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

Skip to comments.

Going for Broke [Will Apple and Intel merge?]
PBS ^ | June 9, 2005 | By Robert X. Cringely

Posted on 06/09/2005 8:17:17 PM PDT by ScuzzyTerminator

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last

1 posted on 06/09/2005 8:17:18 PM PDT by ScuzzyTerminator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ScuzzyTerminator
"Apple and Intel are merging."

Boy, that would sure be Intel's loss.

2 posted on 06/09/2005 8:19:52 PM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScuzzyTerminator
Apple and Intel are merging.

Not a chance. it was really weak when intel got DEC semiconductor division (alpha). But a merger of a software and hardware company is a very bad thing. It would also hurt Apple a lot more than Intel, and Jobs has never been the kind of guy to sell out, his ego is way to big.
3 posted on 06/09/2005 8:30:11 PM PDT by ProudVet77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScuzzyTerminator

What's amazing is that anyone would pay Cringely to write this stuff.


4 posted on 06/09/2005 8:30:31 PM PDT by VeniVidiVici (In God We Trust. All Others We Monitor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy

An extremely unintelligent analysis.


5 posted on 06/09/2005 8:34:01 PM PDT by rlmorel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ScuzzyTerminator
TWO OBVIOUS ERRORS:

1. Intel is already shipping, in cheap-ish systems, CPUs that have the EM64T extensions, which is essentially a clone of the AMD64 instructions. Close enough to properly be called a 64-bit chip.

2. The Cell processor has several flaws vs. a G5 or G4 chip, but the biggie is: the Cell does not do out-of-order execution. That is a show-stopper and means that a 3Ghz Cell CPU would in most cases be outperformed by a 1.7GHz G4 (or so), let alone a G5.

6 posted on 06/09/2005 8:46:42 PM PDT by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ikka

Those are indeed errors, and Intel is NOT buying Apple ... however, it's a FACT that Apple would be switching to Intel chips, phasing in late in 2006 and completing the transition in 2007.

So ....


7 posted on 06/09/2005 8:50:18 PM PDT by TexasGreg ("Democrats Piss Me Off")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ScuzzyTerminator
In one word: NO!!!

The reason is simple: it could end up running afoul of both the Department of Justice Antitrust Division and the European Union equivalent in no time flat.

8 posted on 06/09/2005 8:53:46 PM PDT by RayChuang88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScuzzyTerminator
Makes ya go Hmmmmm though doesn't it?

He does raise some interesting points.

Cheers,

knews hound

http://knewshound.blogspot.com/
9 posted on 06/09/2005 9:16:09 PM PDT by knews_hound (Out of the NIC ,into the Router, out to the Cloud....Nothing but 'Net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScuzzyTerminator

Okay - if this analysis is wrong, then why *did* Apple go with Intel?


10 posted on 06/09/2005 9:25:16 PM PDT by WOSG (Liberating Iraq - http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ikka
The HP theory seems to be off based as well. They are appearing to be moving to diversifying the chips they are using by using more AMD chips, plus giving guarantying full capability with Ubuntu.
11 posted on 06/09/2005 9:29:37 PM PDT by neb52
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ScuzzyTerminator

My theory is that Apple will be getting out of the hardware business altogether. Which is something they should have done a long time ago.


12 posted on 06/09/2005 9:43:20 PM PDT by tonyinv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScuzzyTerminator

I pray the theory of this article is correct. I'd love to see Apple/Intel


13 posted on 06/09/2005 9:44:42 PM PDT by HallowThisGround (http://www.opiniontimes.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WOSG

I don't see a merger in the future, but it has two motivations: a direct challenge to Microsoft, and the fact IBM was dilatory in getting a laptop usable version of the G5.

The first aspect of the move was set was set up with OS X, which is really a bunch of extremely cool and user-friendly utilities and a GUI running in a UNIX environment. I suspect the whole thing was written in a dialect of C (as most variants of the UNIX kernel and most UNIX specific software are), so it should be trivial for them to port it to another processor. And, on the financial side by the success of the iPod and iTunes. The iMac Mini was a teaser to the mass market, and is slated to be the first Intel chip Apple (in the accounts I read elsewhere).

Basically this represents the challenge Linux was supposed to mount, but never could because it had no strategic center: a variant of UNIX for Intel chips, but this time with a really sweet GUI and a host of good applications already written.

If they do the full port so that Mac OS X can be installed on any recent Pentium machine, plenty of folks sick to death of all the Windows security issues and instabilities will take the plunge.


14 posted on 06/09/2005 9:54:36 PM PDT by The_Reader_David (Christ is Ascended! The Lord is gone up with a shout!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

Apple/Intel ping...


15 posted on 06/09/2005 10:08:05 PM PDT by tubebender (Growing old is mandatory...Growing up is optional)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000; antiRepublicrat; Action-America; eno_; Glenn; bentfeather; BigFinn; byset; Bubba; ...
Apple and Intel merger possible? Cringely thinks so. PING!

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

16 posted on 06/09/2005 10:14:19 PM PDT by Swordmaker (tagline now open, please ring bell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

"Apple and Intel are merging."

ba-har-har-hardy, har-har.


17 posted on 06/09/2005 10:33:16 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (FR profiled updated Tuesday, May 10, 2005. Fewer graphics, faster loading.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WOSG

Because IBM couldn't push the PowerPC in the ways Apple wanted (no 3Ghz G5 or PowerBook G5 yet); because Apple apparently thinks Intel is a more reliable long-term partner than AMD and IBM; and because IBM was probably getting less sensitive to Apple's demands, due to IBM supplying the CPUs for all three of the next-gen game consoles.


18 posted on 06/09/2005 11:22:17 PM PDT by Terpfen (New Democrat Party motto: les enfant terribles)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
The first aspect of the move was set was set up with OS X, which is really a bunch of extremely cool and user-friendly utilities and a GUI running in a UNIX environment. I suspect the whole thing was written in a dialect of C

The base kernel is C and some hardware drivers are written in C++. Almost all of the cool stuff is written in Objective-C, which is C with a few object-oriented extensions added - syntax is similar to SmallTalk.

19 posted on 06/10/2005 2:15:42 AM PDT by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
"Okay - if this analysis is wrong, then why *did* Apple go with Intel?"

A pure guess of course but I think IBM wants out of the chip business. Note their recent decision to sell their PC hardware operation. Doubt if IBM sees the return on R&D to continue development of the chip line. If Apple has 3-5% marketshare that probably doesn't give IBM much, if any, return. It's possible IBM uses the chips in other boxes, but still, they can't be doing that much volume and margins in the chip business are slim.

A merger would also crank off a lot of current Intel customers who would view them as competition and might make AMD a more acceptable solution. Does Intel want to lose, say, Dell to AMD? Ouch.

Plus as noted earlier by someone else a merger might trigger an anti-trust problem. It was speculated that 10 years ago when AMD was in a struggling second place Intel could have dropped prices and put them out of business, but choose not to, preferring to keep them around to keep the feds off their backs.

20 posted on 06/10/2005 2:27:56 AM PDT by Proud_texan (We have met the enemy and he is us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 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