach expands the processor's capabilities to concurrently address high-bandwidth data processing (such as streaming video) and the algorithmic intensive computations which today are handled off-chip by other devices, such as graphics, audio, and modem functions. SSE3: http://www.intel.com/support/processors/sb/cs-001650.htm A couple of links that may be of interest http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050606/sfm142.html?.v=9 http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1824704,00.asp | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 7365 Registered: 1-2003 |
Are there time estimates for when the new models will come out? | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 6587 Registered: 4-1997 |
I recall hearing July '06 Except for editing video, I can't think of an application I currently use that would benefit from more processor speed. | ||
| monster Supporter Username: Monster Post Number: 815 Registered: 7-2002 |
I think the first release will be in the Mini, sometime late next year, after that I bet it will be the full line sometime in the second quarter of '07, starting with the laptops. Of course I could be wrong. For most people the speed increase won't really be noticed, but for those that do video encoding/rendering, rip movies, musicians, scientists, engineers, and others that may use some type of higher end software, the speed increase should be welcomed. Not to mention that now the specialty software that's out for Windows can be made to run on a Mac, without starting from scratch. Wolfram's CEO, said they ported Mathematica 5 to Intel-based Macs in 2 hours. With a working version in 20 hours. | ||
| DeborahG Citizen Username: Deborahg Post Number: 1436 Registered: 5-2001 |
AAhh! I still don't know what to do! Was on my way to the Apple store to buy the 15 inch Powerbook. Now wondering if I should get a cheaper PC laptop and save making the switch to my next machine (MacIntel). What would YOU do? (I currently have Windows so the Mac will be a learning curve for me. My reason for switching was to get rid of viruses that are driving me nuts). | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 7396 Registered: 1-2003 |
Do you need a machine now? If so, buy something that is available now. | ||
| monster Supporter Username: Monster Post Number: 819 Registered: 7-2002 |
What Tom said |
