Apple to switch to Intel chips: WSJ

Reuters ^

[Capt. Tom]

I was wondering if I was the only one who didn't see the connection.

From a WSJ article

Apple's decision, which comes after years of industry speculation and behind- the-scenes lobbying by Intel, could cause disruptions for users of the Macintosh. Among other things, application programs will have to be adapted to run on Intel's x86 chips, the calculating engines used in most personal computers that run Microsoft Corp.'s (MSFT) Windows operating system.

[chronic_loser]

Among other things, application programs will have to be adapted to run on Intel's x86 chips, the calculating engines used in most personal computers that run Microsoft Corp.'s (MSFT) Windows operating system.

Thanks for posting that. I would have, but I was recoving from the brick to my head that the earlier imbecile threw and thus was unable to post.

[Ron in Acreage]

will Apple now need pre and post Intel applications? 2 versions of the same software?

[I_dmc]

There was a booming clone Mac market until Steve Jobs came back to Apple and killed it.

[I_dmc]

What this really tells us is that Apple faces this regardless, which is the only time they consider hardware changes.

[chronic_loser]

why do so many people approach these Linux/Mac/Microsoft threads with the fervor of a religious fanatic?

For me it is the result of running a business for 14 years having spent countless hours stringing together a network of machines and applications and thus getting to know the absolute CRAP that MS puts out. We have moved all the machines in our office over to linux except for 3. I hardly ever have to stay down there and fix crap or reinstall AN OS. We hardly even have to reboot.

Goobs on free republic who have run to the end of their tether when they have logged on, collected a few activeX bots from surfing the web, checked their email, and collected a pretty picture from their grandkids have no clue as to WHY all us linux diehards just seem so touchy. If I explained it to you, you would not understand, so I won't try.

[flashbunny]

This won't do jack squat to microsoft.

All this is is a sign of distress for apple.

Surely you remember how apple fans crowed about how superior PPC chips are to intel and how the mac hardware is so superior to anything on the intel side.

Now Apple is going to use the same damn hardware they maligned for years.

I guess it either wasn't that superior, or apple is in more trouble than they are letting on.

[TexasTransplant]

 Here's a hint: don't try to engage someone in a battle of wits. You are clearly unarmed.

 

Thanks, but I don't take advice from losers.

TT

[chronic_loser]

I will type REAL SLOW for you so you can follow it: 1)MS has dominance in the desktop mkt for SOFTWARE. 2)MS has been in alliance with INTEL for years, thus the moniker "WINTEL" 3)Apple has had superior os and superior hardware for years, but has been buried by MS for a variety of reasons, one of which is the steep entry price of the mac. 4)Apple has gone to an "open source" version of its latest OS for the MAC, OSX and now "tiger". However, these will only run on a mac, which is still cost prohibitive. ergo: with APPLE going to an INTEL chip, there will be both downward pressure on the price of the MAC and ability to clone the MAC, so that a viable alternative to Windows can get out there.
Tried to keep the syllables short for you so you could follow it all. This is VERY relevant to MS. I am sorry you were so thickheaded that all you could do is recite "MS DOESN"T MAKE HARDWARE! DOH" but that is what poor policing of the gene pool does for a society. Have a great evening.

[Avenger]

"...why do so many people approach these Linux/Mac/Microsoft threads with the fervor of a religious fanatic?"

I have no idea what you are talking about, nevertheless you should switch to Linux while you still have the chance. The day of reckoning is at hand!

[Swordmaker]

Not another Apple -> Intel report based on the same original article... this time from the Wall Street Journal...

PING!

If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.

[Terpfen]

Sorry, I really doubt Apple is switching from the PowerPC to the Pentium, or one of its derivatives.

Most likely, Jobs will tomorrow announce a speed upgrade in PowerPC desktops, and that Intel will supply chips (not processors) for some other technology--maybe Intel chips will power the receptor box of the rumored Apple HDTV service?

Even if Apple uses the Pentium processor one of its derivatives, it's still not going to directly compete with Microsoft in the off-the-shelf OS market. Apple will continue building its own closed-format PCs, just with Intel CPUs instead of IBM.

