digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Apple OFFICIALLY switched to Intel Chipsets

engadget.com — "We've been through many transistions. 680x0 to PowerPC, Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X. Today we begin a third transition. It's true; We are switching to Intel." The Transistion is to be complete by WDCC 2007

show profanity settings
expand all
  • digital_ice, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1i just bought a g4 mac a few months ago, now it just gone obsolete

    damn you steve jobs damn you
  • digital_ice, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0going to sell my mac on ebay right now
  • bimp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0now what do I do!? was looking to get a 12" powerbook but don't know anymore.
  • mrman5917, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Its not going to be obsolete anymore than any other mac would be after a year or two. OS X will be identical, programs will continue to work (after a recompilation using the new xCode) and life will go on.
  • Logik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0i honestly feel like the switch to INTEL was the worst... amd would've been a better choice i think. granted i think it came down to the fact that amd doesn't have a solid stable low power chip worth using in low power consumption laptops yet, where intel has the pentium-m. very disappointing. I won't be buying another mac for a long time, just purchased my first powerbook about 13 months ago. i've gotten great use out of it, but at the same time i feel like 2 years is too little out of a $1800 laptop.

    i'm keeping my powerbook, i work really well with it, but i won't be purchasing a machine until this transition is over and they come to their senses and use amd.
  • eric_n_dfw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Why, did your G4 Mac just magically stop working?

    OS X will be supporting PPC for a long time - and by the time the x86 based machines are shipping, your G4 Mac will probably be ready for replacement anyway.
  • shit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Holy *****: "Mac OS X has been living a secret double life for the past 5 years... the keynote’s been running on a P4 3.6GHz all morning...The soul of a Mac is its operating system."

    So it is x86? Damn. I wonder what effect this will have on Microsoft. I, for one, will at least be dual-booting. I will also break off the extra 5 buttons I have on my mouse.
  • Logik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0if you want a powerbook, buy one. the binaries will be compatible for the next 3-4 years probably without any problems. but at some point you will be cut off. I won't be buying another machine, but i have my 15" powerbook and i'm not getting rid of it.
  • monolith, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wow!!! Steve jobs is freaking smart... HOW much fraking press did he get out of this!!!??? It won't matter technically really what processor is in the Mac... but man what a way to get PR/mindshare. Go JOBS GO!!!
  • kefkakrist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Unless I misunderstood, all programs that come out for the x86 Mac will be compatible with the PPC Mac. Programs that are out now for the PPC Mac will need some tinkering to work with the x86 Mac but for now if you have a Mac you will have no problem running the next gen software...
  • dusingaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0imagine OSX 10.5 Leopard comes out the same time as Long horn, BUT works on macs and PCs, meaning they take Microsoft head on in the OS world.
  • mragentr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Macintel. AMD would have been the better choice, as they have been the real innovatior lately. Wonder if they will be going 32 or 64-bit, single or dual core? If they are not going 32-bit, dual core, then they are stepping backwards, as the PC world is moving to 64-bit, dual core.
  • Duston, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I understand that he is moving to the Intel chipset "x86". AMD also runs on an x86 format. I think this will finaly allow me to get a mac! (price issues)
  • Logik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0you won't be dualbooting... this will NOT run on any old PC hardware. apple will force the os to only run on their hardware.. it's that simple.. want os x? buy a mac. no difference there.
  • dechah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This has the potential to put a major dent in the sale of new Apple hardware until the transition to Intel is phased in. Why would anyone buy a new PPC computer today,when the future is Intel? I can imagine tha tthere are quite a few independant resellers that are going to struggle even more, at least in the next couple of years, at least until the transitions is complete.
  • mrman5917, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ Duston

    Well, maybe. Apple is still a hardware seller, and will likely lock down OS X to run on special machines produced by them. They may not since the keynote was running on a Dell (hearsey) but who knows.
  • Logik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Ok here's the run down.

