 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| ACS
| Commons
| Calendar
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| ACS
| Commons
| Calendar
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat |
|
| | ||
| 0 user currently in Hardware/Software. |
| Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - Hardware/Software - Apple to Use Intel Microprocessors Beginning in 2006 |
 |  |  |
| Pages: 1 2 | Add to favorites | "RSS" Feed | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| User | Post | ||
|
Tarale I'm not under the alfluence of incohol like some thinkle peop I am. It's just the drunker I sit here the longer I get.  Level: 73  Posts: 2033/2720 EXP: 3458036 For next: 27832 Since: 03-18-04 From: Adelaide, Australia Since last post: 4 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| Huh wha... a huh... wha.... uh......uhhh.... ?! I wouldn't have believed it, if it wasn't on Apple's own website. Interesting. I wonder what architecture it will be on. I very strongly doubt they will use x86. |
|||
FreeDOS Lava Lotus Wannabe-Mod :< Level: 59 Posts: 1475/1657 EXP: 1648646 For next: 24482 Since: 03-15-04 From: Seattle Since last post: 6 hours Last activity: 4 hours |
| ||
| There are other news sites that say Pentium 4... so perhaps it will be x86. I just hope that all they're doing is giving Intel license to manufacture PowerPC chips, since their ties with IBM haven't gone well recently. Anyway... if this is for x86, I won't need new hardware to run Mac OS X!  |
|||
Kitten Yiffer Purple wand Furry moderator Vivent l'exp����¯�¿�½������©rience de signalisation d'amusement, ou bien ! Level: 135 Posts: 9839/11162 EXP: 28824106 For next: 510899 Since: 03-15-04 From: Sweden Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 4 min. |
| ||
| Besides Microsoft might pull the plug of the Macintosh version of Office, if they start to devolop Mac OS X. If they start to use X86... well. Doomed they are. X86 SUCKS. I read it about it on slashdot, thought the headline is wrong (They're not ditching IBM's PowerPC) Funny how X86 was chosen back in the day for the first IBM PC as the competive was considered too fast... computers maybe would have been better today if it wasn't for that. |
|||
|
Tarale I'm not under the alfluence of incohol like some thinkle peop I am. It's just the drunker I sit here the longer I get. Level: 73 Posts: 2034/2720 EXP: 3458036 For next: 27832 Since: 03-18-04 From: Adelaide, Australia Since last post: 4 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| When it comes to Mac Rumors, there are so many of the damned things, I refuse to trust Slashdot. When all the rumors were going around before, I told myself I'd only believe it if it was posted on Apple's own website.  And I like PowerPC  |
|||
neotransotaku Baby Mario 戻れたら、 誰も気が付く Level: 87 Posts: 3141/4016 EXP: 6220548 For next: 172226 Since: 03-15-04 From: Outside of Time/Space Since last post: 11 hours Last activity: 1 hour |
| ||
| I think they are changing instruction sets because intel has developed technology to maintain backwards compatibility with older x86 processors. Although it good for intel to pick up a deal with apple, i don't think it was in their best interest to redesign the circuity to use another instruction set. I could be wrong. The development kit is $999 dollars so I'm guessing the answer of whether they will be changing to x86 will be in there. | |||
|
HyperLamer <||bass> and this was the soloution i thought of that was guarinteed to piss off the greatest amount of people Sesshomaru Tamaranian Level: 118 Posts: 4820/8210 EXP: 18171887 For next: 211027 Since: 03-15-04 From: Canada, w00t! LOL FAD Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
They're moving from PPC to x86? ...I can't think of an analogy, but PPC > x86. Hell, quite a bit > x86.  |
|||
|
Tarale I'm not under the alfluence of incohol like some thinkle peop I am. It's just the drunker I sit here the longer I get. Level: 73 Posts: 2035/2720 EXP: 3458036 For next: 27832 Since: 03-18-04 From: Adelaide, Australia Since last post: 4 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by HyperHacker No, they're moving from PPC (IBM) to Intel, not necessarily x86. They haven't said on Apple's website what they're moving to, architecture wise.... and frankly, I'm not trusting any other website in regards to this... (edited by Tarale on 06-06-05 01:29 PM) (edited by Tarale on 06-06-05 01:30 PM) |
|||
|
Colleen Administrator Level: 136 Posts: 8507/11302 EXP: 29369328 For next: 727587 Since: 03-15-04 From: LaSalle, Quebec, Canada Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 1 hour |
| ||
