“I can foresee a future where the best engineers at Intel move to the Apple project. Being able to start with a blank slate for x86 will probably be the most interesting job over there,” Sam Pullara writes for javarants.com.
“For the past 25 years or so the x86 has been forced to be backwards compatible back to the original MS-DOS. This includes all aspects of the architecture, from the instruction set, to the memory system, and even the BIOS. If you made an x86 machine without this backwards compatibility, could you do better? I think this is the question that Jobs is posing to Intel right now. Ironically, this new system would probably still run Linux, but running stock Windows might be difficult. It’s hard to say how much of that backwards compatibility is required for Windows to boot, let alone run programs,” Pullara writes.
“At the current x86’s core is a RISC chip with a big huge layer of crud on top if it that emulates all the CISC instructions. That layer could be trimmed. The current chipsets contain tons of legacy support that could be jettisoned, as Intel has shown with tons a prototypes that were never picked up by the industry because of Windows users who demand that Lotus 1-2-3 still runs on it,” Pullara writes. “The form factor of the board is completely open for discussion as there need not be a standard case that accepts it. So if they really take advantage of the situation I could see a Mac running on Intel that is faster than the fastest Windows PC.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: “Intel has shown with tons a prototypes that were never picked up by the industry because of Windows users who demand that Lotus 1-2-3 still runs on it.” LOL!
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Universal Binaries forever: Apple could use PowerPCs in Mac lineup at will – June 13, 2005
Computerworld’s ludicrous subtitle: ‘Mac users say they have no plans to switch – yet’ – June 13, 2005
What happens when world’s No. 1 Apple brand is combined with No. 5 Intel brand? – June 13, 2005
Video of Mac OS X 10.4.1 for Intel running on Dell laptop posted online – June 13, 2005
Report: Apple Mac OS X 10.4.1 for Intel hits piracy sites – June 11, 2005
Is Apple setting up the ultimate “Switcher” campaign by preparing to let Mac OS X speak for itself? – June 10, 2005
Intel-based Macs running both Mac OS X and Windows will be good for Apple – June 10, 2005
Twin Mac website debuts, dedicated to dual booting Intel-based Macs running Mac OS X and Windows – June 10, 2005
Cringley: Apple and Intel to merge; Steve Jobs finally beats Bill Gates – June 09, 2005
Fortune: Apple’s switch to Intel processors to accelerate Windows users switching to Mac OS X – June 09, 2005
Will developers stop writing Mac applications if Apple ‘Macintel’ computers can run Windows? – June 08, 2005
Why buy a Dell when Apple ‘Macintel’ computers will run both Mac OS X and Windows? – June 08, 2005
Apple to use Intel microprocessors beginning in 2006, all Macs to be Intel-based by end of 2007 – June 06, 2005
Sad to say this this is all bound to be pie-in-the-sky.
I got into macs at the advent of PPC when mac looked like they might also crash and burn, i remember all the talk about how PPC chips were the future and they would blow away the cisc enemy, i am also sure i remember all sorts of bollocks about chip speed we would have in the future… yeah right…….
i think macs are going to use Intel for security of supply and maybe to ‘come in from the cold’ as well as they fact mac was shafted by IBM etc.
IF intel are going to somehow treat the mac as a test platform for new chips wont we then be in the same boat as we were with PPC? i mean we were kind of a test platform and look who now has the 3+ppc chips?
Intel knows the big earner and after the honey-moon period i expect we will become just another customer, who yes might take more risks but in the end all those fanciful projections will come to naught.
We will progress at the same rate as the other guys, chip evolution is not like natural evolution where a freak might appear once in a blue moon that actually advances the gene pool in some unforseen and beneficial manner….
Anyway keep dreaming, i will too but I wont put any money on it
I am sure that the first Macintels will be standard x86 Pentium M chips (iBook, Powerbook and Mac mini).
Because of Universal binaries, Apple can utilize chips other than x86. What if IBM comes out with a 3.0 GHz Dualcore 970? Apple could use it. What if Intel comes out with a really fast, next generation chip which isn’t exactly x86 compatible? Apple could use it. What if Apple wanted to use AMD’s Operon in their XServe? They could do that. The point is that this gives Apple flexability which does not exist in the x86/Windows world.
From: deep inside intel
Jun 13, 05 – 02:22 pm
Uh, duh. The answer is obviously yes. You’ll see…::whistle::
Oh man, either you are a sick sick person or just someone with info that we’d all like to know. If it’s the latter, please drop more suggestive hints!