Of course, if this IS true... why Intel? AMD has a major technological advantage over Intel, especially in dual core CPUs. And what about the Cell? I can see Apple solving laptop heat problems by using a Cell processor with less sub-processing units than desktop variants.

Tomorrow will tell.

[Golden Eagle]

The especially good thing about this is that Apple is already open source in its latest 2 operating systems.

Only a small portion, the best parts of the O/S are proprietary to Apple, and they know better than to give it away for free.

This comes at a particularly strategic juncture for the desktop, as linux is finally beginning to make some small inroads into M$oft's dominance on the desktop.

Which is one of the main reasons they're doing this, to get back at IBM. This could effect Linux more negatively than Windows, especially in the short term.

[Ron in Acreage]

F'off dick.

[HAL9000]

Say what now? Apple is a hardware manufacturer. They are not a software company. They lose money on their software just to sell their hardware.

No. Apple is more than a hardware manufacturer, and software is a profitable business for them.

[chronic_loser]

Hugs and kisses to you too, sweetie!

Get back to me when you have all four of those working neurons firing at once.

[chronic_loser]

Only a small portion, the best parts of the O/S are proprietary to Apple, and they know better than to give it away for free.

Actually, the core is completely open source. Many flavors of linux are proprietary, including versions of Xandros, Novell linux, and Suse Pro......., but you already knew that.

Which is one of the main reasons they're doing this, to get back at IBM. This could effect Linux more negatively than Windows, especially in the short term.

You have been in these linux/os threads long enough for me to pick up the following:
1) Open source is anti-capitalist, and no one will ever make money from it. The cant that people can make money SERVICING it and writing specific apps for it is propaganda from the west-haters.
2) Because it is socialist, all the leftist organizations (like Free Republic! he he) use it.
3) Every news event that comes out will be bad for it. Linux is collapsing, and may well pull down the entire computing infrastructure of the west with it.
4) Microsoft is a wonderful, innovative, success story which is continually reworking itself. It never publishes sloppy lazy code or engages in predatory copyright infringements ("hell yeah we stole it......, so sue us!"). It is a paragon of virtue that seeks to strive for new vistas of performance, rather than rest in its position of market dominance
5) Microsoft NEVER spreads FUD like sending Ballmer to an OS conference and obliquely hinting that OS systems may be infringing on patents that MS "has." They would never discourage competition by putting the idea in the heads of developers that "if you code for Linux, you might hear a knock at your door from our lawyers."
5) Finally, security "problems" in MS are not due to any problems with MS, but due to the sheer ubiquity of their position in the market. They would never "sit" on known exploit and refuse to release the info. Nor would they ever hire others to try and break Apple or Linux code. The idea that exploits are endemic in MS systems because of the systems themselves is a filthy communist lie, hatched in the bowels of the child sacrifice room that Torvalds keeps...., which is funded by the Marxists.

Did I miss anything?

[solitas]

and ability to clone the MAC

Um, easier said than done. Just because it's using the same instruction set doesn't mean one can do a garden-variety cloning - the I/O structure could be mapped VERY differently between the two boards (not to mention totally different support chips with their own particular needs).

Apple may be changing processors, but I don't think they'd spin-off an OS for microsoft-capable boards - they could have done that years ago if they'd wanted to.

[Admin Moderator]

To whom it may concern, please knock off the personal stuff.

[Golden Eagle]

I'm not necessarily opposed to "open source", like the BSD-based Apple Darwin core, because it can be business friendly as Apple, Sun and even Microsoft have shown.

What I am opposed to is supposed "free software", which uses Richard Stallman's GPL license, whereby the entire operating system has to be released under the GPL license, which requires anyone who modifies that code and attempts to distribute it must give it away for free.

Your list of claimed "proprietary" versions of Linux is false, because no version of Linux is proprietary, they have to give the entire work away to others, who can take that software, strip the name off, and resell or redistribute. China's government does it with Red Hat Linux, whereby they take the name Red Hat off, and rename it Red Flag instead, all legally. Can't do that with Apple OSX, or Sun Solaris, or Microsoft Windows, all of which contain some BSD licensed open source.

Clear?