Results 1 to 18 of 18
Thread: Apple going to Intel chips!!
June 10th, 2005 #1
Apple going to Intel chips!!
For those of you out of the apple loop this is a major event. Intel has not been at all happy with Microsoft as they have been using AMD as a leverage arms against Intel in terms of pricing etc.
Intel will be merging in time with Apple now and this spells some serious trouble for Microsoft. IBM above all has been having problems in also developing reliable chips in the G5 range for the powerbooks and with laptops outselling desktops in 2004 you can begin to understand why Apple needs to move on.
The thing I am wondering though is that if anyone is looking to buy a mac now are you going to hold off until the intels come out?
Hide this ad by registering as a memberJune 10th, 2005 #2
What the HELL are you talking about?
Where are you getting your information because they have bull flowing from all orifaces!
Apple is displeased with IBM because they promised 3ghz a year after their 2ghz chips for the G5 and still havn't delivered it. So. Cue Intel. Apple will be using x86 (Intel) processors by sometime in 2006.
What this DOESN'T mean:
Apple and Intel merging.
Apple and Intel exclusive.
Microsoft/Windows/Longhorn not being on Intel computers.
What this MIGHT mean:
Apple OSs being able to be installed on "PCs"
Microsofts OSs being able to be installed on "Macs"
What this DOES mean:
Any real hardware distinction between Macs and PCs is dead. Its all about the OS now.
Apple will be trying it's hardest to stop you from installing Longhorn on their "Macs"
Microsoft just not caring cause Apple users give them lots of money by buying Office.
By the way. If you want GOOD technology news try ArsTechnica.
Last edited by wassermelone; June 11th, 2005 at 12:17 AM.
June 11th, 2005 #3Microsoft just not caring cause Apple users give them lots of money by buying Office.
June 11th, 2005 #4
Toaster, lol, take a deep breath man. You know for sure as much as anyone else online, which is NOTHING. Everyone is still wondering why Apple announced this a year ahead of the change, and it isn't because of third party software devs, they have mathmatica to ensure any and all problems are delt with.
June 11th, 2005 #5Originally Posted by Presence
We do know things. Go read the articles on that website I linked. They use linked press releases and stuff.
Plus whats up with people telling me to take a chill? Perhaps they should stop posting baseless nonsense. It raises my blood pressure! Bastards!
June 11th, 2005 #6
I am so looking forward to the day when all computers work 'the same'...everyone can go out and choose their OS...but we'll have NO PROBLEMS making the stupid machines work TOGETHER! Microsoft did us a huge favor getting a "consistent OS" back in the '80s. This is just one more piece in the puzzle. Thank you Apple. And finally we can stop bickering about PC vs. Mac...boy, that'll be the day.
Let's all be friends
Those who make religion their god will not have God for their religion.
Crit for a Crit: My Online Sketchbook of Super Power Fun
June 11th, 2005 #7
Note that even though you'll be able to run Windows and Mac OS X on the same computer, that doesn't mean that all Windows programs will start working in Mac OS X, and vice versa. The programs will still have to be compiled for the OS.
It's good to see that Microsoft is finally getting some OS competition. I wouldn't be surprised to see some people switching to OS X (or at least trying it out or running both Windows and OS X on the same computer), simply because it's easier to use, looks better and is more secure (for those who use windows and run any random files they stumble upon, or open all e-mail attachments they receive, or don't have a firewall, or....). With any luck Longhorn will be even better, and will push Apple to improve Mac OS even more.
June 11th, 2005 #8Registered User
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Thanked 19 Times in 17 Posts
i must say i don't really give a rats ass bout all that stuff since i'm happily still running win2k.
i'd even say that my life as user wouldn't really be affected too much if i would switch back to win98 tomorrow...
June 12th, 2005 #9
June 12th, 2005 #10
Works either way. I use both platforms because they're both tools of the trade. Whatever it is, if some software uses MacOS and some uses Windows, then we just gotta do whatever it takes to learn those tools and arm ourselves with knowledge to make the transition as smooth as possible. Because we're artists and our clients pay us to deliver.
The only real issue would be Mac fanboys starting to worry they might lose their "niche" status in the consumer electronic playground. Which I honestly don't care about.
There are 3 sides to every story. Yours, mine and THE TRUTH.
June 12th, 2005 #11
June 12th, 2005 #12Originally Posted by Pontemonti
**Finished Work Thread **Process Thread **Edges Tutorial
Crash Course for Artists, Illustrators, and Cartoonists, NYC, the 2013 Edition!
"Work is more fun than fun."
"Art is supposed to punch you in the brain, and it's supposed to stay punched."
June 12th, 2005 #13Originally Posted by Elwell
And if more people run their OS, they have several advantages...iTunes is the default media player -- people purchase music through their store and they will probably want an iPod to play the music (it is possible to play the protected aac files on an ipod, right?)...and some might even consider purchasing a mac just because they like the OS.
I just hope Apple aren't shooting themselves in the foot...if they don't make it possible to run Mac OS X on any PC, someone else will, and that someone may be making money on it (for example by selling a component for your PC so you can get it to work). Or some warez group will just remove the "bad" parts...in which case Apple won't sell a single copy of their OS to PC users, even though lots of people may be running it.
June 12th, 2005 #14
Despite how hard they might try (because they will still want to differentiate themselves)... Apple will probably fail at barring people from installing their OS on other systems, or even Windows on their system.
Considering how much virtual OS software has improved over the last couple years even in regards to x86 to PPC or vice versa... I somehow doubt that having them both on x86 will make it harder... or hard at all.
June 12th, 2005 #15
All I know is that I'm totally getting a 64 bit machine for college. Yay for the future and all that. I'm not about to be caught with my processor's pants down when the OS shift ocurrs, and the more options I have, the better, especially given this news.
June 13th, 2005 #16
I actually managed to get Mac OS X to install and run in Virtual PC 2004, on my Windows XP machine. But it was terribly slow (who would have known, I only have 512 MB RAM in total, so I gave OS X 256 MB...heh ), and whenever I run Virtual PC I just want to switch back to the real OS because you are so limited (no sound, no network...).
64 bit CPUs may be interesting today if you're doing lots of high-precision calculations. It does make a difference if an instruction can be done in one operation instead of two, but the program has to be compiled for a 64 bit CPU. Generally speaking, I guess your computer will be faster when you're doing "advanced stuff" and everything is compiled for 64 bits. But it won't make much difference for normal office applications...
June 13th, 2005 #17
From what I heard they dont intend OSX to be able to run on non-mac hardware . I believe Intel will probably come up with some kind of proprietary chip for Apple. Apple will still be building machines, its all gonna be proprietary.
June 13th, 2005 #18Originally Posted by Mpeirson
As we said. Its likely they will try... but its also likely they can't stop em.