“Apple Computer Inc. has been in talks that could lead to a decision soon to use Intel Corp. chips in its Macintosh computer line, The Wall Street Journal reported Monday,” Reuters reports. “The report, citing two industry executives with knowledge of recent discussions between the companies, said Apple will agree to use Intel chips.”
“Neither company would confirm the report and an Apple spokeswoman told the Journal she would characterize it as ‘rumor and speculation.’ It was unclear whether such a move would signal a large-scale shift away from chips made by IBM, Apple’s longtime supplier, the report said,” Reuters reports. “Apple sells only about three million computers a year — a small portion of the estimated 200 million sold globally. But for Intel, winning over Apple would be a prestigious endorsement from one of technology’s most influential trend-setters and could associate the chipmaker with Apple’s hugely popular iPod music player.”
MacDailyNews Note: Apple is currently selling over 1 million Macs per quarter, or closer to 4.5 million Macs per year.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: With all three major next-gen gaming systems all going PowerPC and the G5 poised to break the 3GHz barrier, we don’t see this as anything more than a rumor. Unless Intel has something completely new that nobody outside Intel and Apple know about. Does anyone remember that the Apple, IBM, Motorola (AIM) Alliance developed the PowerPC? Why would Apple admit defeat, especially when GHz to GHz the PowerPC pummels anything from Intel into submission? This could be a planted story to save some sort of face for Intel as even Microsoft have dropped Intel and chosen PowerPC for the Xbox 360 and with Sony’s Cell processor causing so much excitement. For Apple to go backwards to what Intel currently offers would be ridiculous.
Macs are cheaper than PCs, and their processors are faster too. – Paul Murphy, “Will Apple switch to Intel?” – May 23, 2005.
Some things to keep in mind: Apple already uses Intel IOP chips in Xserve RAID, so maybe this is related to this rumor and people have gotten the details screwed up. Or maybe it’s a new Apple product like a remote control or tablet Mac or something that will use some Intel processors? Maybe Apple is using this to light a fire under IBM to finally get a G.D. 3GHz G5 Power Mac this summer. You know, the 3GHz G5 that we were supposed to have last summer as promised by Steve Jobs? And, (stop reading now if Mac OS X for Intel gives you a queasy stomach), as we reported last week, Intel did add FireWire 400 and 800 to latest motherboard. Also, remember that Apple’s iPod revenue stream makes them far less dependent on Mac hardware sales and give them the ability to maneuver in ways nobody would have dreamed just a few years ago.
The Wall Street Journal article (paid subscription required) is here.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple shares rise on Intel Mac rumors – May 23, 2005
Bio authors: Steve Jobs wants ‘to take back the computer business from Microsoft’ – May 23, 2005
Intel adds FireWire 400 and 800 to latest motherboard – May 18, 2005
Windows tech writer Thurrott keeps harping on ‘Apple Mac OS X for Intel” rumor – April 29, 2005
Apple Xserve RAID has ‘Intel Inside’ – March 04, 2005
Intel has no answer to the ‘Cell’ processor; will Apple use it in Macs? – February 10, 2005
Apple Macs now cost less and run faster than Wintel PCs – September 30, 2004
Apple CEO Jobs misses ‘3Ghz G5 within a year’ prediction by wide margin – June 09, 2004
Steve Jobs needs to stop making predictions he can’t hit – June 09, 2004
iPod success opens door to Mac OS X on Intel – March 04, 2004
Intel’s Senior VP and CTO: ‘Steve Jobs has made the wrong CPU choice for 20 years’ – August 05, 2003
Another call for OS X on Intel chips – July 09, 2003
Dvorak predicts the ‘MacIntel’; says ‘Apple must go with Intel or risk its future’ – April 07, 2003
Dvorak spews latest prediction: Apple to go Intel within 18 months – March 19, 2003
Intel claims MHz doesn’t matter; Wintel world perplexed – March 14, 2003
Steve Jobs needs to stop making predictions he can’t hit – June 09, 2004
[[zupchuck wrote: I’m asking an honest question here – how would moving to x86 acrchitecture improve security and stability for OS X? Please elaborate, it has lots on interesting implications.]]
Zupchuck:
I should’ve been clearer on this. I meant – by virtue of OSX being a more secure OS than Windows – running OSX on x86 will improve security for everyone. The comparison was (OSX on x86) vs (Windows on x86), and not (OSX on x86) vs. (OSX on PPC).
That thought leads to similar questions:
What would Intel do for Apple that IBM doesn’t already do? Faster chips? Faster development? Faster time-to-market?
What if OSX could run on 100 (or even 1000) times the number of computers they currently run on? How would developers react? How would customers react? How would businesses and the government react?
Is the lesson learned from iPod’s success that Apple embrace Windows rather than try to compete directly? (iPod didn’t take off until is was made compatible with Windows.)
—
I use both platforms because the work for me. What if both platforms were housed in the same console (desktop, entertainment unit, notebook, etc)?
