You are here

Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

For anything relating to music-making on Windows computers, with lots of FAQs. Moderated by Martin Walker.

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby Martin Walker » Fri Jun 10, 2005 8:30 pm

ED - I think you've misinterpreted the majority of comments here, which are not aimed at Mac users, but at Apple itself and its 'about face' after years of claiming that clock speed isn't the most important factor, and comparing current Macs to Intel-based PCs to show much more capable they are.

I personally don't mind what type of computer I run as long as it does what I want it to. However, when these new Macs come out we'll all finally be able to see just how important (or not) the operating system is, since much of the hardware (processor, associated chipset, RAM, hard drives, and so on) will be almost identical in both machines.

By the way, what are those extra luxuries you think worth the extra cost?


Martin
User avatar
Martin Walker
Moderator
Posts: 15154
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:44 am
Location: Cornwall, UK

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby steveman » Fri Jun 10, 2005 8:30 pm

Phil Schiller (Apple's head of marketing) says that it'll be entirely possible to install Windows XP if you so wish.

Macs aren't more expensive than PC's because of the G4 / G5 chips, the G4 is certainly cheaper than the Intel equivalent, G5 G5s are comparably priced to their equivalent. Macs are more expensive because they include the cost of software (you know, OSX) & hardware R & D. Dell's R&D consists mainly of finding ways to make their machines cheaper.

Apple's market share (that's sales of new machines, not the installed no. of machines) is around 3.5 % now.

As E D said, there seems to be lot of unnecessary aggression here towards (us) Mac users. I could have made some sarcy comment about installing Windows in my 1st sentence - but I didn't.

PC fanatics and Mac fanatics are as bad as each other.
steveman
Regular
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2002 1:00 am
Location: London - UK

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby steveman » Fri Jun 10, 2005 8:40 pm

no way this is going to happen...

Phil Schiller (Apple's head of marketing) says that it'll be entirely possible to install Windows XP if you so wish.
(which is at the pathetic 2.6% at the moment...)

Apple's market share (that's sales of new machines, not the installed no. of machines) is about 3.5% now.

As E D said, there seems to be lot of unnecessary aggression here towards (us) Mac users. I could have made some sarcy comment about installing Windows in my 1st sentence - but I didn't.

PC fanatics and Mac fanatics are as bad as each other.

Some Techy Stuff from a developer who's had their hands on one :

" ... First, the thing is fast. Native apps readily beat a single 2.7 G5, and sometimes beat duals. Really.
All the iLife apps other than iTunes, plus all the other apps that come with the OS are already universal binaries....
They are using a Pentium 4 660. This is a 3.6 GHz chip. It supports 64 bit extensions, but Apple does not support that *yet*. The 660 is a single core processor. However, the engineers said that this chip would not be used in a shipping product and that we need to look at Intel's roadmap for that time to see what Apple will ship.
It uses DDR-2 RAM at 533 MHz. SATA-2. It is using Intel GMA 900 integrated graphics and it supports Quartz Extreme. The Intel 900 doesn't compare favorably to any shipping card from ATi or nVidia. The Apple engineers says the dev kit will work with regular PC graphics cards, but that you need a driver. Apple does not write ANY graphics drivers. They just submit bug reports to ATi/nVidia. So, when we asked where to get drivers for better cards the engineers said "The ATI guys are here." He's right, they've been in the compatibility lab several times.
It has FireWire 400, but not 800. USB 2 as well. USB 2 booting is supported, FireWire booting is not. NetBoot works.
The machines do not have Open Firmware. They use a Phoenix BIOS. That's right, a Mac with a BIOS...."

"They run Windows fine. All the chipset is standard Intel stuff, so you can download drivers and run XP on the box."

Of course these are the developer boxes, will have to wait and see if it's any harder on the real thing.

