Apple Decided For Intel?

[heavensounds 0]

Some time ago news came out, that Apple is breaking a contract with IBM company, which has till now produced all the processors for all of the apple personal computers. Now roomers became reality and Intel is becomin a new official processor supplier for Apple.

Till the summer 2006 processors in computers for less-demanding users (eMac, Mac Mini, ...) will be replaced and somewhere in the middle of 2007 Intel chips are goin to be in the Power versions of Macintoshs also. It is interesting, if Apple will change to x86 and follow the rest of PC manufacturers (Dell, HP, IBM, ...). We are about to see if and how is this goin to influence Apples sucess, till then you have time to read
the official news.

greetz:rolleyes:

[badinfluence 0]

yah, that's interesting news about! Apple said that it would be lo-fi version of apple computer.. i was wondering how they gonna code for the instruction-set as stable as what os x does... i'm on tracking about cahsing this news..

[ameribass 0]

Yes, I have also heard about this. A very interesting and bold move by Apple. They are to substitute the chips first in the Mac Mini and then will move on to the Power Macs, of course this will take some time, so don't get your hopes up about getting the computers any time soon. Anyway, only time will tell if Apple's move will pay off or not.AmeriBass

[badinfluence 0]

no, apple said that they always testing with intel all the time of OS X integration.. The news said that they have shown the demo running on tiger intel base power pc. the CEO of apple said about these

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.

"We've been running on an Intel system all morning."

that's was since 1990, os 9 to os X. what a good quote, "secret double life"...
you can have more infomation on CNet apple's article. so, see how Mac machines going in next 2 year up!!

[biscuitrat 0]

Well, I think Apple can only benefit from this. Intel's a much better choice than IBM. However, you have to imagine that IBM is a bit letdown. But they couldn't keep up to speed so they got what was coming to them.

[Florisjuh 0]

Mmmh what is the big difference between the ibm processors and the intel processors? :\ Anyway I dont like macs so I dont really care which processor they put in, but would an intel proccessor make the mac compatible with x86 programs / game mods?

[E-Sector 0]

Strange! Power PC:s are faster! It was therefor Microsoft switched from Intel and nvidea (Xbox) and choosed IBM and ATI, just like the GameCube (Xbox 360).

[Lozbo 0]

So what will be the actual main difference? Performance? Will it be slower or faster?

[DogEater008 0]

mac is currently making MAC operating systme for PC. My brother downloaded the beta version and installed it on his laptop. It worked like a mac. The only thing was, it only supports the newest type of INTEL chipset. So he had to run an emulator for it to work. So when te mac os comes out, anyone that has an old computer, they won't be able to install the operating system. Unless they buy a new system... most likely from mac.

[Galahad 0]

I don't understand why people take this as some sort of catastrophe? It's obvious that IBM's PowerPC processor didn't add up to the task (though I don't see how, as Mac on 500MHz, beat any PC, Intel and AMD running at twice the speed), and people at Apple decided to go with diferent manufacturer.badinfluence, CPU instruction set has nothing to do with stability of the system. Coding has. It's not that Intel or AMD are ustable. No, it's Windows, Windows is unstable. And since people at Apple have much experience in coding stable programs, I doubt they will have any problem migrating to Intel. Also, I think Mac will try to stay original, and non x86 compatible, even though processor itself will be x86. But maybe Apple is trying to enter mainstream market?One other thing. Mac is kind of expensive, atleast in my country. So, maybe going with mass-production CPU, it's cost will be lower?As someone said smartly, only time will tell what will happen.

[ProxyMan 0]

One other thing. Mac is kind of expensive, atleast in my country. So, maybe going with mass-production CPU, it's cost will be lower?

 

As someone said smartly, only time will tell what will happen.

195768[/snapback]

Well i believe that the price will go down, but not by much. If you know what the other parts an apple has it would explain, 17 in flat screen ($500) + G4processor($145) + 50 gig hd ( $100) + motherboard($135) + 512MB ram ( $125 <--what i paid for it) + keyboard/mouse ( $15) that all adds up to $1030 which was almost the price of my computer. I paid $1400 for it. (its a powerbook G4 and i was using it for the specs) So its not the fact that its expensive.. its just its parts are expensive.

[believer 0]

I am not really a fan of ready made systems like Mac/Dell?IBM and I always build my own hence this news will not affect me that much. I am more inclined though on one post given about the Mac Operating System, given a chance I'd love to try this one just to know what really is the difference between Mac and MS products