    1. x86 partnership with intel.. from this standpoint, i don't see amd
    2. OS X will not boot on any old dell or homebrew computer
    3. they will not be taking on microsoft by allowing you to install it on any hardware you want.
    4. if you want OS X, you buy a Mac. That just happens to have a x86 processor
  • mrman5917, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I agree with Logik...How else would Apple make its money??
  • Marmot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I wonder how long before HAL.DLL is ported to the new x86 Mac?
  • mragentr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0(note: I just installed Tiger on my iBook) They make their money by selling you the Apple lifestyle. They force you to keep buying hardware and software at a much greater rate than Microsoft. Honestly, Tiger is not that revolutionary and is equivilant to what Microsoft would release for free as a service pack. Committed Apple fans continue to buy their products because they have something new. Now they will force people to upgrade again. Wonder how this will bode for PPC based sales?
  • mrman5917, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0When was the last time a Service Pack dramitaclly changed the core of the operating system? Tiger is dramatically different under the hood, including a new multithreading kernel, a new loader, etc. M$ would not do something like that in a service pack. Think XP to Longshot more than anything else.
  • Logik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Tiger is much more than you think. Tiger includes things microsoft is putting into Longhorn.. or well.. WAS going to put into longhorn. Spotlight (i don't use it frequently, but i'm glad it's there now), dashboard (i use it sporatically and love it), Core Image (increased my battery life by 30 minutes)... there's a lot of great under the hood changes in Tiger and i felt it was worth the $70 i paid with my educational discount.

    oh and DirectX will not be ported to OS X.. for christs sake.. just because OS X can now run on x86 processors does not mean that you can just whip up directx on os x with minor effort, direct x is tied into WINDOWS, not x86.
  • Marmot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Another interesting idea... I wonder how hard it will be to reverse engineer whatever makes an 'Apple PC' able to run OSX--it would be theoretically possible to run OSX on regular PC hardware with the right emulation/virtualization hardware, and at native speed.

    I keep thinking of a VMware twist here...
  • test5477, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0they won't open osx up to all PCs.
    I am a huge Mac fan with 3 in my house now and this is a little bit disappointing. Mac people like to be the underdog and this seems like signing a deal with the devil in order to make a couple extra bucks. I have faith in Steve but I wonder how this will affect the hardcore fans.
  • myrdog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0OK, so most people seem to be thinking that OS X will not run on just any old Desktop PC, correct? However, if Apple does not lock down their hardware and allows me to install Windows XP (or Longhorn) on their hardware, they are definitely getting my business. Anyone else feel this way? Or would you boycott their hardware for locking down the OS?
  • mrman5917, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Well, the Apple hardware has always been "locked down" of sorts. It would be fantastic if I could run OS X and XP(longhorn) on my laptop though. :)
  • Logik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Marmot... wtf are you talking about?

    The difference between Apple's x86 setup and .. dell's for example is the bios. Apple uses OpenFirmware. OS X upon installation will check to make sure your computer is running OpenFirmware and probably certain hardware hooks here and there. If all is ok, it boots the installer, otherwise it kicks you out. you won't have to emulate ANYTHING, it'll be a PC with a few minor differences that make it an Apple and as such the only machines capable of running OS X.

    A modchip won't cut it, it'll be a combination of bios firmware, and hardware (my guess).

    the next biggest thing is this. Drivers. OS X will only include drivers for THEIR hardware. not your dell, not your HP or Compaq, ONLY THEIRS. so even if you do somehow get to bypass their stuff, it won't be supported due to you not having the correct hardware.
  • mragentr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I agree with Marmot, I think the emulation scene running OSX on PC will take off now. Of course Apple's lawyers will be there to slap them down even worse than the bloggers.
  • myrdog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yes mrman, the hardware has always been locked down, because Microsoft did not build XP for use on a PPC Platform, but with the x86 change, it opens "Windows" (get it?) of opportunity.
  • test5477, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0how will this affect the virus and spyware advantage that apple has now?
  • mrman5917, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0myrdog, perhaps it will open windows, but it is still too early to say. I am sure that if there is a way to run windows on a x86 mac, then that will happen, but I have a feeling that there will be no way for a regular PC to run OS X.
  • mrman5917, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@test5477

    Viruses are OS specific, not processor specific.
  • myrdog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0mrman, I agree completely with you. I really don't see a way in which Apple could "lock out" Windows or why they would, as they have already made thier profits off of the hardware sales (and, in theory, the bundled OS X price).
  • DeVryGuy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@Logik : The question isn't if you can install OS X on an old pc or homebrew, the question is will you be able to install Windows on a Macintel.

