Slashdot Mirror
Apple/Intel Speculation Running Rampant
6031769 writes "ZD Net are reporting a rumour that Steve Jobs will announce Apple are going to move to an Intel chip base at their worldwide developer conference today. Still just a rumour, but could this be the masterstroke Apple have been promising or is it a blind alley?" Lots of submissions about this one, but no one knows for sure - there have been stories about how AMD is hurt by this - but I think my favorite debunking of it is the piece by John Gruber on Daring Fireball.
This is all just rumors to get Apple users upset. Its being going since the 1980's, and its never happened. The G5 is too much of an asset to dump for the hell that is the P4. Even diehard Windows users are all migrating to AMD64 these days, Intel is just trying to get some free advertising and FUD to play with.
Do you play with your Willy?
At this point pretty much everyone is saying something about it: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&lr=&tab=nn&ie=UT F-8&ncl=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4612 951.stm
the worst thing in the world would be for a Mac to have an "Intel inside" sticker on it, or even on the packaging. but as annoying as their stupid campaign is, would Intel make an exception to their rule for Apple? Apple's design is one of their biggest assets so I can't see them giving in either.
If they are going to announce it today, why don't we just wait and see instead of posting that "it could happen" right before?
Can you say binary incompatability?
When Apple last changed processor families, there was a big problem with binary incompatability. Needless to say, there were a lot of very pissed off Apple users. The transition from PowerPC to Intel could be very painful given two different processor families.
The LAST thing Apple needs to do is to piss off it's user base.
Don't anthropomorphize computers, they don't like it.
I'm a bit sentimental about PPC, but I guess this move probably makes some sense for Apple (see here)
I have a few questions that I haven't seen raised anywhere else though:
1. Will Windows run on these machines?
2. Will Apple offer some kind of Window compatibility using something like WINE?
3. What will happen to Yellow Dog Linux?
But, you know, we have at least five or ten years of people debunking this particular rumor. Describing this list as the best ever is jumping the gun a little. Maybe we'll have another five years of the same, and then we can judge better.
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
I heard Dvorak on the episode 8 twitcast basically bragging he "called" this x86 switch a couple of years back.
he's completely extatic about it, and discuss the x86 switch as a done deal.
He's also going off on his blog.
I'm still not sold, and the debunk arguments by Gruber seems reasonable.
The Register weighs in with two articles this morning.
Apple shifts to Intel: What is all the fuss about
Apple to announce Intel 'Switch' - WSJ
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
Switching the Mac over now would be really weird: for years Apple struggled with the G4's performance - then I might have understood. Now they've got IBM as a partner - one of the world leaders in CPU architecture, silicon fabrication, etc. It would seem truly bizare to ditch out from PPC at this point, especially given IBM's huge commitment to PPC world domination (and their manifest triumphs over Intel in another volume market - games consoles).
Using an XScale, I could understand. Intel are *the* market leader in high end portable processors at the moment (try to find a powerful PDA that *doesn't* have an XScale). An XScale would be the sensible choice for an Apple PDA or, indeed, the iPod / Phone combo that has been so talked about.
This "leak" might about buying Intel might a be deliberate publicity stunt but I find it really hard to believe the Mac will move away from PPC in the foreseeable future.
The third possibility is that Apple will introduce something new - something else they've not mentioned before. An ultra Apple / Windows friendly UNIX server? An appliance computer (e.g. a cross between iPod and a {web,file,database}server?) A set top box (*cough* *pippin* *cough*)? Personally, I think Apple could be good with appliance computing.
Apple is building an updated version of OS X called "Mac OS X Extreme", which uses the Windows NT kernel as its underpinning (essentially Darwin is going away, and being replaced by the lower layers of Windows XP, witha BSD-type POSIX layer for reverse compatability)
This will ensure Apple can still produce high quality and different computers (it'll still have the OS X GUI, for example) while migrating to more popular, and hence better tested, cheaper, technologies. The first machines will be Pentium M based, and we'll see the Mac mini Extreme in 2006, with others following using a forthcoming so-far unannounced 64-bit version of the Pentium.
These are exciting times.
