Originally posted by xortam
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Hell freezing over? Apple in talks with Intel
Collapse
X
-
In which case, maybe an X-scale? Something non-x86. After all, Apple's already working on iTunes for phones.Gigabyte P35-DS3L with a Q6600, 2GB Kingston HyperX (after *3* bad pairs of Crucial Ballistix 1066), Galaxy 8800GT 512MB, SB X-Fi, some drives, and a Dell 2005fpw. Running WinXP.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JesterzwildThat's the speculation, and it's based on the fact that IBM has been unable to produce a G5 processor capable of being used in the Powerbook and iBook lines.P.S. You've been Spanked!
Comment
-
Originally posted by WombatIn which case, maybe an X-scale? Something non-x86. After all, Apple's already working on iTunes for phones.“Inside every sane person there’s a madman struggling to get outâ€
–The Light Fantastic, Terry Pratchett
Comment
-
Originally posted by JammrockThere have also been rumors that Apple is working on a PDA type device, in which case you can't beat an Xscale. That makes a lot more sense that an x86 processor for their computers. Maybe they'll resurrect the Newton
It doesn't do floating point math natively and there's even lots of known CPU bugs. I'm not talking about obscure op codes either. I used to be an active member of the HP PDA dev program but I gave up because the support all around was so terrible. I remember that a breakout clone game I used to play played very differently on two IPAQs that I had (even though they were the same CPU) because there was a stepping difference and the math for the bounce angle and velocity was being calculated differently!P.S. You've been Spanked!
Comment
-
“Inside every sane person there’s a madman struggling to get outâ€
–The Light Fantastic, Terry Pratchett
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by ALBPMOH the HORROR!!!!!...
No Damn Answers !!!tm...tm courtesy of xortam
"I know nuthink!"
Last edited by xortam; 24 May 2005, 11:48.<TABLE BGCOLOR=Red><TR><TD><Font-weight="+1"><font COLOR=Black>The world just changed, Sep. 11, 2001</font></Font-weight></TR></TD></TABLE>
Comment
-
Originally posted by WombatI strongly disagree. Apple is a hardware company first. They produce software to support their hardware. If they went x86, then they'd lost their hardware lock-in.
Comment
-
Originally posted by WombatI strongly disagree. Apple is a hardware company first. They produce software to support their hardware. If they went x86, then they'd lost their hardware lock-in.<TABLE BGCOLOR=Red><TR><TD><Font-weight="+1"><font COLOR=Black>The world just changed, Sep. 11, 2001</font></Font-weight></TR></TD></TABLE>
Comment
-
Originally posted by The PITBut against that they can sell more Macs to a wider audience who don't like being locked in.
One of the best things about Macs is that Macs work. The primary reason that they work is because Apple has strict control of what hardware you will run their software on. Hardware incompatibilities, tolerances, all that stuff that the PC crowd has to put up with. Apple is free of that. Going to open hardware like the PC market would ruin them.Gigabyte P35-DS3L with a Q6600, 2GB Kingston HyperX (after *3* bad pairs of Crucial Ballistix 1066), Galaxy 8800GT 512MB, SB X-Fi, some drives, and a Dell 2005fpw. Running WinXP.
Comment
-
Originally posted by WombatWhich would totally work against them.
One of the best things about Macs is that Macs work. The primary reason that they work is because Apple has strict control of what hardware you will run their software on. Hardware incompatibilities, tolerances, all that stuff that the PC crowd has to put up with. Apple is free of that. Going to open hardware like the PC market would ruin them.
Besides how often do you see intolerances in the PC market today. It's now fairly rare as the market has matured a lot.
Comment
-
It's either just sabre-rattling to get a better deal, the mobile thing (hadn't thought about that), or some PDA (yay!). There already is an x86 port for OSX, like there was for every recent MacOS.
AZ
Comment
Comment