"I've been talking to and watching a lot of devs. There are a lot of apps from big names running in the Compatibility lab already. Some people face more pain, sure, but Jobs wasn't kidding when he said that this transition would be less painful than OS 9 to OS X or 68K to PPC.
Game devs seem optimistic. They see porting Windows/x86 to Mac/x86 as much easier. They look forward to the day they don't have to support PPC"

I think this part sums the situation up :

"...This transition is not about current P4 vs G5. It is about the future directions of the processor families. Intel is committed to desktop/notebook and server in a big way. Freescale/IBM are chasing the embedded market and console market. Apple would have been in a lurch in 2 years."
steveman
Regular
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2002 1:00 am
Location: London - UK

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby *INACTIVE USER* » Fri Jun 10, 2005 9:05 pm

This "switch" thing is really hilarious. Most Apple fans seem to forget that Apple is about 3% of the desktop market. (this comes from macworld) And I don't think it has that number in the server market.

All this stuff about Intel making a special cpu, porting all application, Sir Bill sobbing of fear... Do the math!

- running a silicon fab cost money. Intel makes 70% of all cpu's.
- if a mac can run windoze, then why port your soft to 3% of the market when that slice can just as well run your soft under windoze?
- Sir Bill has another 3% of customers without spending marketing money, Sir Steve will do that for him. Not that he cares much, M$ owns a nice share of Apple.

Macs are becoming a range of expensive pc's that run another OS than windoze. And because the driver problem stays just the same, using cheap pc hardware will not be possible unless you run windoze.

The only clear winner here is Intel that gains a few % marketshare. Apple won't use AMD because they don't make the whole chipset (nor motherboard) like Intel does.

So what is in it for Apple?
- they can lay off some hardware developers
- they get cheaper hardware if they go with standard stuff
- they get some Intel maketing dollars for the "Intel Inside" deal

And the customers?
- those with a PPC mac will be left up the proverbial creek pretty soon
- those willing to upgrade are going to wait and see before commiting themselves and maybe missing out some productivity
- in the long run, all faithful mac users will have to buy all new gear and soft, some maybe very soon
*INACTIVE USER*
Regular
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 12:00 am
Expert in non-working solutions

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby Rick Taylor » Sat Jun 11, 2005 1:49 am

RedRum wrote:Apple will make sure that Macs only run OSX using hardware methods (similarly to microsoft did with the xbox for people not to run linux, you need to seriously hack it to do it).


People will pay extra for a pc with limitations?

now if I could have PC processing power and prices with a brilliant OS such as the OSX (plus the Mac stylish boxes), I would hands down go for it.


How will people build their own? What's to stop folk cracking the os? {There's about 60 zillion pc case styles. Many of them better than mac designs.}

It makes no sense for someone to buy a pc with a limiter on it. People will simply go with a pc that they can do anything they want with.

Why would macintosh limit themselves? The os is good enough to become a major competitor. To me it sounds like they're selling a pc with the equivelant of a hardware dongle on it. Why don't they just sell the os with a dongle? They could set up a dx/directshow, etc emulation layer and run pc applications.
Rick Taylor
Regular
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 1:00 am

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby Rick Taylor » Sat Jun 11, 2005 2:00 am

Havoc wrote:And I don't think it has that number in the server market.

I don't think it has a number in the server market.

How many of those mac servers got sold anyway?

Wouldn't it be nice if Power ran OSX and Windows?
Rick Taylor
Regular
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 1:00 am

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby Rick Taylor » Sat Jun 11, 2005 2:10 am

steveman wrote:Macs are more expensive because they include the cost of software (you know, OSX) & hardware R & D.


How much do you think the pc {Intel, AMD, Gigabyte, ASUS, ATI, Matrox, Maxtor, Kingston, Midiman, Echo, etc, etc, etc...} industry has sunk into hardware r&d?
Rick Taylor
Regular
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 1:00 am

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby *INACTIVE USER* » Sat Jun 11, 2005 11:01 am

The pc industry has indeed sunk a large amount into R&D. And likewise does the price of a pc includes the software. The price to design a motherboard or write a piece of software is identical for both platforms. But because the amount has to be written of on a smaller number of macs it is more expensive. Just basic economics.

