Is it good news that Apple has moved to Intel chips

[ade234uk]

I dont know if this is good for the industry or not and what with Microsoft Vista coming out how will Linux fair?

[poofyhairguy]

I dont know if this is good for the industry or not and what with Microsoft Vista coming out how will Linux fair?

Its good news for them- OSX is a hog and the G4s were slow.

[prizrak]

Apple set themselves back by moving to Intel they have a complete 64 bit environment which Intel doesn't support but AMD would they shoulda moved to Athlon 64. I also expect their laptop sales to go down since they won't have the battery life/heat advantage over the Intel laptops anymore. Other than that not much difference.

[zenwhen]

Apple set themselves back by moving to Intel they have a complete 64 bit environment which Intel doesn't support but AMD would they shoulda moved to Athlon 64. I also expect their laptop sales to go down since they won't have the battery life/heat advantage over the Intel laptops anymore. Other than that not much difference.

Intel does indeed support 64-bit with their desktop chips. Intel's Pentium M has been cooler than the G4 since it has existed. The Core Duo is just as cool, and is more power efficient than the G4.

It was a step up all the way around. This is a huge deal for Apple. They didn't have 64-bit support on their laptops anyway, and 64-bit has little to offer to a laptop.

This is a good thing for OSS users because Apple machines will be able to run x86 Linux now, offering them more package selections in Ubuntu.

[ade234uk]

Do you reckon this will help Linux or will it kill it. I know for one I am staying with Ubuntu and I can see really good things happenging this year with Linux. KDE 4 looks really interesting but will IT push the boundaries and could it compete against OSX and of course that pay for rubbish Vista?

The larger this community gets the more improvments will be made. I am expecting by the end of 2006 for a load more games to be available to Linux through Crossover.

Just interested to get all your thoughts on this?

[BSDFreak]

Since it will still be tied directly to the hardware from Apple it doesn't matter much to most people, you won't be able to buy just OSX and run it on your computer. (of course the release version will be cracked, all hardware protected versions of every program that has ever existed on the x86 platform has been cracked, so will this, but it's still illegal)

For those wanting OSX who are prepared to pay the premium for the hardwares ability to run OSX it means that you'll be able to run Windows along with which will probably be a biggie for many people. Of course, the x86 hardware is both cheaper and faster but Intels CPU's are running too hot and slower than AMD's counterparts. It's stupid of Apple to lock themselves into that deal but they have always made the worst possible choices so why stop now?

[poofyhairguy]

Do you reckon this will help Linux or will it kill it.

Neither. Linux is more than a desktop OS (TiVos for one thing).

I don't even think it will effect the Linux Desktop efforts that much, as Apple is the upper class computer company.

Someone giving cars away does not compete with a BMW.

The community might lose some people that came around to run away from Windows, but they are not part of any of the pillars.



I know for one I am staying with Ubuntu and I can see really good things happenging this year with Linux. KDE 4 looks really interesting but will IT push the boundaries and could it compete against OSX and of course that pay for rubbish Vista?

I don't think Ubuntu or Kubuntu really competes against Vista or OSX. Different things really.

http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=631317&postcount=44

[JimmyJazz]

MAC are just another PC (that won't run everything normal PCs do) now.
Personally I have used a slew of MACs and I have never been impressed by any of them. Much quieter hardware companies often blow Apple out of the water performance wise. Just goes to show you how important a good marketing team is.

[JimmyJazz]

Also anyone who questions if Linux can stand up against Vista or OS X really needs to look deeper, I'm guessing you are basing this on eye-candy, no linux won't have the eye can vista has for a while oh but Linux will go fast, I mean if you are into that ;)

[BoyOfDestiny]

I'd say it leaves them better off. Not to mention osx users should be able to run wine without using something like qemu.

However, am I the only person who ditched windows due drm/stupid phone home registration? I did not have virus/spyware problems (surfed with a proxy, only dl'ed gpl apps and like 2 freeware ones, scanned things regularly... ok it was a battle, but I still love my proxy). Also, XP was reasonably stable for me, I could usually get 30 days uptime... as for the POS win98se, I could get 2 weeks if I was lucky...

Having those gpl apps available made my switch to Linux much easier, since my favorite apps were here for me (vlc, dosbox, open office, zsnes, gimp, fceu, mame variants, firefox, privoxy, just to name a few).

