Bugbyte

It's a little more complicated than that (he says, not really understanding it himself). The hardware configuration in the Apples are fairly well controlled. You don't get bare bones PC's with weird architectures inside them that have to be supported. The number of variables is lower in the hardware.

Also, there's "stuff" on the Intel boxes that isn't on the Apple. Parallel ports, serial ports, I2C, to name a few.

It's not clear that things like multiprocessor applications would thread the same as they do on the Power PC chip (I'd think...NO!) for one thing. All of the operating system "insulation" that Mac OSX does for you would have to be rewritten for the Intel boxes.

I suppose you can port just about anything to just about anything. I think Pear PC runs the Mac OSX on the Intel by emulating everything in software. Slow, but I understand that it works.

The main question is "what value would that bring to Apple?". Are they better off at the end of the day selling more copies of Tiger on Intel or are they better off building machines like the Mini that make it more attractive to switch yet simple for Apple to support?

__________________
-Where in the world is the iBug?
-Find out about theiBug
-Attention Newbies! Have you seen the FAQ Emporium?
-No time to figure it out? Take 5 minutes to view the Car PC 101 video

Hcomplyr

Just because the hardware is there doesn't mean it has to be supported, i'm just saying to get a running OSX installation on a PC shouldn't be that hard, It would run but it would take a while to support all of the nuances of the platform. For instance just because PC's have serial and paralell ports doesn't mean the OS should natively support them especially since the industry is moving away from them. USB and Firewire I'm sure wouldn't take too much effort to get going on the PC since the technology is the same. SO all i'm saying is the CORE of the OS could run. I would indeed take a large effort to fully use the platform. I was basing the fact that the Unix system which is the heart of OSX runs on just about every modern system, so why would it seem unreasonable for it to be ported to the PC?

__________________
500Mhz Celeron, 256MB RAM, 20GB Hard drive, Sound Blaster MP3 USB
Installing in Monte

1994 Ford Probe SE beater/Girlfriend's car

1995 Monte Carlo Z34 Engineless carPC

frodobaggins

It wouldn't take Apple long at all to port OSX to a x86 chip architecture with controlled hardware.

__________________
FrodoPlayer.com
TeaBaggins.com
[H]4 Life
My next generation Front End is right on schedule.
It will be done sometime in the next generation.
I'm a lesbian too.
I am for hire!

Bugbyte

It's not porting it to some specific set of hardware (and by the way, I'm not against this idea even though it sounds like I am). It's just...what do they get for that?

Switching to Mac is switching to Mac, whether the hardware is Intel or not. Why in the world would a PC user switch to an operating system that doesn't run the software they have and requires them to learn the nuances of a new operating system?

I just don't see what this would do for Apple other than wreck their hardware sales. Like I said, I could see them moving to an Intel platform sometime in the OS-11 time frame when the legacy apps on the PowerPC won't work anyway or can be emulated like OS9 apps are today in OSX.

One of the reasons that Linux is available is that its open source and lots of people are interested in seeing it succeed on many platforms. I don't know how that would apply to Apple's OS.

I've been wrong before. Probably am now. I bet Apple announces this tomorrow. That would teach me.

__________________
-Where in the world is the iBug?
-Find out about theiBug
-Attention Newbies! Have you seen the FAQ Emporium?
-No time to figure it out? Take 5 minutes to view the Car PC 101 video

sdashiki

hmmm apple has used PPC chips for over a decade and a half or so...

switching to intel...
bargaining chip rumors...

this thread
proof positive it is working in Apple's favor to get IBM to build their chips quicker

APPLE IS NOT SWITCHING FROM PPC TO INTEL. 100% positively it is NOT. Dont argue with me, they arent. No point, no nothing. And whats more the rumors never say intel will now make the apple CPU, it just says in talks with Intel. Intel makes all types of chips... **** i think i saw an intel ROM or something on an AMD motherboard...

__________________
(----) 0.0%
No more loot for the carpute.
Trying to fit my 20" iMac into the dash... RF 600.5 amp, two 10" JLW0, 8 Infinity Components

anthropod

Well it looks like some major news outlets might have egg on their face if Apple doesn’t announce tomorrow that it migrating to Intel.

It has gotten pretty thick.

If they do announce it, I predict three things.

1. Slow up on software development.
2. Slower hardware sales. I for one would wait to buy an Intel mac as I am typing this on a 6 year old Powermac and I try to get the most out of my systems. I was looking to buy a new mac this summer, but I will wait and see what they say tomorrow.
3. A brief stock boost as many investors don’t really know the implications this will have and look favorably towards Apple for jumping into bed with intel.

If I was a developer, I would be worried right now. Just think of all the code rewrites that would have to take place.

I know that IBM has not been the best at keeping their promise, but I wouldn’t call the G5 a slouch. It still has industry leading features and performance on many apps.

Pros:
Cheaper macs….perhaps.
Shorter product life cycles. (Faster computers sooner.)
Large R&D budget.
Perhaps more software? I would think it would be much easier to port software to Macintosh if it was on an X86 platform.

Cons:
Short term turmoil that might be really rough.
Might open up the platform and we could get crappie macs out there. If they do that I hope they mandate the use of reference designs.
For mac zealots, it makes it a little less special owning a mac because you would be running on the same hardware as Windows folks. :-)

Hcomplyr

IT HAS BEGUN!

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050606/sfm142.html?.v=9

BWAHAHAHAHAAHA!!!!

Intel 2115644545
IBM 15147

__________________
500Mhz Celeron, 256MB RAM, 20GB Hard drive, Sound Blaster MP3 USB
Installing in Monte

1994 Ford Probe SE beater/Girlfriend's car

1995 Monte Carlo Z34 Engineless carPC

Bugbyte

Care to revise your post?

__________________
-Where in the world is the iBug?
-Find out about theiBug
-Attention Newbies! Have you seen the FAQ Emporium?
-No time to figure it out? Take 5 minutes to view the Car PC 101 video

MikeH

...ouch!

__________________
MikeH
CarNetix
------------
Helpful info at http://www.carnetix.com
C134, M10000, 40GHDD, XM-PCR, CarNetix P2140, FP

Hcomplyr

I win I win I win

__________________
500Mhz Celeron, 256MB RAM, 20GB Hard drive, Sound Blaster MP3 USB
Installing in Monte

1994 Ford Probe SE beater/Girlfriend's car

1995 Monte Carlo Z34 Engineless carPC

kandyman676

Beat me to it Bugbyte:-) hehe.

I, for one, am happy about this move. Virtual PC should operate 10x better then its doing now.

However, I was hoping AMD would be chosen instead of Intel.

__________________
"If it works this good why F with it?" -KMFDM "Intro"

Strive for ethical wardriving: http://faq.wardrive.net/

My CarCPUs: v1 - 2000 | v2 - 2004
Mp3Car Meets: http://detrimental.org/eyecandy/MP3CarMeets