The Wall Street Journal has reported today in their Monday, June 6th edition that Apple Computer has been informing certain business partners about the company’s pending move from IBM to Intel processors.
“Apple will start shifting its Macintosh line next year to Intel chips, in a major change of strategy for the computer maker. The move could be a blow to IBM and Freescale, which now supply Apple’s PowerPC chips. Such a move could help Apple ensure that its Mac systems remain competitive with rivals like Dell Inc., of Round Rock, Texas. It could be a prelude to collaboration with Intel in developing new devices for homes and offices. And it might help Apple reduce its prices, a longstanding disadvantage; an industry executive suggested that the computer maker sought, and won, more-attractive chip prices from Intel than it could get from IBM, of Armonk, NY,” The Wall Street Journal reports.
Full article (paid subscription required) here.
John Markoff and Steve Lohr report for The New York Times, “Steven P. Jobs is preparing to take an unprecedented gamble by abandoning Apple Computer’s 14-year commitment to chips developed by I.B.M. and Motorola in favor of Intel processors for his Macintosh computers, industry executives informed of the decision said Sunday… ‘This is a seismic shift in the world of personal computing and consumer electronics,’ said Richard Doherty, president of the Envisioneering Group, a Seaford, N.Y., computer and consumer electronics industry consulting firm. ‘It is bound to rock the industry, but it will also be a phenomenal engineering challenge for Apple.'”
Markoff and Lohr report, “the chips I.B.M. makes for Apple represent less than 2 percent of chip production at its largest factory in East Fishkill, N.Y… For I.B.M., the end of the Apple partnership means the loss of a prestigious customer, but not one that is any longer very important to I.B.M.’s sales or profits.”
Full article (free registration required) here.
MacDailyNews Take: Whatever happens, remember what we’re fond of saying: it’s the OS, stupid.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
MacDailyNews to present live Steve Jobs’ WWDC Keynote coverage – June 06, 2005
Apple’s shift to Intel really all about Hollywood, owning the living room, and Transitive – June 05, 2005
Why would Apple switch? PowerPC is smaller, more efficient, cheaper than comparable Intel chips – June 05, 2005
Intel Inside Apple Macs? – June 04, 2005
Intel in Macs?! How’s Apple CEO Steve Jobs going to spin that switch? – June 04, 2005
Apple to switch to Intel chips starting in 2006 – CNET [updated] – June 03, 2005
Apple and Microsoft battle for control of future living rooms – June 01, 2005
Anticipation, rumors build ahead of Apple CEO Steve Jobs’ June 6 WWDC keynote – May 27, 2005
Intel CEO Otellini: If you want security now, buy a Macintosh instead of a Wintel PC – May 25, 2005
Analyst: Apple-Intel rumor ‘hogwash’ (today marks 11th month that Jobs’ promised 3GHz G5 is late) – May 23, 2005
Apple bundles videos with select music albums via iTunes Music Store – May 10, 2005
Apple releases iTunes 4.8; now supports QuickTime video along with contact, calendar transfers – May 09, 2005
With Mac mini Apple CEO Jobs attacks the Achilles heel of Windows dominance: the living room – January 14, 2005
Apple Computer will own the living room, not Microsoft – January 10, 2005
Can Apple crack the living-room conundrum before Microsoft? – December 30, 2004
NY Times: Can Steve Jobs put Apple in the center of your living room? – March 23, 2004
iPod success opens door to Mac OS X on Intel – March 04, 2004
Oh well, so much for using a system NOT for everyone.
But I will never give up my Aston Martin DB9. So what if Ford owns the company…they still make less than 4K cars a year…
Be individual..
Ohh, the 1st post maybe??
This is not a rumor!
i am so depressed. it is now official… the computer is just a commodity.
The end of the IT-world as we know it….
It’s funny… the Intel chips aren’t cheaper, in fact Intel said they would not sell undercost like IBM and that’s the reason they lost the gaming machines. Well, after all is said and done, Steve REALLY knows how to play with our anticiaption like no other. With Wintel, they say what they might deliver in a few years… with Apple… we wait, imagine, wait and then…
Oh, the web’s gonna be busy this afternoon…
Jb
I am getting tired of this bullshit.