Will a lot of people be eager to switch from a heavily proprietary OS to another heavily proprietary OS that is bound to hardware? Buying both seems pretty expensive as well...

For the savvy users (I'd guess), since the hardware is basically the same now, you could buy a cheaper (and perhaps uglier box), fill it with fancy chips, burners, RAM, and stick Linux on it. Also, can you just pick up a part and stick it in, do apple folk still have to ship it to apple for an upgrade/fix?

More ranting on DRM:

When I was setting up some software at home, which cost $$$ it had trouble registering, warning that within 15 days it would disable saving if not remedied...
Makes me sick. :P

Ok, sorry for the long rant, amazed that you read this far. I guess my main point, is that macs are not even on my radar, they aren't going to take over for those who chose linux for ideological reasons (opinion!).

For those who ran away from windows, I dunno.

[xequence]

Good thing because as someone said, macs can now run x86 linux. Bad though since there wont be as much support for PPC linux as there is now.

But really... Everyone knows AMD beats intel. Yes, intel has better battery life with laptop chips, but AMD beats them in everything else.

[BWF89]

But really... Everyone knows AMD beats intel. Yes, intel has better battery life with laptop chips, but AMD beats them in everything else.
Then why are all these comanies like Apple and SGI chooseing Intel for their processors?

[BSDFreak]

Then why are all these comanies like Apple and SGI chooseing Intel for their processors?

Yeah, that's why, exactly. Just like all HW companies selling the majority of their machines with Windows preinstalled, it's because Windows is simply better than Linux.

Why would they pay a premium price for a CPU that is more expensive but doesn't perform as well as their cheaper AMD counterpart? The answer is, of course, they don't, just like MS Intel, being a huge company, can afford to offer huge discounts. You'll find that this doesn't benefit the consumer at all though.

Performance wise Intel has lost the race, price/performance wise per CPU Intel haven't been close for many years.

[benplaut]

It depends on whether or not OS/X piracy becomes very widespread. If it does, then people have the choice to use their current computers for any of the 'big 3'... which would bring users away from linux.

[fuscia]

the new powermac looks almost as good as a sony vaio and it's only twice as much. awesome!

[drizek]

you guys should compare this to the real competition. maybe something like the asus V6va. This still hasnt been updated with the core duo processor and the x1600, but it should be updated shortly. anyway, it comes out to $1995, and the new specs should look like this

1.86ghz Dual Core
1gb ram
x1600 video
1400x1050 "Colorshine"(one of those new sexy glossy lcds) 15"
DL DVD burner
100gb Harddrive
Bluetooth/WiFi
2 year warranty

This is about as good as any 15" notebook gets. asus quality is second to none(they make apple powerbooks and sony vaios as well as their own). It is worth noting that this is also the same thickness as the macbook, 1". However, this thing packs a better lcd(although a widescreen version would have been nice), a faster cpu, more ram, a larger harddrive, a longer warranty, and im pretty sure the dvd burner is 8x compared to apples 4x. It looks, IMO, sexier than the macbook, and even if you disagree, you have to admit, this thing aint no ugly duckling. http://www.c9tech.com/catalog/notebooks/models/V6V/album.html

and to top it all off, it comes with a free carry case, and wireless mouse. all this and it is 4 dollars cheaper too.

[poofyhairguy]

It depends on whether or not OS/X piracy becomes very widespread.

I don't think so!

And people give Linux crap about not having drivers....hacked OSX is in FAR worse of a situation.

[BSDFreak]

I don't think so!

And people give Linux crap about not having drivers....hacked OSX is in FAR worse of a situation.
I didn't event think about that, i suppose there would have to be drivers for supported hardware (for it to have any success) but it would be up to apple what "supported hardware" really is.

[mstlyevil]

Then why are all these comanies like Apple and SGI chooseing Intel for their processors?

Intel gave Apple deep discounts for chips that perform 2 to 3 times better than the best power pc chip. Also Apple can now buy their mother boards straight from Intel using the same motherboards sold to other major manufactuers. This will result in a huge cost savings for Apple since they no longer have to contract out the design for specialty boards to use with the power pc line.
AMD does not produce it's own chipsets and mother boards so they were not able to compete with Intel on this level. Also Apple will probally use Intels new architecture for all it's other PC's since both are planned to go to market at the same time. The new chips coming from Intel the second half of this year are supposed to equal the performance of the Athlon 64 so Apple is not really sacrificing nothing by going with Intel in the timeline they have set.