They are going to pay for having a "system". I think I understand that part of it. You buy something that is certified to work. Since there are a much smaller amount of combinations of hardware, the software can be better tested against it. On the other hand so do you when you buy a typical Dell. Only difference is that with OSX you are having the added value of "security". Now how much more secure this is and how much value it represents is another debate.

Since the Apple users are now already paying more for a system with a limiter on it that has no performance advantage, why would they stop doing so?

The problem I think is that a lot of mac users compare osx to W95. The difference between both OS's isn't that big these days. I help a mac user with his pc (that he needs for exchanges and so on). From what I hear the mac has about as much trouble as the pc. Maybe the pc a bit more, but some of that is because the system is less well tended because unfamiliar and not the primary workhorse.
*INACTIVE USER*
Regular
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 12:00 am
Expert in non-working solutions

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby PatK » Sat Jun 11, 2005 12:26 pm

dubbmann wrote:But I predict that Apple in 2008 will be a software/multimedia company that sells a shrink-wrapped version of MacOS XXX and which makes most of its money off of Itunes and Ipods.

Emm, 2008? Try 2005 :) That's one reason why Apple decided to make the switch now - iTunes/iPod will make up the majority of its profits this year (I think it already runs at 48% of profits or something?) I'm sure they are expecting to take a hit in sales - but the iPod is giving them the cushion to make the transition now.

The other reasons for the switch - IBM were too busy paying attention to consoles instead of the Mac. I don't think Jobs personality is the sort that takes well to being told to wait behind Sony and Microsoft in the chip supply queue. Plus they need a laptop solution soon, because their offerings are no longer competitive against the Pentium M. Laptops, if you missed the news last week, are now selling more than desktops in the USA. So this is starting to matter more than ever. IBM are taking too long to deliver a G5 for laptops, and now they are too busy giving their priorities to the XBox 360/Playstation 3 to give it the priority Apple wants.

Of course we'll see any Windows PC being able to run OSX at some point whether Apple wants it or not. But since this would be unlikely to happen (legally) without their blessing, I doubt they're overly concerned. Nobody will actually be selling plain white boxes with Apple OS pre-installed, it'll only be people willing to install it themselves - which is a small minority of users (consider how many people don't even have a clue how to partition a drive, never mind jump through the hoops required to use hacks to get another OS running on their system.)

Havok wrote:
The only clear winner here is Intel that gains a few % marketshare. Apple won't use AMD because they don't make the whole chipset (nor motherboard) like Intel does.

Intel licenses 3rd parties to make its motherboards usually. They went with Intel purely because Intel cut them a better deal, plus AMD doesn't have a mobile chip that competes with the Pentium M yet.
PatK
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:00 am

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby Rick Taylor » Sat Jun 11, 2005 12:34 pm

Havoc wrote:The pc industry has indeed sunk a large amount into R&D. And likewise does the price of a pc includes the software. The price to design a motherboard or write a piece of software is identical for both platforms. But because the amount has to be written of on a smaller number of macs it is more expensive. Just basic economics.


Only if you look at the pc industry as a whole rather than disparate companies. How do Matrox sales stack up against Mac? {How much R&D goes into building a card as opposed to assembling a system?}

They are going to pay for having a "system". I think I understand that part of it. You buy something that is certified to work. Since there are a much smaller amount of combinations of hardware, the software can be better tested against it. On the other hand so do you when you buy a typical Dell. Only difference is that with OSX you are having the added value of "security". Now how much more secure this is and how much value it represents is another debate.


They {users} still buy third party soft and hardware... I doubt they can guarantee that. {I know they try...} All of that's about to change radically unless they plan on certifying every piece of hardware out there.

