Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 55

Thread: OMG ITS TRUE!! - Apple to use Intel chips in '06-CNET

  1. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maddog
    I've been using a G5 for a few months now. Don't think its a trailblazer. Moderate performance.
    Apple has been found to offer misleading test data in their 'tests' against Windoze PCs in the past.

    Nice chassis and design though.

  2. #22

    Default

    intel rumors confirmed. 1st intel macs will appear june 2006. transition complete by june 2007. most software just need to be recompiled. new technology to translate ppc to intel code in realtime for backward compatibility.

    every mac os x release has been compiled for both ppc and intel for the past 5 years.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The heart of the Abyss
    Posts
    2,307

    Default

    But pity the device makers. All their device drivers must be recompiled and tested again and cannot make use of the emulation software.

    It would be interesting in 1-2 years time, direct comparison between them. It would be very interesting to see all those "wonderful" benchmarks again.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    West Coast of sunny Singapore
    Posts
    1,439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Watcher
    But pity the device makers. All their device drivers must be recompiled and tested again and cannot make use of the emulation software.

    It would be interesting in 1-2 years time, direct comparison between them. It would be very interesting to see all those "wonderful" benchmarks again.
    and what about current apple users? devices may not work on the new machine?

  5. #25
    Senior Member Hommie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    925

    Default

    Quotes from Cnet:

    CEO Steve Jobs announced Monday that Apple will gradually shift its Mac line to Intel-based chips over the next two years. The move confirms a timetable first reported by CNET News.com.

    Jobs' announcement formed the centerpiece of a keynote speech to Mac programmers attending the company's annual Worldwide Developer Conference here. The conference, expected to draw some 3,800 attendees this year, is a traditional venue for Apple product launches.

    In his speech, Jobs revealed that Apple has been developing all versions of OS X since its inception to run on Intel and PowerPC chips.

    "Mac OS X has been leading a secret double life the past five years," he said.

    The move to Intel marks a tectonic shift for Apple, which has used processors from IBM and Motorola (now Freescale Semiconductor) throughout the life of the Mac. However, the company has changed architectures before, shifting in the 1990s from Motorola's 68000 family of chips to the PowerPC architecture jointly developed by IBM and Motorola.

    Jobs also noted the significant effort required earlier this decade when Apple moved from Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X. Although the operating systems are only a digit apart, he noted that the move to a Unix-based system was a major shift. "This was a brain transplant," Jobs said.

    The CEO showed a demo of the Tiger operating system on an Intel-based machine, saying, "We've been running on an Intel system all morning."

    As for why Apple was making the shift, Jobs pointed both to past problems and to the PowerPC road map, which he said won't deliver enough performance at the low-power usages needed for powerful notebooks.

    Two years ago at the same conference, Jobs introduced the first G5-based Power Macs and promised developers that the company would have a 3GHz PowerMac within 12 months. The company still doesn't have a machine that fast. "We haven't been able to deliver," he said. Nor has Apple been able to introduce a G5-based laptop--something Jobs said "I think a lot of you would like."

    Things weren't looking better in the coming months, Jobs said, saying that IBM's PowerPC road map would only deliver about a fifth the performace per watt as a comparable Intel chip.

    Jobs said there are a lot of products Apple envisions for the coming years, but "we don't know how to build them with the future PowerPC road map."

    Jobs added that most of the necessary OS work has been done, but developers will have to do some work to make their applications work on Intel-based machines.

    Transcoding tool to the rescue
    Programs written will require various amounts of effort--from a few days of tweaking to months of rewriting--depending on the tools used to create them.

    Some software that's insulated from the underlying chips, such as widgets and Java applications, will work without modification, Jobs said.

    Going forward, Mac developers will be able to create universal binaries of their programs that will run on both types of chips.

    In the meantime, Apple has a transcoding tool called Rosetta that will allow programs written for PowerPC chips to run on Intel-based machines. "Every application is not going to be universal from Day 1," Jobs told the audience.

    A Microsoft executive said the company would create universal binaries with future versions of Office for the Mac. And Adobe Systems CEO Bruce Chizen told developers they can be "absolutely sure" his company would support Apple's transition.

    "The only question I have, Steve, is: What took you so long?" Chizen said.

    Also on Monday, Jobs said the next version of OS X, called Leopard, will be released in late 2006 or early 2007. That is the same time frame as Microsoft's next Windows update, dubbed Longhorn, he noted. Microsoft has said Longhorn will be released by late 2006.
    After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying 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," he said.
    Last edited by Hommie; 7th June 2005 at 10:39 PM.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The heart of the Abyss
    Posts
    2,307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by obviousdude
    and what about current apple users? devices may not work on the new machine?
    The new machines must have the device drivers ready. Just like when you move from Win98 to WinXP.