BTW Apple is first to market with Intels new Duo mobile CPU's. These are a huge improvement on the old G4 processors that were previously in this line. AMD just does not have a mobile chip that competes well with it yet, so that is probally why they went ahead and started shipping six months ahead of scedual. (I know I misspelled scedual but for the life of me I can not remember how to spell it correctly.)

[benplaut]

I don't think so!

And people give Linux crap about not having drivers....hacked OSX is in FAR worse of a situation.

depends on if someone can make native OS/X drivers work with linux. Darwin is open, so it should be possible in some way ;)

[drizek]

BTW Apple is first to market with Intels new Duo mobile CPU's.

actually, they are closer to being the LAST to market. everyone else unveiled their core duo lappys at CES, and macworld was only held yesterday.

[mstlyevil]

actually, they are closer to being the LAST to market. everyone else unveiled their core duo lappys at CES, and macworld was only held yesterday.
Yes that is true but Apple is already selling it in their stores and online. Others debut the chip at CES but they have not quite got it to market yet. Within the month they will offer it.

[drizek]

dell is selling them as well. they wont ship for a month or so though.

[mstlyevil]

dell is selling them as well. they wont ship for a month or so though.

That was my point though. Apple is shipping them out now. Dell, HP, Gateway and others are so large that they usually have a month between introduction and shipping. Apple on the other hand is much more streamlined and efficient so they usually ship the very day they announce a new product line.

[poofyhairguy]

depends on if someone can make native OS/X drivers work with linux. Darwin is open, so it should be possible in some way ;)

I got in an arguement about this with a Mac Zealot the other day. He/She was REALLY anti-Linux and believed that a hacked OSX would kill our favorite OS.

One arguement the person put forth is one like that one- hackers could just add FreeBSD drivers to OSX and make it beat out Linux.

So I did a lot of research and I found that OSX does not use the FreeBSD drivers. It uses modified Mach drivers that are made just for OSX. My research showed me that it would be easier to make the drivers from scratch rather than bolt on Linux or FreeBSD ones.

So no Ndiswrapper like magic for that group.

[drizek]

Apple on the other hand is much more streamlined and efficient so they usually ship the very day they announce a new product line.

I hope that is sarcasm... they have had a TON of product shortages and backorders in the past cause they cant meet demand.

Either way, that is simply not the case. from apples own site:

"Ships: February"

[mstlyevil]

I hope that is sarcasm... they have had a TON of product shortages and backorders in the past cause they cant meet demand.

Either way, that is simply not the case. from apples own site:

"Ships: February"

Okay I will eat some humble pie. I got the impression from the media and Steve Jobs annoucements they were shipping immediately. When someone says they have gone on sale today you expect it to be ready to ship immediately. Oh well I guess I will have to call my girlfriend over to spank me for being a bad boy. ;)

[drizek]

I got the impression from the media and Steve Jobs

Well theres your problem right there...

[Linux BASHer]

JimmyJazz, Mac is just an abbreviation for Macintosh. It isn't an acronym and it isn't capitalized. As Mac OS X is it's own OS it runs applications specific to Mac OS X, just as Ubuntu runs apps specific to Ubuntu Linux and ******* specific to that.

Since Mac OS X will be tied to Apple hardware, it will not directly compete with Linux. And, as said, Linux and Mac OS X target different audiences.

I tend to think that Mac OS X, if anything, helps Linux adoption, as it encourages interoperability between both (I run OpenOffice.org in X11 on my Mac). You can go back and forth and use the same shells and apps in many cases, which is not as easily accomplished with *******.

BoyOfDestiny, I tend to think that variety is good, not bad.-- Even if it includes proprietary systems. I see the Mac and Linux as on the same side, providing alternatives to *******, not competing directly.

Now, at the present, though there is DRM support on the Mac (iTunes music, etc.), Mac OS X itself and all Apple software DOES NOT use DRM. Some third part apps do now, but that is, of course, the doing of those companies, not Apple. The OS itself does not enforce any kind of mandatory, system-wide DRM.

The only DRM that is in place now, is that to disallow Mac OS X from running on other PC hardware. But Apple has always had a method to do this-- it's just the the relative rarity of PPC hardware outside of Macs provided a great excuse for not being able to run the Mac OS elsewhere. But also remember that Apple has used, in addition, the Macintosh ROM to limit the Mac OS to Mac hardware. So, it's the same kind of thing, by another name. This is definitely not the same thing as the kind of DRM you describe.

