Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Should have apple waited???
- Thread starter jtalerico
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not sure if any of you are /. readers if so, they had the same writeup on their site about Should have apple waited. Had some very interesting comments...
http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/06/02/07/2045218.shtml
http://apple.slashdot.org/apple/06/02/07/2045218.shtml
No they should not have waited and there's one very compelling reason: Universal Binaries. If you actually think that Apple is going to stop PPC development within the next 20 years you are very short sighted. They may not make the systems available to the public but they will have PPC systems running newer faster chips at the Apple Campus.
Assuming that the Intel switch goes smoothly and developers jump on board with Universal Binaries, Apple will be able to switch back and forth between PPC and x86 whenever they like, I could even see a future where there are pro machines and servers running high end Power Series processors and the consumer/laptop lines are running an x86 derivative.
Apple has opened a huge door for themselves with this transition. They will be able to jump from processor to processor as the technologies advance and leapfrog each other. We might also see the end all comparisons between PPC and x86 when we get to see them run the exact same apps and OS on the different processors so there is little question left of which architecture is "faster."
Assuming that the Intel switch goes smoothly and developers jump on board with Universal Binaries, Apple will be able to switch back and forth between PPC and x86 whenever they like, I could even see a future where there are pro machines and servers running high end Power Series processors and the consumer/laptop lines are running an x86 derivative.
Apple has opened a huge door for themselves with this transition. They will be able to jump from processor to processor as the technologies advance and leapfrog each other. We might also see the end all comparisons between PPC and x86 when we get to see them run the exact same apps and OS on the different processors so there is little question left of which architecture is "faster."
Personally I dont see the need to go over to Intel, PowerPC is perfect and even though AMD is much better than Intel - ah well...
wasimyaqoob said:
There was a very imformative post on /. about WHY they picked Intel. The post said something like, If Intel screws Apple by not building a chip that can run fast/cold/less power consumption then Apple can do another switch to AMD making the market possiby making a shift towards AMD (Dell, blahblahblha).
True...
Apple waited a long time for the 3GHz chip (still waiting). Despite the rumor mill and the press releases, these chips still have not been manufactured in quantity.
Apple gave IBM a chance to develop chips for them. IBM said they would. IBM didn't due to (insert excuse here). The Apple business cannot survive built on promises for the future. The transition to Intel gave Apple a chance to continue to do what they do best without worrying about chips anymore.
BTW, a little deja vu with Apple going to Intel since OSX is based on NeXT and NeXT ran on Intel chips. What goes around comes around.
atszyman said:
Apple waited a long time for the 3GHz chip (still waiting). Despite the rumor mill and the press releases, these chips still have not been manufactured in quantity.
Apple gave IBM a chance to develop chips for them. IBM said they would. IBM didn't due to (insert excuse here). The Apple business cannot survive built on promises for the future. The transition to Intel gave Apple a chance to continue to do what they do best without worrying about chips anymore.
BTW, a little deja vu with Apple going to Intel since OSX is based on NeXT and NeXT ran on Intel chips. What goes around comes around.
I admit that I don't really know what I'm talking about but I thought these Power6 CPUs were designed for 6 digit price tag enterprise data servers and not at all for the consumer marker. IBM has had a power5 chip for a while and we didn't see that getting into Powermacs. It's just not the same market.
Apple isn't going to start selling $300,000 appliance-sized powermacs that need to be kept in rooms at 60 degrees no matter how fast the chips are.
Apple isn't going to start selling $300,000 appliance-sized powermacs that need to be kept in rooms at 60 degrees no matter how fast the chips are.
Play Ultimate said:
Actually, NeXTstep originally ran on Motorola 68k processors and was later ported to Intel. They had the same kind of Universal Application support (Fat Binaries) as we're seeing, though there wasn't a Rosetta-like emulation engine.
I still kinda miss my NeXT cube.
jtalerico said:
Have a look around on the internet what kinds of machines contain POWER5 processors and what they cost. When you've done that, maybe you will come to the conclusion that you really don't want to pay for a Macintosh with a POWER6 processor.
And Intel has? Come on, what rock have you been hiding under for the last several years? Intel has been late, buggy, and has cancelled projects. Not exactly the best image in the industry.jacobj said:
Funny, but the one thing noone ever mentions when talking about why apple jumped ships is the fact that Microsoft became a much bigger client of apple to IBM when the switched to a g5-like processor in the xbox 360...
Maybe Mr Softy started pulling IBM's reins a bit too hard and apple got scared?
Maybe the very reason IBM couldnt deliver to apple was because of their developement priority for Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo.....
Maybe Mr Softy started pulling IBM's reins a bit too hard and apple got scared?