This is going to be sooooo headache-inducing... it's pretty much a given that a lot of applications are going to have to be rewritten now for the new processor. Plus the articles I've read (media, not rumor hounds) say that one challenge will be for Apple to ensure that OS X... well... runs on Apple computers only.  God forbid Mac clones start popping up on the market.  |
|||
|
Kitten Yiffer Purple wand Furry moderator Vivent l'exp����¯�¿�½������©rience de signalisation d'amusement, ou bien ! Level: 135 Posts: 9846/11162 EXP: 28824106 For next: 510899 Since: 03-15-04 From: Sweden Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 4 min. |
| ||
| We get to know, sooner or later. If they made a mode there must be a good reason for, whatever it's cost or power... And hell, what other processors does Intel Produce? (edited by Kitten Yiffer on 06-06-05 02:32 PM) |
|||
windwaker Ball and Chain Trooper WHY ALL THE MAYONNAISE HATE Level: 61  Posts: 1642/1797 EXP: 1860597 For next: 15999 Since: 03-15-04 Since last post: 4 days Last activity: 6 days |
| ||
| X86! We're dependant on it, and it would mean more people using the Mac OS. | |||
|
FreeDOS Lava Lotus Wannabe-Mod :< Level: 59 Posts: 1479/1657 EXP: 1648646 For next: 24482 Since: 03-15-04 From: Seattle Since last post: 6 hours Last activity: 4 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by Colleen Not rewritten usually, but only recompiled for x86. And that won't be a problem if you use free software (but if you do, why are you running Mac OS X?)... |
|||
|
Colleen Administrator Level: 136 Posts: 8510/11302 EXP: 29369328 For next: 727587 Since: 03-15-04 From: LaSalle, Quebec, Canada Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 1 hour |
| ||
| Article I saw used "rewritten" although if an application is REALLY dependent on PowerPC assembly... :\ There likely will be a few compatibility nightmares resulting from this come this time next year, I bet. |
|||
KsoftFusion Paragoomba Level: 15  Posts: 55/71 EXP: 13389 For next: 2995 Since: 06-19-04 From: I don't know, gimme a map. Since last post: 25 days Last activity: 1 day |
| ||
| This is soft of neat. I'll be able to boot my 3 favorite OS's on one computer. Also, the programs will not have to be rewritten. Apple has a technology called "Rosetta" that will allow the PPC apps to run on the Intel Mac. Rumors are going around that they're also going to drop Classic. That would make me sad. (edited by KsoftFusion on 06-06-05 10:08 PM) |
|||
Mercury Shyguy Level: 16  Posts: 54/88 EXP: 18132 For next: 2124 Since: 07-08-04 From: Hihihi. Since last post: 1 day Last activity: 1 day |
| ||
| Yeah, for me its also a good thing. I don't buy a Mac because it has an IBM processor in it, I buy it because of the OS and well, the design  .If moving to Intel means even faster processors, it's only a good thing right? Also, this sounds VERY good for Mac gaming, maybe we'll eventually have Half-Life and all those other games that didn't make it (although most games today are luckily ported!). A few interesting things related to Mac gaming and switch to Intel  ! |
|||
|
neotransotaku Baby Mario 戻れたら、 誰も気が付く Level: 87 Posts: 3143/4016 EXP: 6220548 For next: 172226 Since: 03-15-04 From: Outside of Time/Space Since last post: 11 hours Last activity: 1 hour |
| ||
Originally posted by Colleenthe compatibility issues will arise from Apple's Rosetta Stone thingy--which is the software emulation later that allows old apple programs to be used in OSX I think. Anyways, converting programs into x86 isn't the problem--it's just testing them all over again is the issue here to ensure they do work correctly like they did in PowerPC. |
|||
|
Kitten Yiffer Purple wand Furry moderator Vivent l'exp����¯�¿�½������©rience de signalisation d'amusement, ou bien ! Level: 135 Posts: 9852/11162 EXP: 28824106 For next: 510899 Since: 03-15-04 From: Sweden Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 4 min. |
| ||
| Well, yeah. If they switch to X86 a port of Wine would be on it's way. And it's expected that someone make Wine easy to use... now people can stop making fun about how many games that are avaible on Macintosh computers. Still, that the Mac's was based on PowerPC was a reason why I was considering buying it... Thought there was a X86 version of one of the Mac OS's near the end of the 90's. I heard it was very unstable... |
|||