You can’t efficiently emulate PowerPC chips on Intel, cause Intel chips suck. So no virtual machine crossover.
OSX can be ported but since a chunk of the OS uses Altevic why would they rewrite to use a lesser system?(SSE)
Intel chips aren’t known for their power efficency, or heat disspation rates.
Half the reason OS X runs as well as it does, is because of the limited number of drivers the base system needs. You switch to x86 and you suddenly get windows BSOD’s. Apple on Power can demand specailly made ATI and nvidia cards. Apple on Intel can’t. So you end up having to support every idiots cheap knock-off card.
My bet is steve jobs is using this just to stick it to IBM, and the announcement will be for PCI-E or a short range Wi-Max for their streaming HD setup.
keep your head high… the processor does not make the computer. the OS does. Windows is the reason why Dells suck… not Dell.
Dell, makes crappy computers made of junkyard parts.
Well I was saving my money for a new 3.0 or maybe a 4.0 mhz but if they switch to a crappy intel chips . I’m buying a 2.7 one for sure now. Apple I think you make your first mistake
If the G5 used in Macs make up less than 2% of IBM’s chip production, imagine how much less percentage Apple would be for Intel. So how is switching to Intel going to improve this aspect of the problem? Wouldn’t Intel also put Apple on its list of low volume (i.e., back-burner) customers after the newness wears off, like it seems IBM has done?
Also, why would it take until next summer for Apple to produce a Mac Mini with Intel Inside? Surely the apps Apple bundles with the Mac wouldn’t take a full year to port over to another chip. The only thing about this 1 year delay that makes sense to me is that it will take Intel about that long to design its version of the PowerPC chip.
Steve is not stupid enough to alienate his developers and user base. It’s horrible marketing and he’s good at marketing.
In looking at the puzzle surrounding Apple’s rumoured shift to Intel, it’s worth wondering ‘who would benefit from such a fundamental shift?’ Or rather – ‘what’s in it… and for whom?’
If Apple’s move to Intel resulted in the major third-party software manufacturers – such as Adobe (inc Macromedia), Quark etc – needing only to build a SINGLE version of each of their products – with only minor adjustments, or a ‘patch’, for it to run on Mac – then they would see it as a HUGE saving in terms of the resources traditionally channelled into building completely separate – yet identical – versions of each title (one of which only goes to a small market).
The killer blow in this is that it would mean Windows users will ALSO be able to run those same third-party applications (which they already own and have invested heavily in) either in Windows… or directly in Mac OS X – with a simple ‘patch’ downloaded from the manufacturers.
The extent to which Apple licence out ‘MacIntel’ hardware to third-party manufacturers (to build MiniMac or MiniPCs for example) is another question. What IS clear is the anomaly in third-party software production which has its roots in the historical development of the Mac/PC platforms but which these days is outdated in ways which hurt – and hold back – BOTH the manufacturers AND Apple.
The paradox in resolving this anomaly for the restive software manufacturers (which has increasing hung over a tiny and ‘static’ Mac market-share) is that it ALSO allows Apple to kick open the door into the vast and creaking Windows universe and stake their rightful claim to be a part of the action. In completely getting rid of a need for ‘Mac’ version software, Apple’s next revolution will be to level the playing-field on which OS’s can compete… and the company is now pretty confident about who the winner will be (aside from the end-users)!
I don’t take the word of someone who spells IBM, I.B.M.
Sheesh, the hysteria is really sickening.
Why would Apple pass up on the Cell processor?
It’s the audio/video dream chip, infinite scaleable and fast as hell.
Even tho it has only been a couple of days, I am really getting tired of all the speculation. In just a few hours all will be made clear – we can start second guessing Apple’s move(s) AFTER we know what it really is.
If apple consumes 2% of IBM chip production and has a 2% share of the market does this mean that IBM 0wns the remaining 98% I don’t think this adds up, even allowing for faulty intel processors.
\o/ cheap Macs, yesssssssssssssss!!! \o/
Really making an {effort} here not to laugh at ‘it’s the OS, stupid’-spin. This is the end of the ‘Intel chips are inferior’ crap, zealots.
