| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/03/2005 11:45:01 PM · #1 |
Hmm....interesting...especially in light of this conversation!
Apple to drop the G5....move to Intel processors |
|
|
|
06/03/2005 11:57:13 PM · #2 |
I'll be surprised if IBM doesn't find a way to keep them from switching. I think one of the big selling points for Mac right now is the fact they DON'T have an Intel chip. If they switch to Intel, what's the point in buying a Mac?
|
|
|
|
06/03/2005 11:59:35 PM · #3 |
|
|
|
06/04/2005 12:45:01 AM · #4 |
| The mac OS is far superior in certain areas. Realize that it is builton top of a Linux os, which is easily enough portable across architectures. While rewriting the top end would be a detailed job, it is deinitely not something unreachable. There was some speculation back when OSX was released that there would be an Intel based port... I guess we see that coming true. |
|
|
|
06/04/2005 01:04:07 AM · #5 |
Actually its a BSD core...
;) |
|
|
|
06/04/2005 01:04:42 AM · #6 |
| Why do you think they are switching? Does Apple want to expand and cater to the business community? Or is it that more software will be developed for the Mac with an Intel based system? |
|
|
|
06/04/2005 12:27:33 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Why do you think they are switching? Does Apple want to expand and cater to the business community? Or is it that more software will be developed for the Mac with an Intel based system? |
I think if they do it it will be because of price. Intel is a high volume chip maker and can probably provide the chips to Mac for less money then IBM. The problem people have with Intel is not the chips, it is the unreliable OS they run on. |
|
|
|
06/04/2005 01:18:01 PM · #8 |
| whats the difference between intel chips and IBM chips? |
|
|
|
06/04/2005 01:55:01 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by eswik:
whats the difference between intel chips and IBM chips? |
price
I also thought IBM processors had faster bus speeds...
|
|
|
|
06/04/2005 02:26:46 PM · #10 |
I don't think this rumor is true. Dual core PowerPC G5 on the way, not Intel.
Analysts: Dual-Core PowerPC G5s Due for Apple [eweek.com]
Story text:
Analysts: Dual-Core PowerPC G5s Due for Apple
Building a G5 PowerBook could be an aesthetic challenge for Apple. The G5 chip tends to consume more power and produce more heat than the G4. Hotter, more power-hungry chips tend to require a thicker, more spacious chassis and larger, higher-capacity batteries--all of which might lead to a more portly PowerBook.
But, analysts say, versions of the 970FX technically already fit into the power envelope needed for Apple to offer a mid- to full-size laptop in the 5-7 pound range. At the moment, two of its three PowerBook G4 portables weigh in at over 5 pounds.
Aiding portability, IBM has also added a power-management feature to the PowerPC 970FX. Called PowerTune, it can cut the chip's clock speed, therefore lowering its voltage, in order to save on power.
Therefore, a 1.8GHz PowerPC 970FX would be a good choice--it would top the current G4 processor--but power management might still be an issue in some other ways.
The 1.8GHz chip "might be 35 watts or something like that. There are plenty of 35-watt [notebook] processors out there. The big problem is you want to get average power [consumption] to be a lot lower. That relies to a large degree on software management," Glaskowsky said. "If I had to pick a reason why it hasn't shown up yet ... I'd say it's [Apple power management] software."
Still, not everyone believes that the Power PC 970FX makes a great notebook chip.
"Right now, from IBM's perspective, the [PowerPC] 970 is a pretty competitive part, but they definitely lack a low-power version," said Kevin Krewell, editor-in-chief of the Microprocessor Report, in San Jose, Calif. "The question is, can you get it low enough--25 watts to 35 watts--in order to get it into something sleek enough for Apple?"
To arrive at the right mix of frequency and performance, Krewell suggests that IBM and Apple might need to consider creating a new G4-G5 hybrid instead of delivering a low-power 970.
"The best route would be to develop a new [processor] core that's somewhere between the G5 and the G4," Krewell said, "But that's a significant design undertaking ... and it's a limited-size market. A redesigned core might be attractive for future multicore processors" for desktops and servers as well, he said.
Apple could also adopt a multicore G4 derivative from Freescale Semiconductor Inc., once the chip arm of Motorola Inc., for its portables, Krewell said.
"That's still a 2006 thing ... and it's designed for the network world," he said. "It would require some modifications. But it's doable."
