“Stocks opened higher Monday as investors welcomed falling energy prices and a report that Apple Computer Inc. was talking with Intel Corp.about using its microprocessors in its Macintosh computer line,” The Associated Press reports. “Wall Street was cheered by the report as such a change would possibly be the biggest shift in the Mac’s makeup since it came out in 1984 and a potential cash cow for Intel.”
AP reports, “An Apple move to Intel’s chips would make Macs far less expensive — a major hurdle in Apple’s ongoing battle with cheaper PCs already using Intel processors and Microsoft’s operating system. The possible deal, reported in The Wall Street Journal, could spell trouble for IBM Corp. , Apple’s current supplier.”
Macs are cheaper than PCs, and their processors are faster too. – Paul Murphy, “Will Apple switch to Intel?” – May 23, 2005.
Apple added $1.27 to $38.82 in morning NASDAQ trading.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Sometimes you just have to chuckle at the market. Wall Street understands Apple about as well as Ping-Pong balls understand chocolate pudding.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple said to be considering switch to Intel chips for Macs according to Wall Street Journal – May 23, 2005
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
Yeah, they’re not too bright.
That shows you how dumb these stock people are. Especially to think that Apple is just going to switch to Intel after Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo are all switching to the Power PC. It makes no sense what so ever.
Whenever I was looking at computers in the store, I always looked at the ones with the “intel inside” sticker on them as cheap garbage. I always stayed away from them. If an iMac was made with “intel inside”, would the quality be the same? Would OS X Tiger be just as good?
Nice to see the stock rising on baseless rumors and innuendo. Those with intelligence know that this Intel on Macs thing is extremely unlikely to happen…
All of you are chuckling at this right now but I think this thing has legs. It may not necessarily be Intel for Mac but there’s gotta be something in the pipeline.
“An Apple move to Intel’s chips would make Macs far less expensive…”
Anyone know how much of the retail price of any computer actually pays for the processor itself. Can’t imagine it would have much or any effect at all, myself.
If XBox, Sony and Nintendo move to IBM PPC chips then shouldn’t the overall cost of production decline and Apple then get a price decrease from IBM?
If anything, Apple may get some Xscale processors from Intel for a future iPod, but you won’t see x86s in Macs though.
Come on Ed and everyone else –
Intel makes good microprocessors. Just because windows sucks doesn’t mean that the hardware is crap. switching to an x86 platform could reduce the cost of apples and thereby increase market share for apple. this would be a GOOD thing.
right now, Intel has the best laptop platform around. They can also handle 64bit instructions and 64 bit memory addressing. They are in production with multi core procs.
When Motorola couldn’t keep up, apple went to IBM. if IBM isn’t keeping up, they should switch again.
Where´s the Apple lawsuit for reporting this rumor….???
Can you imagine that – Steve Jobs talking with the enemy, Intel, about using their chips?
How is that all the apple worshipping nerds here can´t believe it, when it is happening.
Watch when Steve announces Intel in Apple and the same intel haters/apple worshippers will be singing how wonderful Intel is.
Too many think Apple is a religion when it is just a business.
Apple helped design the architecture of the chip they use with IBM. Why would they drop that to switch to a chip that has admittedly reached it’s speed limit?!?!
Investment analysts are idiots, but I’m glad that stock is climbing regardless!!
“right now, Intel has the best laptop platform around”
You’re kidding, right? Intel laptops have crap battery life, 6 hours on my iBook and 4+ hours on my PowerBook Vs 2 hours AT BEST from an intel machine.
I just hope that people remember why stocks went up $1.27, so when they drop $1.27 it isn’t blamed on anything but a rumor not coming to pass.
Sidenotes:
– If Apple was moving to x86, I hope they would go with AMD. (Assuming that they aren’t commissioning Intel to make PPC chips)
– I don’t think Apple’s financial future is ready for an x86 port of OS X that could be pirated and hacked to work on non-apple hardware.
>helen of troy, ohio: Too many think Apple is a religion when it is just a business.