Here goes: 1. Yes, they switch, and yes, OS X will still be closed to Apple machines. 2. Apple will provide hooks for all published MS API's, allowing 90% of Windows programs to run natively within OS X on Intel. 3. Apple will open source the Cocoa API's. They will provide the API's for Windows, leaving others to port them to Linux, etc. 4. Steve will claim to have saved the world by freeing the world from Windows.
The AMD link isn't really about how it'll hurt AMD, but about how Apple couldn't choose AMD because AMD can't reliably keep up with that level of demand.
That's a lot more interesting/reasonable, since a switch to Intel architecture for Apple would be *good news* for AMD, since then going from Intel-made chips to AMD ones would be possibile sometime later.
The "debunking" link sounds reasonable -- "Here's my bet: Intel is going to produce PowerPC chips for Apple. But I'm only betting one dollar." Another possibility along those lines would be that Apple is switching to Intel *graphics chips*, which would make sense given the comment in the original rumors that the switch would happen on low-end computers first.
Fact: NeXT used an i860 (64-bit RISC) graphics accelerator. Manufactured by Intel.
Fact: Intel manufactures ARM (Advanced RISC Machine) processors.
Intel knows a thing or about RISC chips. Intel manufacturing PPCs is far more probable than Apple jumping to x86.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
Here's my theory:
If any of this is true, which I'm not at all sure it is, why does everyone think it's going to be an x86 chip?
Apple IIRC has the ability to license the PowerPC chip to others. What if Apple is licensing PowerPC to Intel because IBM can't deliver? No incompatability. The current chips are already made by two differrent companies.
If there is ANY fact to this rumor, and it all seems to be rehash of the cnet story, this where where I think the most logical answer lies.
-Pete
Soccer Goal Plans
It seems likely that this frenzy of speculation will affect the stock price in the short term. It seems like no matter what Apple announces at WWDC today, the headline will be related to this speculation. The folks who drive the stock price probably don't read Slashdot, and the headline "Apple did or did not switch to Intel" may drive some pretty big buy/sell movement as soon as the keynote is over.
Which direction will it move? If it moves down, how long will it take to recover?
There is enough uncertainty in such a move that it sure seems to me -- a slashdot reader who doesn't affect stock prices -- that it could only move down if such a switch is announced. However, when I think about it from the perspective of a trader who probably doesn't know all that much beyond the headline that shows up on his pager at say 11:01 PST today, I wonder if a switch would be considered good, and a series of PowerPC related announcements would be considered as a sell indicator.
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
He's busy preparing for his keynote, duh.
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
1) Chip supply. IBM and Motorola have had repeated problems supplying Apple with the number of chips that Apple needs. Intel will not have this problem.
IBM is now something like two years behind on its promised 3 Ghz chips.
2) Laptops. Apple needs a low-heat G-5 chip for it's laptops. From all accounts, it may be as long as two years before IBM or Motorola will be able to provide these chips.
3) Cost. Apple, according to today's NY Times, in its latest renegotiations with IBM wanted a discount on the price of the PowerPC chips. IBM essentally said forget about it.
4) There's no way Apple will NOT have a way for users to run their old applications on the new Intel/Macs. There will be some form of emulation available -- count on it.
- dj
Microsoft bought Connectix (authors of the VirtualPC software that lets Macs emulate Wintel boxes) and then quickly dropped their main product for no readily aparrent reason (other than pure spite). ... This leaves Apple with a VirtualPC shaped hole in their 'switch' marketing campaign.
Really? I guess my mind must be playing tricks on me; I was sure I had a copy of Microsoft Virtual PC 7.0 on my Mac...
Some posts argue that Apple switching to Intel would mean switching byte endianness, and that would piss off a whole slew of Mac developers and require enough software rewrites to be extremely uncomfortable.
That's a good arguement, but it's interesting to note that IA64 can go both ways. I'm not saying they'd go IA64, but that Intel is capable of making that a non-issue.
Personally, I think this while notion is awesome entertainment no matter what happens. And I don't think Apple will be going Intel any time soon.
I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it.