Ramsus Octoballoon Level: 19 Posts: 83/162 EXP: 34651 For next: 1126 Since: 01-24-05 From: United States Since last post: 39 days Last activity: 71 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Kitten Yiffer Xscale, which is an ARM derivative. I doubt they'd put it in a desktop machine -- they've done little work on it speed-wise. I don't have a problem with using Pentium 4's in Macs, since then Apple could more easily expand into the low-end market with high-quality software and well-designed computers. In addition, they could more easily negotiate better graphics cards for their iBooks and PowerBooks with nVidia and ATI. And the possibilities with x86 virtual machines and compatibility layers like WINE are great. EDIT: Oh, and Steve Jobs may be more cautious about the whole hardware thing after experiencing fKitten Yiffers in sales with NextStep and the G4 Cube. Moving to a more widespread platform might be an issue of comfort and security than anything else, especially since Intel can guarantee big supplies. (edited by Ramsus on 06-07-05 11:22 AM) |
|||
VL-Tone Red Cheep-cheep Level: 23  Posts: 47/200 EXP: 64158 For next: 3565 Since: 06-06-04 From: In the Moon! Since last post: 5 days Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| I don't feel like debating about any of this, but here are some facts. Apple will switch to x86 chips from intel, it's confirmed in the documentation, and developers systems are 3.6 GHz P4s. Consumers Mac intel machines will ship in one year (06/06/06?) Many current apps will work on OS X intel with very little changes in the source code and simply a recompile. A simple checkbox enables compiling for PowerPC, intel x86, or both. No need to "rewrite" the apps. Some, like Dashboard "widgets" or Java-based programs will run as is with no recompiling. Others will require more changes, but its doable, in a few weeks/ months. Microsoft (well the MBU spokesperson, Macintosh Business Unit) and Adobe were on stage to show their support for the transition. Office and other MS apps will be ported to OS X on intel (much to my own amazement) As for apps that wont be recompiled, Apple has a good track record regarding emulation of previously used processors. The 68k emulator during the 68k->PPC transition was very compatible and relatively fast. Apple has bought some technology from Transitive for their Rosetta code translator that will run a great percentage of non recompiled PowerPC programs transparently and at usable speed on intel processors (much faster than PearPC). Every release of Mac OS X since 5 years has been tested in secret on x86, that includes all the "iApps", iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto and iDVD. The OS was designed from the start to be CPU independent, so it should be stable. Mac OS X is based on NeXT's OpenStep OS that ran on intel processors when Apple bought the company. OpenStep already had mechanisms for dealing with CPU transitions ("Fat binaries"). Apple has stated that they wont allow OS X to run on non-Apple hardware. I guess alot of you guys are pissed off about this, but they have reasons not to do it for now. Once the transition is over, they can decide to make it available for all x86 machines at any moment if they feel they can do it. Maybe some hack will make it possible before, we'll see. They said though that they won't stop anyone from doing a program that runs Win32 apps on the Mac. So we'll probably see VMware and VirtualPC types solution appearing, that will run Windows programs at 80-90% speed. Much an improvement from current Windows emulation on PPC Macs. Anyway since I remember reading here that "nobody in his right mind would do ROM hacking on a Mac", I wont get deeper into the implications of it since I already feel estranged enough here. |
|||
|
||bass Programmer Admin Level: 44  Posts: 446/817 EXP: 570813 For next: 40472 Since: 03-15-04 From: Salem, Connecticut Since last post: 26 days Last activity: 11 days |
| ||
Originally posted by VL-ToneIt would still apply since most of the tools, etc are still written to work against the Windows API. Emulating windows (such as with WINE) would be easier given the similar hardware. Performance in general would be similar to running WINE at best, VMWare at worst. Good, not great though. |
|||
|
Tarale I'm not under the alfluence of incohol like some thinkle peop I am. It's just the drunker I sit here the longer I get. Level: 73 Posts: 2042/2720 EXP: 3458036 For next: 27832 Since: 03-18-04 From: Adelaide, Australia Since last post: 4 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by VL-Tone Bleh, that disappoints me for some reason. Not that I have a problem with x86, I guess I was just hoping to see Intel and Apple innovate like Intel and IBM did back with PowerPC. I was dreaming of a nice collab I wonder how many idiots will try to install OS X on their x86's now and complain it doesn't run right (edited by Tarale on 06-07-05 07:34 PM) |
| Pages: 1 2 | Add to favorites | "RSS" Feed | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - Hardware/Software - Apple to Use Intel Microprocessors Beginning in 2006 |
| | |