[[zupchuck wrote: I’m asking an honest question here – how would moving to x86 acrchitecture improve security and stability for OS X? Please elaborate, it has lots on interesting implications.]]
Zupchuck:
I should’ve been clearer on this. I meant – by virtue of OSX being a more secure OS than Windows – running OSX on x86 will improve security for everyone. The comparison was (OSX on x86) vs (Windows on x86), and not (OSX on x86) vs. (OSX on PPC).
That thought leads to similar questions:
What would Intel do for Apple that IBM doesn’t already do? Faster chips? Faster development? Faster time-to-market?
What if OSX could run on 100 (or even 1000) times the number of computers they currently run on? How would developers react? How would customers react? How would businesses and the government react?
Is the lesson learned from iPod’s success that Apple embrace Windows rather than try to compete directly? (iPod didn’t take off until is was made compatible with Windows.)
—
I use both platforms because the work for me. What if both platforms were housed in the same console (desktop, entertainment unit, notebook, etc)?
[[zupchuck wrote: I’m asking an honest question here – how would moving to x86 acrchitecture improve security and stability for OS X? Please elaborate, it has lots on interesting implications.]]
Zupchuck:
I should’ve been clearer on this. I meant – by virtue of OSX being a more secure OS than Windows – running OSX on x86 will improve security for everyone. The comparison was (OSX on x86) vs (Windows on x86), and not (OSX on x86) vs. (OSX on PPC).
That thought leads to similar questions:
What would Intel do for Apple that IBM doesn’t already do? Faster chips? Faster development? Faster time-to-market?
What if OSX could run on 100 (or even 1000) times the number of computers they currently run on? How would developers react? How would customers react? How would businesses and the government react?
Is the lesson learned from iPod’s success that Apple embrace Windows rather than try to compete directly? (iPod didn’t take off until is was made compatible with Windows.)
—
I use both platforms because the work for me. What if both platforms were housed in the same console (desktop, entertainment unit, notebook, etc)?
A cheap Intel chip in each Mac along with the usual PPC chip would make it much easier for Apple to emulate Windows for the odd in house or obscure Windows app that some of us need to use every now and then.
Maybe they could get the Mac to play that #1 Windows app of all time, SOLITARE.
Just a thought.
It’s one thing for Apple to have OSX running on Intel (which may or may not be true) but it’s another thing entirely to get enough developers on board to port (or heavily modify) their code to a new processor. And just because Adobe makes cross platform apps does not mean all they have to do is recompile their Windows version to run under OSX/Intel. It’ll be a ton of work for any company to do this, and it ain’t gonna happen.
I for one would ***NEVER*** buy a Mac with a kluge of an Intel processor in it. They can’t even make a dual core chip where 1 core can communicate with the other without having to use the main bus. The only thing they have that can match a G5 is Itanium, and that beast outshines a nuclear reactor and is terribly expensive. I tell ya, Apple won’t drop PowerPC for Intel.
Where would I get my twin engine dual-core G5 next January if they did???
(Man, you should see all the financial news outlets running this story… it’s crazy.)
>Maybe they could get the Mac to play that #1 Windows app of all time, SOLITARE
If you think Solitaire is so awesome, you’ve gotta visit a computer store and see what thunders beyond the puny Apple section.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Apple itself says to think different(ly). Step outside of your cute, little box from time to time.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
You may end up using both platforms.
>Maybe they could get the Mac to play that #1 Windows app of all time, SOLITARE
If you think Solitaire is so awesome, you’ve gotta visit a computer store and see what thunders beyond the puny Apple section.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Apple itself says to think different(ly). Step outside of your cute, little box from time to time.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
You may end up using both platforms.
>Maybe they could get the Mac to play that #1 Windows app of all time, SOLITARE
If you think Solitaire is so awesome, you’ve gotta visit a computer store and see what thunders beyond the puny Apple section.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Apple itself says to think different(ly). Step outside of your cute, little box from time to time.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
You may end up using both platforms.
Maybe Apple really is going to make a Mac with Intel inside.
Maybe Apple isn’t going to give up on PowerPC either.
Maybe Apple is going to produce something with BOTH chips.
sftu
wrong again…
you’re not worth the effort my friend
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />
>sftu
Goodness! You can’t even cuss right. You just took the fun out of making fun of you.
>sftu
Goodness! You can’t even cuss right. You just took the fun out of making fun of you.
>sftu
Goodness! You can’t even cuss right. You just took the fun out of making fun of you.
I give this story a lot of credibility since its from the WSJ. However,
given that the xbox and PS3 are using PPC processors, I don’t see Apple “switching” to Intel. It may be that Apple is going to offer both PPC and Intel boxes for sale.
– Mark
{What the heck is the point of having to type in the “MDN Magic Word” before submitting your comments?)
Mac & PC Guy,
I think the spectre of Apple employing Intel to manufacture chips (where “chips” is very ambiguous) for them certainly puts pressure on IBM to produce. I would think SJ has some piece of Intel hardware running OS X in a secret room to show to IBM now and then how easy it would be to move. Motorola taught Apple a good lesson in hardware dependency.