    A mac you can use for PC gaming as well is nothing to sneeze at.
  • Plecky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm just glad about this due to those obsessive Mac people out there (sometimes known as the Mac Cult). Their either going to have to eat up the same words they've been saying about intel to continue supporting mac in future years, or follow PPC in whatever it does and say goodbye to MacIntel. This will be a real test of the Mac Cultist out there, if there really "big fans of mac and Steve Jobs" like they claim they are, then they'll back up the software end. If all they care about is the PPC and hardware, then they'll leave the Mac Cult, those hypocritical sons of a... Hey anyways, maybe this will help the Mac Mini and Tiger and all the other steps apple has taken to attract the PC crowd, personally I know in Mid-2006 I'll be getting one of these new systems! Am I the only one who likes this news just to see the sheer affect it will have on those annoying Mac Cultist. Don't get me wrong, I love Tiger and Mac's been doing awesome, but there's one thing to love something with a open mind and another to just be completely biased. Personally I like seeing these people forced to either eat up all that crap they've been saying about Microsoft-PC chips or go the way of the PPC in a year or so down the road. Maybe they won't be as annoying now...
  • mragentr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0In an utopian world, this would spark the first transition to a happy world where PC & Mac, Unix & NT, open source & closed source, open & closed computer architecture could all co-exist together without the fret of software, hardware, or file compatability. But then again, maybe Intel made Apple a deal they could not refuse (Dell?) in honor of the all mighty dollar.
  • Plecky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Does that make me a evil person?
  • Plecky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Does that make me a evil person?
  • mragentr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0In an utopian world, this would spark the first transition to a happy world where PC & Mac, Unix & NT, open source & closed source, open & closed computer architecture could all co-exist together without the fret of software, hardware, or file compatability. But then again, maybe Intel made Apple a deal they could not refuse (Dell?) in honor of the all mighty dollar.
  • chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If it looks like a Mac and runs like a Mac, what do you care what is under the hood?
  • chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If it looks like a Mac and runs like a Mac, what do you care what is under the hood?
  • chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If it looks like a Mac and runs like a Mac, what do you care what is under the hood?
  • test5477, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0how will they keep PC companies from making all PCs run OSX?
  • DeVryGuy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ Plecky: It's really the same on both sides. There are Macies who refuse to see the merits of the PC side (gaming, cheapness, huge third party) and there are PC Cultists who bash the merits of owning a Mac (great first party software, stability, "It Just Works").

    There will always be fanboys on both sides, and God hates them all.
  • helfire, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"how will this affect the virus and spyware advantage that apple has now?"

    How would it change it? It's not the prosessor that gets infected with spyware/viruses, it's Windows that does. More market share may mean more people will try, but it wont have anything to do with the prosessors.
  • egrumling, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Damn, this must be the biggest geek story of the year... Digg slashdotted, Slashdot slashdotted. All over the lastest release of NextStep 486.
  • Aflat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You will be duel booting. The thing is, you will have to buy an Apple machine, and then add linux/MS to it. You won't be able to buy a Dell and put OS10 on it, at least I don't think you will be able to.
  • Plecky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Haha, DeVryGuy you're right. I guess I just don't know as many people who are so passionate about their PC's as Mac people are about their Mac's (or as defensive). But you make a good point, but such PC fanboys would drive me nuts too. Maybe I just like the argue and defend both sides, or I'm just a neutralist who likes to see everything as gray and not black and white or right and wrong or best and worse etc. Thanks DeVryGuy for setting me strait, and yes there's a special place in Hell for such fanboys ;) I'm kidding of course...?
  • mercano, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Why Intel? If they are looking for low power consumption, high power computation CPUs, the AMD64s have been blowing the P4s away as of late. On the desktop, at least. I think Centrino still has the portable edge.

    So how long till WINE for OSX-x86? If they could get that going, they can really start getting some switchers.
  • Marmot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Logik, I know there are obstacles in getting OSX for x86 running on a non-Mac machine, but I don't think it'll be as hard as you think. The secret will be to trick OSX into thinking its running on a real mac--i.e. create a virtualized X86 Mac environment, much the same way that VMware makes a virtualized X86 PC environment. I'm also thinking of Mac-on-linux, where you can actually run OSX under a PPC install of Linux, even on non-Apple hardware. In fact, you can already run OSX on your existing PC, via PearPC...slowly. The Mac has already been virtualized before, in multiple ways.

    It really comes down to the machine check, and whether it can be emulated or not. If x86 Macs have some sort of encrypted challenge/response mechanism between the software and a TCPA-type chip on the motherboard, that may be tough to get around, legally or otherwise.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 65 of 65 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.