Maybe the very reason IBM couldnt deliver to apple was because of their developement priority for Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo.....
Wake up
Just spent some time enjoying reading your post. Some good points
a) PowerPC is a great processor
b) PowerPC is exspensive
But now let look at this logical. the new PowerPC6 will be expensive, it will run lower power but, still to hot for laptops (buy guess). It's design is for IBM highend UNIX server/supercomputers. To repackage it with the correct buses for desktop or laptop means more work. As for the 4-5 GHz, well Intel is nearly at 4 GHZ to day with 3.8. with the move to 45nm I can see this speed improving, but it does not make sense, when you can increase performance just buy add more cores (multi core is cool and more power). I can see intel running at the same speed buy end of 2007 early 2008. The move to intel, is not to have the fastest processor, but to have a strong chip developer. Apple sell about the same number of computers as Dell. Now add the ipods. that is a big customer for intel. Intel look after customers, like no other company does. I worked with intel with chips for smart phones, they give marketing money and help pushing the intel systems. I seen this also with pc resales aswell.
Ideal world is to have the best kick butt chip, but you can't have it all. the performnace differnce will not be much. My Powerbook is slow, At work we have Intels that run at 2Ghz with kick its butt. About time for a swap.
If apple had to wait then people would be upset about no new faster machines. Release of the PowerPC6 will be starting at earlies sometime in 2007, but in want numbers, IBM does not have the production to supply hughe amounts, unlike Intel. And Do I want to wait another 2 years for a faster laptop from apple.
Plus we do not know Intel product road map, but I can say that Apple does, they know where intel is heading, and guess what, this next step in the journey is Intel until they start parting direction. I don't care about what the make of the Processor. Apple software and qualitity built computers are far better and intergated than any other company out there. They engineer solutions that tie so many elements together with little stress to the comsumer. i.e. iLife ties with .mac all the ilife tie together all intigrate with the OS. I salute Apple for being able to deliever a great platform. Who else would be able to swap to a different chipset and support the old (rosetta).
What other company cares so much about there customers, it shows in the qualitity of product. It show in the loyality of customers. Name another computer company that has a following like Apple (it almost a cult). Apple cares. i wroked for company that only care about the $$$$, and spending the money to improve, is not a priority.
Just spent some time enjoying reading your post. Some good points
a) PowerPC is a great processor
b) PowerPC is exspensive
But now let look at this logical. the new PowerPC6 will be expensive, it will run lower power but, still to hot for laptops (buy guess). It's design is for IBM highend UNIX server/supercomputers. To repackage it with the correct buses for desktop or laptop means more work. As for the 4-5 GHz, well Intel is nearly at 4 GHZ to day with 3.8. with the move to 45nm I can see this speed improving, but it does not make sense, when you can increase performance just buy add more cores (multi core is cool and more power). I can see intel running at the same speed buy end of 2007 early 2008. The move to intel, is not to have the fastest processor, but to have a strong chip developer. Apple sell about the same number of computers as Dell. Now add the ipods. that is a big customer for intel. Intel look after customers, like no other company does. I worked with intel with chips for smart phones, they give marketing money and help pushing the intel systems. I seen this also with pc resales aswell.
Ideal world is to have the best kick butt chip, but you can't have it all. the performnace differnce will not be much. My Powerbook is slow, At work we have Intels that run at 2Ghz with kick its butt. About time for a swap.
If apple had to wait then people would be upset about no new faster machines. Release of the PowerPC6 will be starting at earlies sometime in 2007, but in want numbers, IBM does not have the production to supply hughe amounts, unlike Intel. And Do I want to wait another 2 years for a faster laptop from apple.
Plus we do not know Intel product road map, but I can say that Apple does, they know where intel is heading, and guess what, this next step in the journey is Intel until they start parting direction. I don't care about what the make of the Processor. Apple software and qualitity built computers are far better and intergated than any other company out there. They engineer solutions that tie so many elements together with little stress to the comsumer. i.e. iLife ties with .mac all the ilife tie together all intigrate with the OS. I salute Apple for being able to deliever a great platform. Who else would be able to swap to a different chipset and support the old (rosetta).
What other company cares so much about there customers, it shows in the qualitity of product. It show in the loyality of customers. Name another computer company that has a following like Apple (it almost a cult). Apple cares. i wroked for company that only care about the $$$$, and spending the money to improve, is not a priority.
Okay, but yet Apple came out with the Quads and then the Quads lost their hype because Apple announces they are moving to a Intel based chip. If the world was perfect. I wish that Apple kept IBM for their Server/Desktop units, but then got with POSSIBLY INTEL or AMD for their mobile stuff. Just so everyone read that right... IF THE WORLD WAS PERFECT!!! I am not saying it could happen or anything of the above.