Representatives from Apple and IBM declined to comment for this story. A Freescale spokesman did not return a call.
Editor's Note: This story was updated to reflect the fact that an Apple representative returned a phone call to eWEEK.com but declined to comment. |
|
|
|
06/05/2005 12:10:14 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by maxj:
Originally posted by eswik:
whats the difference between intel chips and IBM chips? |
price
I also thought IBM processors had faster bus speeds... |
If the fact about the bus speeds is not true...
Then why didn't Apple use Intel chips to begin with? If they're less expensive... |
|
|
|
06/05/2005 10:18:38 PM · #12 |
I think the main reason is that IBM hasn't been advancing performance fast enough and cost-effeciency.
|
|
|
|
06/05/2005 10:37:40 PM · #13 |
If I am not mistaken... Darwin (the BSD-is kerrnel that OSX uses) can already run on the Intel platform...
What do you wanna bet there are already meetings being held in Redmond ???
An OSX powered Dell ... be still my heart
Message edited by author 2005-06-05 22:39:10. |
|
|
|
06/06/2005 10:32:05 AM · #14 |
Actually I heard a great theory that makes a LOT of sense...
Perhaps, Apple is going to release "Newton II" and use Intel's XScale processor (used in a lot of hand held PDAs).
It makes a LOT of sense.... |
|
|
|
06/06/2005 10:38:21 AM · #15 |
If Apple move to the x86/IA64 architecture, won't that mean yet another watershed in losing backwards compatibility with older Mac software?
|
|
|
|
06/06/2005 10:41:52 AM · #16 |
i sincerely doubt they would call it a newton. LOL
all i know is that, whatever chip they use, apple has it all over PCs simply because they're QUIETER! if i leave my PC on at night it keeps me awake in the next room! and the Xbox sounds like a plane about ready to take off.
the iMac i use at work is just a 17" 800mHz dealie, but it's easily the best computer i've ever used. it's quiet, has a decent monitor, and -- best of all -- has ONE plug for the entire setup -- and doesn't even have a power brick.
long story short, a Dell running OSX does nothing to excite me.
Message edited by author 2005-06-06 10:42:36. |
|
|
|
06/06/2005 10:42:27 AM · #17 |
It's not quite as easy as some might think though. The OS and all applications will have to be rewritten to take advantage of the intel architecture. Apple is apparently relying on the power of emulation (again) to bring legacy users into the next generation of Apple hardware. Here are a few news stories from this morning:
NY Times
Reuters
Wired
Associated Press |
|
|
|
06/06/2005 10:47:06 AM · #18 |
I notice the news stories aren't from what I would call 'technically reliable' sources.. As soon as there's an article in The Register it will have technical meaning.
|
|
|
|
06/06/2005 10:51:57 AM · #19 |
|
|
|
06/06/2005 10:54:12 AM · #20 |
Ask and ye shall receive. -Jesus
The Register
Edit: Crap, my boss came in and slowed me down...
Message edited by author 2005-06-06 10:54:44. |
|
|
|
06/06/2005 10:57:45 AM · #21 |
|
|
|
06/06/2005 10:59:32 AM · #22 |
Thanks muckpond, strangehost, now I can have technical inner peace..
I notice they mention x86 chips not IA64, which is interesting..
Does this mean the end of the Apple Mac computer? Will Apple turn into another Dell, trying to push its own OS (how different is OSX to Linux anyway?)?
|
|
|
|
06/06/2005 11:09:41 AM · #23 |
Ok, I have a G4...and am getting ready to upgrade to Tiger and CS2... will the chip change make me not want to do these upgrades right now?
I won't be able to get work to buy a new mac for several years I'm sure... so I'm stuck.
I'm considering a Mac Mini for home. Does anyone have one?
|
|
|
|
06/06/2005 11:14:44 AM · #24 |
We1mx3: Don't let an announcement like this dissuade you from making a purchase. It will be a long time, maybe more than a year, before there is any effect on announced products.
PaulMdx: I think there is a ton of difference between Linix and OSX, but I haven't used Linix so I can't speak first hand. |
|
|
|
06/06/2005 11:16:32 AM · #25 |
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
If Apple move to the x86/IA64 architecture, won't that mean yet another watershed in losing backwards compatibility with older Mac software? |
Because they use BSD as a core and BSD can be compiled to run on a PowerPC or x86 there will be minimal compatibility hit migrating. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/12/2025 09:40:57 AM EDT.
