Hell freezing over? Apple in talks with Intel

[schmosef]

I didn't know about that file renaming issue that used to plague OSX (or was it OS9?). That would be really frustrating for anyone trying to switch from Windows to Mac.

[Kurt]

Lots of ppl that used to work on a Mac then transfer documents to a PC got stuck with the limitation of 8.3 filenames. You couldn't open your files by clicking on them. You just had to either rename them or simply open the program and through it browse to your file and open it that way. OS X reintroduced the file extension too, previous versions used to have a file type descriptor in the file itself.

Anyway, the real problem from switching OS is that you get little habits that are sometimes hard to lose. First time users do not have that problem, you can put them in front of about anything and they'll simply learn how to use it without complaining how this or that was better on another system.

[ZokesPro]

I wonder if anyone noticed this article?

Hell HAS frozen over, cause it ain't talking about the Xscale.

http://www.techtree.com/techtree/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=4210&cat_id=581

[Kurt]

Yes, still waiting for the announcement though...

[schmosef]

there's been so much propaganda about the ppc risc architecture being superior to the x86 cisc. every mac head i know has tried that argument with me, unsuccessfully.

i'm wondering how they'll overcome that.

[Kurt]

Fanboys.

Besides the x86 CPUs are not really CISC anymore. More like a RISC CPU within a CISC wrapper.

[schmosef]

remember that classic line from Hackers where Angelina "Acid Burn" Jolie says "RISC architecture is gonna change everything" and Jonny Lee "Crash Override/Zero Cool" Miller pronounces "RISC is good"?

ahh memories...

[Jessterw]

Better technology doesn't always win out in the market place, that should be more than evident. Not saying that RISC is better, mind you; I could care less about what platform it runs on as long as I can get the job done

[KeiFront]

It's official "Apple to Use Intel Microprocessors Beginning in 2006" http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html

[ZokesPro]

It's official "Apple to Use Intel Microprocessors Beginning in 2006" http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html

My feet are getting cold, Hell seems to be freezing over.

[ALBPM]

... ROTFLMAOtm!!!! ...
tm courtesy of ALBPM aka Darth Mahl [MU]

[magician]

I don't know how many of you realize it but "RISC vs CISC" is a matter of general concept rather then solely style of CPU design and the way how they work internaly. Battle between Reduced and Complete Instruction Set Chips was a battle between concepts and engineering approaches which rests upon compiler technology and utilization of system memory. I think that this whole modern_x86_CPUs_are_in_fact_RISCs thing is so widely accepted because of several design techniques which ware adopted from early RISCs, such as pipe lines, register renameing (windowing), SIMD etc. No x86 processor will ever be a RISC because it uses hardware decoder to interpret abstract instructions generated by assembler or compiler rather then rest upon compiler-programmer to figure his way around limits.

It is important to differentiate between incorporated techniques and general design approaches because that will be crucial in evaluating future CPU architectures such as EPIC VLIW, which is respectable in regard of it's long term prospects. Speaking of which, I think that Apple might adopt IA64 at some point. It wouldn't be much of a surprise considering that SGI started offering Itanium2 based workstations. No matter what you think about Intel and conglomerates in itself, you have to admit that there is a future in VLIW concept and it is a much brighter then x86's. x86-64 will expand it for sure but for how long? 3, 5, 7 years?

I think that AMD's dedication to x86 is based on Intel's rigid patents and licencing policy, which applay to IA64, rather then on consumer (our) interests. So while it makes us and our wallets happy now, x86-64 may have negative impact on development of more advanced technologies and delay their propagation, but that is another story.

Apple on Intel CPUs? God help us! Just kidding. It will make their products more competative because they will reduce costs, but it is certainly end of an era. One by one, they lose all their destinctive features. First SCSI drives, then the OS, and now Power architecture. Slowly but steady they assimilate into a PC. I bet they will end up running Windows and Linux because of market demands and costs of future development of proprietary applications.

The best thing they could do now is to make x86 based iMac series and Itanium based Power series. I bet Intel will be more then gratefull for that, especially if you take in account that they are tired and sore of Dell holding their balls.

P.S. Note that there is no mention of x86 in the official release so we could hope for affordable Itanium workstations.

[Jessterw]

It's official "Apple to Use Intel Microprocessors Beginning in 2006" http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html

Well f* me and call me Susan

Truthfully, I'm not overly surprised, except that it's pretty much a full transition to the Intel x86 platform. This rather confirms the whole Marklar project rumour (OS X being compiled on both platforms throughout its development). Nice to see there is going to be support for the PowerPC platform for some time to come though. Porting should be a fairly simple process (relatively speaking), in addition to Mac apps compiled for PowerPC will be able to run under emulation on an Intel-based Mac.

Also, while they are ruling out any chance of OS X on any other x86 hardware, they are not ruling out Windows or any other x86 OS running on Intel-based Mac hardware.

Shall be interesting.

Edit: Here is a transcript of the keynote

http://live.macobserver.com/article/2005/06/wwdc2005_keynote.shtml

[The PIT]

All the Mac users now burn their macs in disgust.

[cjolley]

Well f* me and call me Susan

This would be bigger news to me than the Apple anouncement.