Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

It'll be Intel inside Macs, Apple confirms
CINCINNATI POST ^

Posted on 06/07/2005 7:23:06 PM PDT by Happy2BMe

SAN FRANCISCO - After two decades of touting its Macintosh as a superior alternative to PCs based on Intel Corp. chips and Microsoft Corp. software, Apple Computer Inc. announced plans to switch the Mac to the same Intel chips that have powered Windows-based machines for years.

The deal, which has long been rumored, will help Apple better compete with the performance - and potentially the price - of Windows PCs. Still, Apple will continue to build its own computers and says it won't be licensing its software to other PC vendors.

Speaking to thousands of software developers Monday at Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference, Apple CEO Steve Jobs said the move was driven by the fact that its current chip suppliers - IBM Corp. and Freescale Semiconductor Inc., the former semiconductor unit of Motorola - could not promise the same horsepower and power efficiency as Intel, the world's largest semiconductor company.

Intel, on the other hand, has plans to make its chips more powerful without dramatically increasing electricity demands. That's critically important for notebook computers, which now rival desktops in U.S. sales

Jobs revealed that Apple has been working on the move for at least five years, creating two versions of its Mac OS X operating system for both the current Mac chips and those built by Intel. He said the transition will start by mid-2006, with the entire Mac product line switched by the end of 2007.

Calming fears that Apple's switch would ignite a revolt among its most important software programmers, Jobs was joined on stage by two major developers - Adobe Systems Inc. and Microsoft. Both announced that they would support Macs running the existing and new hardware.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: apple; godhatesmacs; ibm; intel; mac; macintel; macos; osx86; pc; windows; xp
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last
Awritey Mr. Steveie Jobs - what's NEXT?
1 posted on 06/07/2005 7:23:07 PM PDT by Happy2BMe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe

Might be worth considering a Mac this time around.....


2 posted on 06/07/2005 7:25:04 PM PDT by Bombardier (Let 'er buck!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe

I feel a mightly BOO-YAH coming on.


3 posted on 06/07/2005 7:26:39 PM PDT by Asclepius (protectionists would outsource our dignity and prosperity in return for illusory job security)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bombardier

Rumor is that Apple switched to Intel for the coming hardwired copyright protection. - I'll stick with AMD Thank You!


4 posted on 06/07/2005 7:28:17 PM PDT by NY.SS-Bar9 (DR #1692)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NY.SS-Bar9

well... Lexmark lost their case. =) Implications for Intel and the UberDRM Reischtag und Cyber Crystalnacht(read about it on Groklaw.net)


5 posted on 06/07/2005 7:33:00 PM PDT by PokeyJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe

I have a G4 dual. As a webmaster, I still use OS 9 because of the all software installed for the web. My OS X Tiger is used making DVD using iLife 5. I still do most all graphic work on 9 and by saving to an external drive I can still open it on X. I refuse to purchase all the software I would need for X because of the cost. (Around $2500 or more) Here is my concern, adding a dual X system, how in the hell will it work and still use OS 9? What a mess.


6 posted on 06/07/2005 7:33:58 PM PDT by Logical me (Oh, well!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe

But mac hardware is so superior to what's in PC's!!!!


7 posted on 06/07/2005 7:36:12 PM PDT by flashbunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe
"Dogs and Cats, sleeping together...."

Intel chips are running cooler at faster speeds. Kind of a shame, since I believe the PowerPC architecture is superior..

8 posted on 06/07/2005 7:38:03 PM PDT by Paradox ("You may disapprove of what I say, but I will defend to your death my right to say it")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Logical me

Based on what I've heard, you'll be SOL. There's to be no support for 68k code on the x86 Macs, nor any support for MacOS 9.


9 posted on 06/07/2005 7:38:17 PM PDT by sourcery ("Compelling State Interest" is the refuge of judicial activist traitors against the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Paradox
PowerPC architecture is superior

It is, but it's not relevant. No one was or is willing to invest sufficient money in either PPC chip development or manufacturing capability to effectively compete against Intel for desktop CPUs. Super computers, very-high-end workstations and embedded processors are another matter, however.