Be real, if (IF, I still have a hard time believing it) SJ announces MacOS on Intel, would he really be thinking something like ‘oh well, our product will run less well, but hooray for more sales’?
The only way this would work without losing millions of current (very loyal) customers is if the new machines allow PPC programs to run in emulation mode. Otherwise, the cost of a new Mac would be $xxx plus several hundred (or thousand) $$$ for software. It would be a nightmare. Moving from 9 to X was tough enough…but to a whole new chipset?
I don’t think Steve would do something this disruptive unless thay had a workable transition plan. I guess we’ll see in a few hours…
I think the key to this whole debacle is the phrase “Apple moving to Intel chips”. Here’s a scenario:
WSJ Reporter: So, I hear Apple’s moving to Intel?
Intel Exec: You didn’t hear it from me?
WSJ: Ok, but can you deny it?
Intel: I’m not denying anything or confirming anything?
WSJ: So Apple’s moving to Intel then?
Intel: As I said, you didn’t hear it from me.
So after four hours of repitition (er, conversation), the article comes out and the story is: “Apple moving to x86!”
I am still holding out that a move to Intel does not mean x86, and it’s very, very possible that there was never confirmation about x86 processors, just the switch to Intel chips. The rest, as they say, is journalism today, where 75% is passing.
Chins high everyone,
Lat I checked, the world was still spining on it’s axis this morning, and likely will tomorrow. We haven’t all heard the details here yet (and I think there is a lot to learn yet). We seem to be forgetting that Steve is a perfectionist (didn’t he have the Next engineers personally autograph the inside of every cube?). He is also a hardware guy (He tried to sell off the software portion of Pixar back in the day!) There is simply no way you are going to see some cheap grey plastic box coming out of 1 infitine loop anytime soon.
If we think back, it seems most point to Apple not liscensing its operating system as the dummest business decision of all time. I would say that it is closely followed by Next not doing the same thing in 1994 when Dell, etc. were seeking an alternative to Windows. Well, here we are in the same spot – perhaps Steve has learned and 3rd times a charm?
Personally though, I think there is so much more to than this than we can possibly imagine! By this evening we will all be typing here how amazing the proposition is. I may well be wrong, but my stand is Intel is going to do something special (not just for Apple, but more importantly (to them) to win back the gaming community). Just wait. real life is eving more fantastical than fiction!
The loser here is Microsoft. I don’t see any benefit to them no matter how big the gamble or payoff to Apple. Jobs gets economy of scale. levles the playing field, and stays with the market on chip upgrades.
I too am shocked and worried about the details..however, Jobs dreams big and he is running out of time to complete this greatest second act. Who knew that the man who was visionary to a fault would later become so steely-eyed and pragmatic later in life. Exciting to watch it unfold, huh?
MW: “stage” as in All the World…
>Just wait. real life is eving more fantastical than fiction!>
A marriage made in eving!
All the years of having this mock feeling of belonging to some type of “elite” computing niche is flushed down the toilet overnight. Thats what you get when you get when you give in to “brand loyalty”. YOU GET F*CKED FOR IT because there’s always some creepy high level executive that changes things to make more return (for the short run) regardless of reprocussions. Amazing!
So, Tiger with support of 64-bit goes down the toilet as well?
x86 still sucks, Tiger 64-bit support on old x86 means no support, nada. No 64-bit architecture (as in a G4).
If ever, it will be a x86-64 or a new generation of chips. Being Apple what it is it might be the first time Intel sucks less (doesn’t sucks would still be difficult) but SJ has to show that these new chips do scale, do have a better roadmap than G5/6, that already Tiger runs 30% faster in the labs on those than on a G5, that backward compatibility is fully ensured (a new meaning to the word ‘Classic’?) so that the switch for whoever doesn’t care, doesn’t want to know, is totally transparent.
Then, given that, AAPL goes to $75.
I really hope it’s not as bad as I think it is.
The Intel architecture sucks. Hopefully they are just making the PPC chips…hopefully.
Let’s face it IBM, Intel, it doesn’t matter. Apple will never get the product it wants when it wants it unless Apple has its OWN engineers working inside the division! No more of this we hit the wall BS. Apple needs to begin having a direct hand in the creation of its own processors.