MS wont live and die on x86, they’ll whore out the next architecture that comes along..Just because Intel moves to something other than x86 doesnt mean that MS will not follow…Get real…Do you all seriously think that MS would keep functioning on x86 when a newer and more superior technology is available? I doubt it. If it werent for x86 (unfortunate but true) we’d all be running Windows on PPC (or some RISC variant of chip) as we speak.
And as far as DOS (wtf?) running and future requirements for legacy devices, it all goes away with longhorn. Monad Is made of XAML command functionality, the bios really isnt needed (however, I still believe in having control over hardware through a UI). The backwards compatability is still there but it uses somewhat of an extraction layer to support those legacy devices. If Intel blows off legacy support, it wound’nt be because of Apple. If the demand is there to remove the legacy support, and far be it from me to say that is isnt, then it will come soon enough…All in all, im glad Apple finally made the decision to align with Intel.
Also consider that Intel is trying to change it’s profile from “chip maker” to a “platform” company. That tells me that Intel, would indeed, work on special projects with Apple, even if it means developing a totally separate line of processors. Don’t you think they can afford to venture into new technologies while retaining their 90+% share in the PC market?
DOS will not go away with Longhorn as it did not go away with NT or XP (as Microsoft claimed with both, but was discovered to still be lurking underneath). M$ is stuck with an albatross. And maybe Intel doesn’t care. I think with its aliance with Apple, they’re happy to sell ungodly amounts of old world chips to PC vendors while they strike out on new territory, all the while watching (with an evil grin) M$ slide ever faster into the abyss.
Justified, MS DOS in longhorn will not go away your right. The difference is that it will be in a “wrapper”, in other words, not used unless called upon. I dont think it would be a wise decision to kill backwards compatability. Apple has the luxury of doing that among other things. That loss in compatibility is something MS doesnt have. But as far as MS-DOS running simultainiously among the WINFX kernel, I can bet with great confidence that MSDOS is dead as it was in 98. The new Monad cmd line will have support for some msdos commands, but most of the command line terminology in longhorn is a new XML based command structure. You cant ask for dos to handle the commands as the have in the past, MS has learned from this. The WinFX Kernel is written from the groud up for security and reliability….and to be self contained away from dos….
Trust me I’ve used all flavors of *NIX command lines and Monad is superior to any of it..
http://weblogs.asp.net/jnadal/archive/2003/10/29/34413.aspx
Anything is POSSIBLE. So f’n what.
Unfortunately, all software for the Intel-Mac will be compiled for this old legacy crap.
A new and different chip archetecture would be ANOTHER TRANSITION. Aren’t you sick of them yet? Everyone talks like they have money to burn.
Nomacforyou: Trust me I’ve used all flavors of *NIX command lines and Monad is superior to any of it..
Except that Monad won’t make it to Longhorn as promised: New MS Shell Will Not Be In Longhorn.
Lotus is part of IBM. Ironic, isn’t it?
Something interesting I found out yesterday:
Intel hired the team who designed the Alpha processor for DEC. The Alpha was years ahead of anything else back in the mid 90’s. It was 64 bit. It was a clean design. But DEC was a troubled company with lots of inept management. Compaq bought them but didn’t know what to do with the Alpha. Then HP bought Compaq and killed the Alpha because they had their own processors (Merced which was codeveloped with Intel and became the Itanium).
So the Alpha team lives at Intel and has stated they will have a product out in 2007. Sounds like what may be in the next PowerMacs.
SOME of you are very close to the truth.
User_01: I’m not a sick person, I’m just someone that is typing with my hands tied behind my back. Can’t tip Intel’s hand.
Again, I didn’t plan on lurking this newboard very much but you Apple fans are a very enchanting bunch. Apple may have the best brand loyalty for any company anywhere. Kudos to you loyalists, keep it up and keep your spirits up because bright days are ahead with Intel and Apple!
Even if they don’t drop x86-legacy compatiblity, i can see Intel adding instructions specifically for parts of OSX, even at the expense of windows-specific instructions running more poorly. M$ has been pretty ruthless towards Intel. Remember the multimedia accelleration Intel was going to put in the chips until M$ threatened them? this was 10+ years ago.
Also, the Pentium Pro was a very nice chip but Windows 95 didn’t run as fast on it because Win95 was at its heart a 16-bit interface and that processor was built for 32-bit work. M$ made Intel change a lot of good things for the Pentium2 so the Win9x stuff would run faster.
And about IBM and the PowerPC: the Power architecture is very key in IBM’s future plans, as is the PowerPC processor line. Apple just decided for their own reasons to switch away. Maybe Steve still sees IBM as the enemy and not M$.
MW: any, as in any hardware
Windows is a whore that has to take birth control patches everyday.