Since the Apple users are now already paying more for a system with a limiter on it that has no performance advantage, why would they stop doing so?


Lord only knows. :)
Rick Taylor
Regular
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 1:00 am

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby Rowboffin » Sat Jun 11, 2005 3:37 pm

Well, E D, seeing as only a month ago you were claiming that the next version of windows would be merely a copy of Tiger (without any facts to substantiate the claim, I might add) its quite gratifying to discover that the next generation of Macs are going to be merely a copy of the PC architecture.

Deliciously ironic, no?
Rowboffin
Poster
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu May 22, 2003 12:00 am

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby PaulD » Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:13 pm

Martin Walker wrote:...what are those extra luxuries you think worth the extra cost?

In my own personal case:
1. Reliability and build-quality of the hardware - in 12 years of Mac video-editing for a living (and music and sound-design post-production as I am a one-man-band operator) ALL the Macs I have used (dozens of them) are all still fully operational, bar one - a 1992 Quadra 950 which lost its internal SCSI bus in 2002).

2. Compatibility of third-party extra hardware, and associated drivers. And Apple-supplied hardware as well, of course.

3. As the range of compatible hardware and software available is comparatively limited (thankfully) the user base is able to supply about 95% of the self-help needed to troubleshoot incompatibilities.

4, The majority of professional Mac users can acquire ALL the skills necessary to administer their Mac installation without significant external paid-for assistance.

5. Correspondingly about 95% or Windows users seem to be totally reliant on having professional paid-for assistance when the dreaded 'Consult your System Administrator' message is encountered.
Using a Mac I can be my own System and Network Administor - without doing anything more demanding than RTFM and browsing web self-help forums. :)

6. Excellence of the primary software packages for creative production, with the proviso that Logic is still a software package in transition, and has yet to become a proper Apple-developed application.

7. User-friendliness of the interface, and standardisation of Apple-software guidelines (Logic excepting during its continuing period of transition).

8. Considerably increased productivity as a result of the ergonomics and standardisation of the user-interface, and lack of down-time caused by (i) flaky software or (ii) unstable hardware or badly written hardware driver software.

All of the above - which of course come at a considerable price ;) - make Mac ownership score considerably higher in all the published indeces of return-on-investment that I am aware of.

Mac usage is considerably higher than a few percent in all its targeted creative professional markets, especially professional music or video production.

The main reason I chose, in 1993, having used computers since a ZX80 in about 1982 and having owned about 42 different models in the 80s/early90s, to switch to a Mac (a £3500 Quadra 840), was that I recognised that it freed me from the need to acquire extensive hard-learnt geek-skills, and allowed me to set up as a creative video production/post-production professional on my own and get back to what I prefer to do - create movies and movie-soundtracks, both linear and interactively-accessible :)

Whilst I recognise since about 2000 it is now possible to do what I have been doing on a Mac since 1993 on a Windows XP machine, I have found that, with my limited experience, that I am incapable of administering an XP computer.

I've just tried for about 3 days to get past XP Professional's defences and load a video file onto a colleague's new Sony laptop, but the inscrutability of the Administrator Password methodology means that the laptop has had to go off to Computer Services to have the permissions reset appropriately. :frown:

My problem of course, but I don't have that with a Mac. There a dozen people here at this forum who would give the precise solution within an hour or so were it a Mac's login screen that was causing the problem. ;)

So in conclusion, frankly I don't give a damn if the Mac's processor architecture changes. A Mac will still present itself as a Mac, and will still cost at least twice as much as a corresponding Dell or HP box :)

And I'll very happily pay for that for:
1. Return on Investment. My main Mac's have a usefully productive working life of at least 3 years, and an ancillary networked life of double that.
2. User friendliness and increased productivity, with negligible hardware down-time, and almost zero software down-time given minimal regular maintenance.
3. Vastly increased software productivity, as all the major software packages I use are designed to be the 'best' :) Even Logic will be so one day - once it has got through the current transitional period and has been released in full conformity with OS X Apple Interface guidelines.... ;)
4. Ease of learning application software, as the standardised interface guidelines (Logic excepted ;) ) give enhanced user-friendliness.