The case for the Itanium is that the reason it failed in the Wintel world was the difficulty of programming for it, notably its ramant use of out of order instruction capability. And when Windows did not really embrace it that was the death sentence. But Apple has a unique position of controlling the hardware and the OS. Thus they could potentially master this beast. Going Itanium could let them leapfrog the x86 world and have more headroom for growth. I also wonder if the itanium has, like the Power series, support for both big/little endian, thus making the transition easier?
Pentium-M. Well this is no brainer. They need a new chip for the laptop and there's none on the horizon. The interesting thing here is that if they went with a hybrid strategy of Pentium-M in the laptops and G5 in the desktops they have a good transistion strategy available. The graphic artisits and application-specific power users will not settle for emulation of their favorite applications. Thus they have to keep G5 on the desktop till all the applications like Photoshop and Maya have swithced over.. But that class of folks wont be using Laptops as their main machine. And the laptop users might be well satisfied with a fast pentium-M machine that occasionally had to run some applications in a slower emulation mode.
Surely intel has some response to the Cell. Are they going to cede the entire video game/ digital hub market to xbox, sony and the cell? I suspect not. But to enter that market they need a partner. And who better than the maker of the ipod and the only company with a coherent home digital hub strategy (think iLife). Well that would be apple. You cant argue market share dictates windows since the ipod proves that wrong and Microsoft already has its bets on the xbox.
So maybe this is about a video console and not about general purpose computers???
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
The Itanium supports both big and little endian. thus switching to this processor would be simpler than X86.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
....gossip rag.
Seriously though, I wrote the Inq piece, and I do have it from an independant source, and I had the info before CNet broke theirs, so it isn't a case of someone seeing CNet and running to me. I didn't get times though, which is why I was waiting.
On a related note, it would not surprise me if the be-turtlenecked megalomaniac had a hissy fit (a given), and put off the announcement. He can't cancel it, but putting it off to screw the journos would not be out of character.
There is more to this story though, and I will put some up as soon as I get bac from Computex, plane in 6 hours. Aargh.
-Charlie
Your guess is as good as mine as to whether this pic is real... I'm guessing no. But regardless, if it's real, wow, if it's not, it's pretty funny:
http://forum.macosx.nl/album_pic.php?pic_id=7142
-Daniel
Apple to Use Intel Microprocessors Beginning in 2006
WWDC 2005, SAN FRANCISCO--June 6, 2005--At its Worldwide Developer Conference today, Apple® announced plans to deliver models of its Macintosh® computers using Intel microprocessors by this time next year, and to transition all of its Macs to using Intel microprocessors by the end of 2007. Apple previewed a version of its critically acclaimed operating system, Mac OS® X Tiger, running on an Intel-based Mac® to the over 3,800 developers attending CEO Steve Jobs' keynote address. Apple also announced the availability of a Developer Transition Kit, consisting of an Intel-based Mac development system along with preview versions of Apple's software, which will allow developers to prepare versions of their applications which will run on both PowerPC and Intel-based Macs.
"Our goal is to provide our customers with the best personal computers in the world, and looking ahead Intel has the strongest processor roadmap by far," said Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO. "It's been ten years since our transition to the PowerPC, and we think Intel's technology will help us create the best personal computers for the next ten years."
"We are thrilled to have the world's most innovative personal computer company as a customer," said Paul Otellini, president and CEO of Intel. "Apple helped found the PC industry and throughout the years has been known for fresh ideas and new approaches. We look forward to providing advanced chip technologies, and to collaborating on new initiatives, to help Apple continue to deliver innovative products for years to come."
"We plan to create future versions of Microsoft Office for the Mac that support both PowerPC and Intel processors," said Roz Ho, general manager of Microsoft's Macintosh Business Unit. "We have a strong relationship with Apple and will work closely with them to continue our long tradition of making great applications for a great platform."
"We think this is a really smart move on Apple's part and plan to create future versions of our Creative Suite for Macintosh that support both PowerPC and Intel processors," said Bruce Chizen, CEO of Adobe.
