• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Apple To Go Intel?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
Thingi said:
I don't think you quite got my point, h.264 decoding is a good example of raw processor fp performance. Windows isn't that much of a bottleneck mate, blaming XP for QT7 performance is plain rude!

thingi
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt Apple would pick a solution that is slower than their current system.

I used macs since 1984, and I'm as loyal as they come.
I have no problem blaming XP foe anything/everything either... :) :)

Again, I have faith by the time the hardware is in the market, it will be fster
than anything out there at the moment.

Seeing "intel inside" on a mac will be funny as all hell though.

CN
 
as they were talking about intel having better "perfomance per watt" so it's almost definate "no" to p4..
In June 06 there will be Yonah and later on - merom/conroe..
guess they at apple will know something we don't know exactly...
like perfomance (estimates) of those cpus..
 
I want to know what the deal with OSX on your average overclockers box is going to be.

Stevie said that he wasnt going to allow it- So what I wanna know is:

1. Is he really going to prevent it, or just not allow OEMs to do it?
2. Can any prevention measures be cracked?
3. Can they be cracked legally?
4. Will he change his mind?
 
u know itll be cracked. ILlegally, if its running on any x86 some crack freak will devote hours to figuring a patch for it.

lol i dont care!i just dropped 2k for my mac, and now the possability for G5 upgrade CPus in a few years has probably dropped to 0. onea the reasons i bought this, was because i know how long the computer will last, and apple has those crazy cpu upgrades. They got them now, upgrade a 300mhz G4 to a 2.0ghz G4 (dunno if its released yet) i was hoping id be able to do that years down the road.
 
Stevie said that he wasnt going to allow it-

4. Will he change his mind?
Click to expand...

He probably said so cause the Mac Faithfull would lynch him right then and there otherwise - just like I wanted to do a few years ago when he pulled the plug on the Mac clones (after I shelled out 7k for a Supermac S900 with 20" monitor). But I have no doubt whatsoever that OSX will run on a vanilla PC the day after it's released.

Re. #4, dream on pilgrim ...
 
I've wanted a mac for a while now, and probably would have gotten one when I had enough money. Not for the OS, mind you, but so I could play around with some PPC hardware. Now I have no reason to whatsoever.

On the other hand, now apple will have an incentive to pump money into wine--making it easier to run windows apps on OSX for x86.
 
Aidenswarrior said:
i just read this

http://gear.ign.com/articles/622/622724p1.html

noooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Anyone want to buy an ipod? God Damn you apple! You sell outs! This really sucks. I was planning on buying a powerbook sometime soon. But now, i won't. I guess they just lost another customer :bang head .
Click to expand...

:clap: :clap: Very good.
Now please explain exactly how apple sold out.
Because if you rather had them clinging to IBM's empty promises and supply issues, you really did not think this through....

It matters NOT, I REPEAT NOT one bit what drives the box.....
PPC simply would not hit 3.0 gigs, as Jobs promised, so here's the next option.

The pack was howling back in the day when the PPC chip was born but ppl got used to that pretty fast..

I dont get it, how can bettter and faster chips be bad news???
I'd think the people of this forum would get it better than the masses too.

If youre thinking as you stated about a portable Mac, this should especially be good news for you.

CN
 
As far as cross-compatibility between OS's, I think it will be limited by motherboard chipset drivers.

If Apple uses standard chipsets on their motherboards, there won't be much of a problem of running Windows on Apple computers. But if Apple goes with their own proprietary chipset, and tell Microsoft not to write drivers for it for Windows, then the only way to run Windows on an Apple is to rely on user-made or third-party drivers (and we all know how reliable those can be for Windows).

Vice-versa, Apple will not provide drivers for standard chipsets, disallowing the use of OS X on standard PCs (in addition to the whole ROM thing), but that might be a bit more easily remedied because of the BSD base of OS X.

EDIT: I suppose I should also mention that the whole chipset thing is secondary to Apple's decision on whether to use OpenFirmware or PC BIOS.
 
Last edited:
I really don't think it's going to be a major headache running OS X on standard x86 hardware. The Pegasos and the AmigaOne hardware can already run OS X via MOL (Mac-On-Linux) with no problems at all. I really don't see the whole project giving up due to a move in processor architecture.

The most likely way of running OS X on a standard PC is via a virtual machine :) Give me a highly overclocked AthlonX4 with 'Pacifica' support, they will be around by the time Apple does the switch running Linux as the main OS with Longhorn and OS X running as virtual machines :) :)

Thingi
 
just saw this on the LA Times website in an article about why apple had chosen intel 'Intel, by contrast, touts its cool-running chips that consume less power'. and it made me laugh. I know this is probably a reference to Dothan and Yonah compared with PPC, but what a reason to state for picking intel over IBM and AMD.
 
Thingi said:
I really don't think it's going to be a major headache running OS X on standard x86 hardware. The Pegasos and the AmigaOne hardware can already run OS X via MOL (Mac-On-Linux) with no problems at all. I really don't see the whole project giving up due to a move in processor architecture.
Click to expand...

Aren't those PPC-based?

The most likely way of running OS X on a standard PC is via a virtual machine :) Give me a highly overclocked AthlonX4 with 'Pacifica' support, they will be around by the time Apple does the switch running Linux as the main OS with Longhorn and OS X running as virtual machines :) :)

Thingi
Click to expand...
I think we'll see a mix of native code and emulation/etc. Darwin already runs on x86 and has for years. The rest of the OS will take quite a while to fully port (as it did moving to PPC),but it will happen. I also assume they'll use Intel chipsets, both since they're already using intel chips and because Apple wants to be known for stability.
 
Hasn't Jobs claimed that they have had some versions of OSX running under x86, I think he made some comment about 'for the last few years OSX has had a secret life...' It may be that they have created experimental ports, but not ironed out the wrinkles or optimised them very well, or equally it could just be talk to reassure the shareholders.

What about the passing mention of AMD as well? Surely they don't want to sour the relationship with intel just yet? It would be quite ironic if they switch from ppc to get away from ibm and then buy AMD chips made in an IBM foundry.
 
Apple now going with x86 - now we can bash MAC O/S for all the bug issues that will arise with many 3rd party companies producing products for the O/S - that is if apple lets them?????? I can see MAC O/S now going down the same troublesome compatible road windows has had to suffer for and get a bad name for because 3rd parties DONT follow policy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mackerel
Intel Foundry update - April 2024
Replies
14
Views
241
Railgun
Railgun
V
Lenovo Yoga 7i 2-in-1 14" - good price or pass?
Replies
2
Views
995
Viper69
V
H
Funny Behaviour/Wierd People
Replies
3
Views
528
Evilsizer
Evilsizer
M
Small voltage difference between two RAM modules from the same kit.
Replies
3
Views
202
Woomack
W
mackerel
Relative IPC and efficiency of some Intel CPUs in Cinebench R15
Replies
3
Views
202
mackerel
mackerel
Back