Of course I am an old fogey. :D The only computer I saw before I was 35 was the 3,000-odd valve (EF54s ;) ) EDSAC in the Cambridge Mathematical Laboratory - it was my uncle's Personal Computer :)
www.cl.cam.ac.uk/UoCCL/misc/EDSAC99/reminiscences
Quote:
"There were several levels of machine use authorisation - allowed to use the machine under supervision, allowed to use it alone and switch it off, and allowed to switch it on. Plus one unofficial higher level - to achieve enough confidence to turn J.C.P. Miller off the machine when his time had run out and it was one's own turn."
And at his home he had another 'computer'...
"To see Dr J.C.P. Miller on his Brunsvega hand machine was amazing; how did he turn the handle so quickly?....
finding Dr J.C.P. Miller working a manual Brunsvega calculator completely engrossed in his calculations, not noticing me at all. Fingers moving at the speed of light - I could work out some of the short cuts he was making, others left me baffled. It was rather like watching Paganini practising. "
I too spent a summer, being paid as a holiday-job, checking my uncle's log table calculations on his Brunsvega (for publication for generations of O level school children to use.. :frown: )
PaulD
Regular
Posts: 52
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 1:00 am

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby Rick Taylor » Sat Jun 11, 2005 5:40 pm

PaulD wrote:Whilst I recognise since about 2000 it is now possible to do what I have been doing on a Mac since 1993 on a Windows XP machine, I have found that, with my limited experience, that I am incapable of administering an XP computer.


I'd think that compared with running any of the animation or video programs available in the late '80s and early '90s that logging into xp would be fairly simple. {I spent a year in '93 taking computer graphics courses on Macintii... {full time {4.0}} even got to mess with the occasional Quadra...} Even stuff like Director and Illustrator, back then, was fairly complex... to say nothing of ElectricImage and coding your objects by hand. Scripting graphics in the late '8os had a slightly higher learning curve than typing one's password. {You remember what a bitch the early versions of AE were?}

What I don't understand is why you wouldn't have gone with an SGI. {or a good DOS editor}
Rick Taylor
Regular
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 1:00 am

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby PaulD » Sat Jun 11, 2005 6:45 pm

Rick Taylor wrote:What I don't understand is why you wouldn't have gone with an SGI. {or a good DOS editor}

Hi
I did :frown:
www.cbs-i.co.uk/studio/images/g4cupboard.jpg
There's an IRIS Indigo (blue tower-box) on the upper shelf (top left, between the G4 and the printer under an old SCSI RAID array box).
Photoshop (v2) and Premiere (v3) for SGI-Unix sucked compared to the Mac versions. And there was no audio sequencer whatsoever!!!
And DOS graphics, made up of asterisks, parentheses and em-dashes sucked even worse :frown:

(BTW I threw away the Indigo's guts about 5 years ago and nowadays there are 8 SCSI drives in the box. And they're obsolete these days - apart from secondary backup usage.....)

(BTW BTW That's an old Nubus tower Mac (c1997) behind the chair-back, still running an analogue component video capture system that allows me to control video sync-pulse timing parameters in a way that no other current-generation gear does.)
PaulD
Regular
Posts: 52
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 1:00 am

Re: Gadzooks! Apple confirm move to Intel rumours.

Postby Rick Taylor » Sat Jun 11, 2005 7:04 pm

Rick Taylor wrote:DOS

I got sort of homesick and did some searching... In case anyone feels like reliving the past:

ftp://ftp.simtel.net/pub/simtelnet/msdos/telix/
Rick Taylor
Regular
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 1:00 am

PreviousNext