Helen, why do you speak such blasphemy?!
—
I hope, at the very least, Apple puts decently fast chips into the PB line. It has sucked for quite some time now… well the processor at least… and that’s only if you compare it to the competition (which happen to run on Intel procs).
>helen of troy, ohio: Too many think Apple is a religion when it is just a business.
Helen, why do you speak such blasphemy?!
—
I hope, at the very least, Apple puts decently fast chips into the PB line. It has sucked for quite some time now… well the processor at least… and that’s only if you compare it to the competition (which happen to run on Intel procs).
>helen of troy, ohio: Too many think Apple is a religion when it is just a business.
Helen, why do you speak such blasphemy?!
—
I hope, at the very least, Apple puts decently fast chips into the PB line. It has sucked for quite some time now… well the processor at least… and that’s only if you compare it to the competition (which happen to run on Intel procs).
Apple already uses some Intel chips, in their XServes, for example.
Here’s another fun piece to run with. Remember the Newton? It used one of those snazzy ARM processors. Guess who currently owns the ARM processors? Intel! So couldn’t Apple be looking to Intel for ARM – or very likely some other technology – for a new gizmo? Maybe this “media center” we’ve been hearing about? Or the fabled tablet?
Or dare I say it – Newton 2? Hehe…
Just because Apple and Intel are talking, doesn’t mean Apple’s going x86. In fact, given how much re-coding would be involved and how much confusion it would create, it would take something much more than problematic development to make Apple leave IBM and Motorola…
>Smithy: You’re kidding, right? Intel laptops have crap battery life, 6 hours on my iBook and 4+ hours on my PowerBook Vs 2 hours AT BEST from an intel machine.
Goodness Smithy! Step outside of your yard every now and then. The world has passed you by. Think differently.
>Smithy: You’re kidding, right? Intel laptops have crap battery life, 6 hours on my iBook and 4+ hours on my PowerBook Vs 2 hours AT BEST from an intel machine.
Goodness Smithy! Step outside of your yard every now and then. The world has passed you by. Think differently.
>Smithy: You’re kidding, right? Intel laptops have crap battery life, 6 hours on my iBook and 4+ hours on my PowerBook Vs 2 hours AT BEST from an intel machine.
Goodness Smithy! Step outside of your yard every now and then. The world has passed you by. Think differently.
And I have to agree with CampusComputerStoreGuy; I’d much rather see Apple dealing with AMD than Intel… I’ve seen much more creativity and innovation coming from AMD in the past 10 years…
The WWDC keynote is about 2 weeks away and his Steveness has just made sure that EVERYBODY is going to be paying attention. You just can’t buy PR like this.
“When Motorola couldn’t keep up, apple went to IBM. if IBM isn’t keeping up, they should switch again.”
But switching from Motorola to IBM didn’t involve a major recompile of their OS to run on the new chip. Going to Intel, who do NOT use the PowerPC architecture, would. Even if prototypes of an x86 version of OS X are running in the lab, what does this mean for all the OTHER software you need to use the computer. Will there have to be “OS X PPC” and “OS X x86” flavors of software if they go to a new chip platform?
“You’re kidding, right? Intel laptops have crap battery life, 6 hours on my iBook and 4+ hours on my PowerBook Vs 2 hours AT BEST from an intel machine.”
Hmmm…try my Thinkpad T43 (14.1″ screen)…around 4.5 hours. X series can reach 6 hours easily. ibooks at 6 hours? hmm..doubtfull atleast for the 14″.
Do your research.
Dream the Endless: One problem with your analogy. Intel is getting spanked by AMD now. Intel has gotten too big, too bloated and can no longer keep up with the technology from AMD. Their dual core chip is a joke. Its really two processors slapped together. Talk about heat and power usage. AMD is much further along in their development of dual core processors. If Apple is serious, maybe they should be talking to AMD.
Another question is who started these talks? If it was Intel, they are in more trouble than I thought. Why else would they all of a sudden need Apple. Is AMD really hurting them that badly?