The Developer Transition Kit is available starting today for $999 to all Apple Developer Connection Select and Premier members. Further information for Apple Developer Connection members is available at developer.apple.com. Intel plans to provide industry leading development tools support for Apple later this year, including the Intel C/C++ Compiler for Apple, Intel Fortran Compiler for Apple, Intel Math Kernel Libraries for Apple and Intel Integrated Performance Primitives for Apple.
Intel (www.intel.com http://www.intel.com/> ), the world's largest chip maker, is also a leading manufacturer of computer, networking and communications products.
Apple ignited the personal computer revolution in the 1970s with the Apple II and reinvented the personal computer in the 1980s with the Macintosh. Today, Apple continues to lead the industry in innovation with its award-winning desktop and notebook computers, OS X operating system, and iLife and professional applications. Apple is also spearheading the digital music revolution with its iPod portable music players and iTunes online music store.
10:26am PDT - "Now, let's go to the big topic: Transitions."
10:27am PDT - 1994-1996 Moto 68K -> PowerPC. "I wasn't hear then, but from everything I hear the team did a great job." 2001-2003: OS9 - OS X.
10:28am PDT - "It's time for a third transition. And yes, (puts up slide that says): It's true." Next slide is one word: "Why?"
10:29am PDT - "I stood up two years ago and promised this (3.0G PowerMac), and we haven't been able to deliver." Steve says it's bigger than that, though. No roadmap for the future based on PowerPC - they can't see a future.
10:30am PDT - Intel offers not just increased performance, but reduced power consumption. Transition will be complete by WWDC '07.
- sigs are for wimps.
The rumors are true: Intel will be inside
Jobs talked about the major transitions in the Mac's life -- starting from the Mac's Motorola 68000-series processor to PowerPC. "The PowerPC set Apple up fro the next decade. It was a good move," he said.
"The second transition was even better -- the transition from Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X that we just did," he continued. "This was a brain transplant. And even though these operating systems (9 and x) vary only by one in name, they are very different, and this has set Apple up for the next 20 years."
As the Intel logo lowered on the stage screen, Jobs said, "We are going to make the transition from PowerPC to Intel processors, and we are going to do it for you now, and for our customers next year. Why? Because we want to be making the best computer for our customers looking forward."
"I stood up here two years ago and promised you 3.0 GHz. I think a lot of you would like a G5 in your PowerBook, and we haven't been able to deliver that to you," said Jobs. "But as we look ahead, and though we've got great products now, and great PowerPC products still to come, we can envision great products we want to build, and we can't envision how to build them with the current PowerPC roadmap," said Jobs.
Intel processors provide more performance per watt than PowerPC processors do, said Jobs. "When we look at future roadmaps, mid-2006 and beyond, we see PoweRPC gives us 15 units of perfomance per watt, but Intel's roadmap gives us 70. And so this tells us what we have to do," he explained.
Transition to Intel by 2007, and yes, Marklar exists
"Starting next year, we will introduce Macs with Intel processors," said Jobs. "This time next year, we plan to ship Macs with Intel processors. In two years, our plan is that the transition will be mostly complete, and will be complete by end of 2007."
Jobs then confirmed a long-held belief that Apple was working on an Intel-compatible version of Mac OS X that some have termed "Marklar."
Mac OS X has been "leading a secret double life" for the past five years, said Jobs. "So today for the first time, I can confirm the rumors that every release of Mac OS X has been compiled for PowerPC and Intel. This has been going on for the last five years."
Jobs demonstrated a version of Mac OS X running on a 3.6GHz Pentium 4-processor equipped system, running a build of Mac OS X v10.4.1. He showed Dashboard widgets, Spotlight, iCal, Apple's Mail, Safari and iPhoto all working on the Intel-based system.
Apple needs developers' help to complete the transition
"We are very far along on this, but we're not done," said Jobs. "Which is why we're going to put it in your hands very soon, so you can help us finish it."
The future of Mac OS X development is moving to Xcode, said Jobs. Of Apple's top 100 developers, more than half -- 56 percent -- are already using Xcode, and 25 percent are in the process of switching to Xcode. "Less than 20 percent are not on board yet. Now is a good time to get on board," said Jobs.
Pooty tweet