    Many of the older devices will not work as vendors will not release new drivers especially when these vendors want to you buy the newer stuff. As of today, the market share of Mac < market share of Linux.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Planet Eropagnis
    Posts
    2,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SNAG
    Who would get a dedicated Mac if a Wintel machine can also run OS X?
    Call me stubborn. Call me weird. But I will.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Hommie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jsbn
    Call me stubborn. Call me weird. But I will.
    Loyal, can?

  9. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    HOME
    Posts
    306

    Default

    I wonder will the "PcMac" be able to run windows and vice versa (i.e. pc runs mac os)?

    if it can, it means they are taking on microsoft windows. so maybe as counter offensive, microsoft may just buy adobe and make it not work on mac os. hee hee hee

    more PcMac viruses akan datang? (take the pressure off the windows supporter.)

  10. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    HOME
    Posts
    306

    Default

    oh no, then there will be lots of taiwanese brand again.

    Long live PINEAPPLE, ORANGE etc

  11. #31
    ClubSNAP Admin Darren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    8,510
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jsbn
    Call me stubborn. Call me weird. But I will.
    What if the Intel-based Mac is half the cost and twice the performance of the PPC-based Mac?

  12. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    HOME
    Posts
    306

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hommie
    After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying 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," he said.
    will it be easy for hackers to try to port mac os to the PC

  13. #33
    Senior Member Hommie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pcwe68
    I wonder will the "PcMac" be able to run windows and vice versa (i.e. pc runs mac os)?

    if it can, it means they are taking on microsoft windows. so maybe as counter offensive, microsoft may just buy adobe and make it not work on mac os. hee hee hee

    more PcMac viruses akan datang? (take the pressure off the windows supporter.)
    Adobe is not releasing Premiere Pro and DVD Encore on the Mac format for protesting against the onslaught of Apple's Final Cut Pro and iDVD.

  14. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hommie
    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," he said.
    I am sure that someone out there will DIY OS X on a PC clone. Meanwhile, if the PC business becomes so good that Mac may decide to challeng Window.

  15. #35

    Default

    Just my opinion, since OS X was built from ground up using a variant of Linux (can't recall which one already ) And linux core has well been implemented on x86 platform, then its quite easy for OS X run on x86, right.

    As you can see the market segment of x86 (Intel / AMD) PC, It definately attractive to Apple. Even SunOS is already place a feet into x86 now.

    Welcome! ... Macintosh on PC make my dreams comes true.
    1x HDD for WinXP 64
    1x HDD for Solaris 10 x86/64
    1x HDD for Mac OS X

    Cheers!
    Canon 40D|17-55 f/2.8 IS|100 f/2.8 Macro|135 f/2L|300 f/4L IS|430ex|BG-E2

  16. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Planet Eropagnis
    Posts
    2,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darren
    What if the Intel-based Mac is half the cost and twice the performance of the PPC-based Mac?
    I will still stick to the PowerPC-Mac as long as its working.

    Until the day my PowerPC-Mac croaks on me, dun think I'll go for an Intel-Mac.

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Planet Eropagnis
    Posts
    2,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hommie
    Loyal, can?
    Free to use any adjectives available. I'm used to anything. Expletives inclusive.

  18. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The heart of the Abyss
    Posts
    2,307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darren
    What if the Intel-based Mac is half the cost and twice the performance of the PPC-based Mac?
    Oh please . Apple is not even on the top 5 PC sellers (yes Apple is now a producer of PCs) and sell less than Acer (see at the bottom of this article). And Apple can break that high-margin addiction and beat Dell at their pricing when HP and IBM can't?

  19. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The heart of the Abyss
    Posts
    2,307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pcwe68
    I wonder will the "PcMac" be able to run windows and vice versa (i.e. pc runs mac os)?

    if it can, it means they are taking on microsoft windows. so maybe as counter offensive, microsoft may just buy adobe and make it not work on mac os. hee hee hee

    more PcMac viruses akan datang? (take the pressure off the windows supporter.)
    No. MacPC will officially run Windows but not around. Read the articles yourselves. MacPC will lock in. But heh

  20. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ST_sg
    Just my opinion, since OS X was built from ground up using a variant of Linux (can't recall which one already ) And linux core has well been implemented on x86 platform, then its quite easy for OS X run on x86, right.
    not a variant of linux...the mac os x kernel is based on bsd which is a variant of unix. linux is not unix, nor is it based on any official unix branch. linux is an independent unix-workalike. if anything it was influenced by andrew tenanbaum's minix.

    Quote Originally Posted by ST_sg
    As you can see the market segment of x86 (Intel / AMD) PC, It definately attractive to Apple. Even SunOS is already place a feet into x86 now.

    Welcome! ... Macintosh on PC make my dreams comes true.
    1x HDD for WinXP 64
    1x HDD for Solaris 10 x86/64
    1x HDD for Mac OS X

    Cheers!
    hehe..read last para of hommie's post.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •