Pentium-Based Macs The Future of Apple?

seek3r writes "Found this interesting article on BusinessWeek.com regarding Apple's potential switch to Intel chips. I wonder what the implications this might have for Apple with regards to market share and software support. Have Motorola's chips really lagged behind Intel?"

64 Bit PowerPC?

[peterdaly]

Seems like just yesterday I was reading about how IBM was helping Apple with getting to 64bit PowerPC chips.

Wish I remembered where I saw the article.

-Pete

Pentium?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see much of a future for this if it's Pentium-based. I mean, come on... Intel is up to the Pentium 4 now. Why would anyone put out a brand new product based on the Pentium?

Heh.

[Wakko Warner]

After all the badmouthing of Intel chips Apple has done in the past (some of the stupidest ads I've ever seen, by the way), this would be the ultimate irony.

"The G4 CRUSHES the Pentium in... oh shit, wait, no, it doesn't. Gimme some of that 2.8 gigahertz love."

- A.P.

Re:Pentium?

[Waffle Iron]

I don't see much of a future for this if it's Pentium-based. I mean, come on... Intel is up to the Pentium 4 now. Why would anyone put out a brand new product based on the Pentium?

Divide different.

Re:Here it is ...

[jimhill]

"until something materializes everything is FUD."

Methinks you misunderstand "FUD". It's not at all synonymous with "vapor".

Pentium-Based Macs The Future of Apple?

[Typingsux]

My opinion is they would be taking a big Risc doing so.

Oh wait, they would be taking it out.

I'm confused

Re:I rather not have Intel.

[Tim Browse]

I never liked CISC Prossors, I much rather have RISC chips running my systems. I find that RISC chip run smoother then CISC do.

Yes, I hate it when you can tell that an x86's tappets need adjusting just by listening to it.

RISC chips are so much more turquoise, too.

Tim

Re:OSX on our PCs, of course!

[Oculus Habent]

Do you think that even with an Intel processor that Apple will let it run on any chipset, any box?

My guess is probably not. Eventually, they may do so, but Apple's "It Just Works" requirement couldn't be acheived on a mish-mash of systems.

With the new System Controller [apple.com], Apple should go in with nVidia on a chipset for the Intel Architecture (nextForce :). They could work to change the Intel architecture to meet their own needs, and eventually have the ability to release the software on their own.

Of course, I could be insane.

Until my NDA expires

[Anonymous Coward]

I can just tell you this article is pure BS.

Re:OSX on our PCs, of course!

[Anonymous Coward]

Exaggerated? Why, I'll have you know the 120GB Ultra ATA drives used in PowerMacs are some of the finest quality drives built and worth every penny of that $300 they cost compared to the $160 you'd pay if you bought them seperately. The heads have been specially redesigned by Apple engineers to be up to 90% more reliable than conventional drives by the same manufacturer. Don't even get me started about the high quality of the memory they use in these systems. It is some of the finest damn quality PC2100 DDR RAM they make and the $450 + you pay for it is a bargain compared to those cheap third party alternatives like Mushkin and Crucial where you'd only pay $300 for 1GB of RAM. I guess the extra $150 is to install it. :-)

Re:Never happen

[tomhudson]

Funny thing is, to get a 12-cylinder Jaguar to run reliably, most owners end up swapping in a Chevy 350 ci V-8.

There's sites devoted to just this type of swap

So, if we look at the CPU as being the power plant, swapping out a Motorola for an x86 or clone makes sense.

But then again, who knows?

Regards, Tom

Re:Never happen

[Anonymous Coward]

4) Profit!

How do you tell ?

[Wudbaer]

The main reason I hope Apple don't switch to x86 is because PPC is different (different is good) and frankly, x86 is a fucked up architecture - it's a 20+ year old architecture that's been kludged over and over.

In almost every discussion that involves PowerPC vs. x86 sooner or later this sentiment comes up. Ok, it may be right or not - but HOW DO YOU TELL ? Are you programming assembler on any of these platforms ? Or do you tell by looking at the chip ? */me opens up his G4 tower, pries away the cooler.. hm... does the same to his Duron...* looks quite the same... a rectangular piece of something looking technical on some kind of socket...

Are you really knowing about a relevant difference or are you just babbling some marketing fluff you heard somewhere without having a clue ?

I mean - Unix (used as a basis for OS X) is a 20+ year old architecture that's been kludged over and over - does that mean that OS X sucks ? What about Linux ? Different is good - so why not run Plan 9 - that's as different as it can get, I think. But both are not really valid arguments for or against any platform IMO.

i told you

[ironfroggy]

I made a recent post saying this was in the works. No one believed me. Believe me next time, for I know things!

Please help!

[TobyWong]

Please help!

I am in the roofing business and recently my boss took away my hammer and gave me a handsaw instead. Now it takes MUCH longer to pound in my roofing nails. Saws suck! Who designed these things anyhow? There are sharp bits all along one edge and I often cut my hands as this crazy saw flaps back and forth. =(

GIVE ME BACK MY OLD HAMMER!