And poofyhairguy, being anti-Linux is pretty ridiculous, in my view. Whoever you spoke to probably has very distorted views when it comes to OSs, or maybe is just over-advocating Mac OS X. As I've said, they do not compete directly, and we should all be on the same side here!

Now, to the original question: Is it good news that Apple has moved to Intel chip?

I don't know exactly what to tell you. It may be a good thing commercially. But, anyone who knows about chip architecture will tell you that the PPC architecture is much more modern and efficient than the x86 architecture. And, as I've stated, I view variety as a good thing. The PPC architecture will no longer be an option for most users, and the PPC itself will probably suffer because of it. Demand fuels advancement, so if there is less demand for the PPC, then there may well be less advancement for the PPC. And, this, I do not view as a good thing.

[JimmyJazz]

JimmyJazz, Mac is just an abbreviation for Macintosh. It isn't an acronym and it isn't capitalized. As Mac OS X is it's own OS it runs applications specific to Mac OS X, just as Ubuntu runs apps specific to Ubuntu Linux and ******* specific to that.

Yeah I know that, I still capitalize it for some reason though

[Virogenesis]

Should be pretty interesting to see how apple will gain from this.
Intel can push out CPUs faster than the current PPC in the long term as the release cycle isn't exactly lightning.
With them being x86 based should push them into a whole new market a market where the end user might be able to afford.
Intel was a pretty good choice for a chip as Intel are known for being extremely stable.
What will mac mini be like now that will be interesting to keep a watch full eye on.
Its quite a good thing that macs will be cheaperas more schools & offices might start pushing people towards a cheaper to run UNIX like os.
Think Sun Microsystems if it wasn't for them linux would not of become such a success.
Those that wanted to run UNIX needed the correct hardware along comes linux which provides a UNIX like system but can run on cheaper hardware.
Fantasic the people thought and maybe something like that will happen again except programs will be designed to run on linux aswell as mac os.

Might apple lose customers moving away from PPC?
Linus himself uses linux on PPC and i'm sure many more linux users use PPC for its performance.
How will it affect them when it comes to multimedia will they bother trying to benchmark against windows versions of adobe products?

And who knows maybe we'll see a group of hackers who create something somewhat simular to WINE but capable of running mac programs on linux I'm sure it would be a much better solution than running photoshop through wine.
Should be a interesting task since Darwin is opensource.

[BSDFreak]

Should be pretty interesting to see how apple will gain from this.
Intel can push out CPUs faster than the current PPC in the long term as the release cycle isn't exactly lightning.
With them being x86 based should push them into a whole new market a market where the end user might be able to afford.
Intel was a pretty good choice for a chip as Intel are known for being extremely stable.

Intel isn't known for being more or less stable than any other chip, the truth is that what makes a chip stable is the ability to process code flawlessly, all CPU's made today do this equally well, it's been ages since Intels famous Pentium bug which is the only CPU bug i am aware of in modern time systems. The only thing that would affect stability today is overheating and since AMD wins that battle hands down in desktop systems i'd say Intel is the least stable choice that could be made.

Dell claiming something does not make it so.


Think Sun Microsystems if it wasn't for them linux would not of become such a success.

You'll have to expand on this because i completely disagree with it.

From http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/linuxunix/0,39020390,39205934,00.htm


Sun is stepping away from an effort to sell Linux for desktop computers, the server and software company's top software executive said Tuesday.
JDS will continue to exist as a product, but now chiefly as software based on Sun's Solaris operating system and directed at programmers, John Loiacono, executive vice-president of software, said at a meeting with reporters in San Francisco at JavaOne.



If you are referring to OpenOffice.org then it's not really supporting Linux since more than half of the users are running OpenOffice.org on Windows.

[prizrak]

The PPC architecture will no longer be an option for most users, and the PPC itself will probably suffer because of it. Demand fuels advancement, so if there is less demand for the PPC, then there may well be less advancement for the PPC. And, this, I do not view as a good thing.
Actually you are mistaken, PS3, XBOX360, and Nintendo Revolution all use PPC chips (which have been modernized to have the cell architecture). There was a discussion on that in another thread, one of the possible reasons Apple moved away from PPC architecture is the fact that IBM doesn't care about the tiny Mac market and will not be willing to advance it's chips just for them when they have 3 major buyers.