Rather funny, since M$ seems to be doing the same to Intel by going PPC with the XBox.
Maybe Apple is just pointing out to IBM that it wants a little more attention?
My (far-fetched) opinion is that if Intel x86 chips were used, it would be either high-end stand-alone workstations (multi-core, multi-CPU work horses) or hybrid Xserves which have a PPC CPU and an x86 “co-processor” to run Windows apps natively in a virtual machine to make more inroads into the enterprise space.
With Longhorn being very late, and the enterprise market a little in flux, the hybrid Xserve could provide some piece of mind to shops that need to move on to something. Just trying to think a little out of the box!
Why should Intel & Co not be able to produce -risc- Ppc chips.. ?
Going xx86 on a Mac sounds redicul.
Here’s an idea..
Apple does an iPhone which icludes all the usual suspect: full iPod like capabilities (with screen equal to or larger than the iPod photo), full PDA capabilities to rival the top of the line Palm or Windows device, full phone capabilities to rival the top of the line Nokia, Moto or Samsung models. What processor would this run? Intel’s Xscale processor maybe?
</pure speculation>
Or much more likely…
Apple is talking to Intel to upgrade its Xserve and Xserver RAID products to the newer 4 Gbps FibreChannel standard using new Intel processors.
There are lots of reasons why Apple could be talking to Intel and none of them related to replacing the PowerPC line of processors.
T-T-T-Tiger UPPERCUT!!!
Man, I’m tired of arguing about stupid stuff. In my first post, I only wanted to point out that beatsme was saying the same thing as MDN, but passing it off as his own opinion. Now we’re in some stupid English usage thing.
From dictionary.com:
re·it·er·ate Audio pronunciation of “reiterate” ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-t-rt)
tr.v. re·it·er·at·ed, re·it·er·at·ing, re·it·er·ates
To say or do again or repeatedly. See Synonyms at repeat
Notice, “See Synonyms at repeat”
re·peat Audio pronunciation of “repeat” ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-pt rpt)
v. re·peat·ed, re·peat·ing, re·peats
v. tr.
1. To say again: repeat a question.
2. To utter in duplication of another’s utterance.
3. To recite from memory.
4. To tell to another.
5. To do, experience, or produce again: repeat past successes.
6. To express (oneself) in the same way or words: repeats himself constantly.
Notice entry 2 “To utter in duplication of another’s utterance.”
Ok, maybe I was wrong to use a big a word as “reiterate” on the MDN forum, but my usage was spot on.
Mac & PC Guy said, “Goodness! You can’t even cuss right. You just took the fun out of making fun of you.”
First off, not sure where I was cussing. Second, why bother posting if I took all the fun out of it.
Sorry, M&PCG;, Just figured out what you were talking about.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
I wish I would take the advice of my name sake.
Anyone who thinks Macs cost more due to the Processor clearly has not stopped to think about it for even one second. Macs cost more because Apple designs the OS, the Motherboard and the case. Apple also maintains a higher margin on their products than PC manufacturers.
I don’t believe Apple would impose upon their customers or developers the burden of an Architecture change.
Mac & PC Guy,
I use Mac’s and PC’s daily.
I still say Solitare is the best Windows program ever written.
Some wouldn’t know sarcasm if it came over and bit them on the ass.
Kevin Gavioli said ” Anyone who thinks Macs cost more due to the Processor clearly has not stopped to think about it for even one second. Macs cost more because Apple designs the OS, the Motherboard and the case. Apple also maintains a higher margin on their products than PC manufacturers.”
Question: Have you priced a Dell or HP computer with similar specs to a Mac lately? I have, for my company just recently, and there is NO, that’s right NO DIFFERENCE in price. PC makers advertise super low prices for super scaled down computers. Example:
Dell Precision Workstation 670
Dual 2.8 Xenon
2 Gig RAM
250 GB SATA Drive
16x DVD-/+RW
256 MB Dual DVI Card
and all the other crap to make it close to a high end Mac
Total: $3707
Add 2 Gig RAM to a Dual 2.7 Mac (because that is the only difference in the stock config) Price: $3349
The Mac is ACTUALLY CHEAPER!
Several problems with this comarison…
1. It runs XP
2. It is not the “top of the line” Dell.
3. Security, security, security.
4. Mac is here in 5 days, Dell won’t ship until 6/1.
5. No affordable “pro” apps (for video), unless you like that crap from Adobe.
I could go on…but I won’t.
Not trying to attack, I’m just sick and tired of people saying mac’s cost too much. I guess they do if you only want to play games and watch porn on the internets…but if you actually WORK on your machine it’s no contest.
– Pariah
Might it make perfect logic for Apple to use Intel’s Centrino mobile chip (excellent from what I’ve heard) in the ‘books line, given all the G5 heat and power consumption problems?