10 posted on 06/07/2005 7:40:52 PM PDT by sourcery ("Compelling State Interest" is the refuge of judicial activist traitors against the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Logical me; Bombardier
Am I the only 'old-timer' around here or does anyone else remember "The MAC-In-A-Box" emulator that was so popular for the Atari 520/1040 MegaST in 1986?

I used to love the MAC back then. The only thing I like about it today is that it does not have Bill Gates name stamped on it and those huge LCD monitors they use are to die for.

11 posted on 06/07/2005 7:42:38 PM PDT by Happy2BMe ("Viva La Migra" - LONG LIVE THE BORDER PATROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe

The good news is, VirtualPC will now be able to run Windows applications on MacOS X just about as fast as they run natively on Windows.

The bad news is that software developers will have much less reason to offer MacOS-specific versions of their software, since Mac owners can just use VirtualPC to run the software.


12 posted on 06/07/2005 7:43:21 PM PDT by sourcery ("Compelling State Interest" is the refuge of judicial activist traitors against the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sourcery
It is, but it's not relevant.

Quite true. The only guys who worry are those who write compilers, since no one really messes much with Assembly language. I cut my teeth on the 6502, and was drooling at the prospect of getting at the NS32032, perhaps the sweetest cpu, machine language wise, of all time, but from a practical standpoint, the PPC is to Intel, what Betamax was to VHS.

13 posted on 06/07/2005 7:45:30 PM PDT by Paradox ("You may disapprove of what I say, but I will defend to your death my right to say it")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sourcery; Logical me
There's to be no support for 68k code on the x86 Macs, nor any support for MacOS 9.

Doesn't mean his dual G4 is suddenly going to stop working - if it's doing what it needs to do, keep it going. I see no reason to believe that x86 Macs will suddenly stop supporting network shares, so use the G4 and save your work to a shared drive.

14 posted on 06/07/2005 7:51:09 PM PDT by general_re ("Frantic orthodoxy is never rooted in faith, but in doubt." - Reinhold Niebuhr)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe
This will allow the viruses written for Windows to be machine compatible with the Intel-Macs.
15 posted on 06/07/2005 7:56:55 PM PDT by still_learning (The United Nations is simply Trotskyite plan B)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: still_learning
What's a virus?

:~)

16 posted on 06/07/2005 8:00:19 PM PDT by Happy2BMe ("Viva La Migra" - LONG LIVE THE BORDER PATROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe
Am I the only 'old-timer' around here or does anyone else remember "The MAC-In-A-Box" emulator that was so popular for the Atari 520/1040 MegaST in 1986?

I remember. It was originally called the "MacSack" until Apple made them change the name to Magic Sack, and forced them to modify the device so that it would only work off the original Mac ROMs, not burned EEPROMs.
17 posted on 06/07/2005 8:01:28 PM PDT by sittnick (There's no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Paradox
but from a practical standpoint, the PPC is to Intel, what Betamax was to VHS.

Which would make the Alpha chip the Quasar video tape format.
18 posted on 06/07/2005 8:05:33 PM PDT by sittnick (There's no salvation in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sittnick
You got it! I picked one up for $20 and had me a MAC Original. It would even format and read MACOS 1 and 2 floppy diskettes.

(Atari's Jack Tramiel loved it.)

19 posted on 06/07/2005 8:06:24 PM PDT by Happy2BMe ("Viva La Migra" - LONG LIVE THE BORDER PATROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: sourcery

> The bad news is that software developers will have much less reason to offer MacOS-specific versions of their software, since Mac owners can just use VirtualPC to run the software.

Software applications have always, and always will, rule the computer world.


20 posted on 06/07/2005 8:23:42 PM PDT by Rate_Determining_Step (US Military - Draining the Swamp of Terrorism since 2001!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson