Michel Mayer, chief executive of Freescale Semiconductor, talked with CNET’s Michael Singer in an interview published today. “While the public may not have a clue, industry insiders are quite familiar with Freescale. The company’s best-known client is Apple Computer, which is under contract to use Freescale chips to build its G4 PowerPC computers through the end of 2008,” Singer writes.
Singer asked Mayer about the G5 and Apple’s move to Intel-based Macs:
Weren’t you there during the discussions when IBM convinced Apple to adopt the G5?
Mayer: In my previous job, I ran IBM’s semiconductor business. So I’ve seen both sides of the Apple story, because I sold the G5 to Steve (Jobs) the first time he wanted to move to Intel.
Five years ago?
Mayer: Yeah, that’s about right. So I sold the G5. First I told IBM that we needed to do it, and then I sold it to Apple that the G5 was good and it was going to be the follow-on of the PowerPC road map for the desktop. It worked pretty well. And then IBM decided not to take the G5 into the laptop and decided to really focus its chip business on the game consoles.
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews reader “Sailfish” for the link.]
It’s very interesting to finally see it in print and from a reputable new source that Steve Jobs wanted to move to Intel long ago and that IBM’s decision not to develop G5s for portable use finally pushed him to act.
Advertisements: The New iMac G5. Built-in camera and remote control. From $1299. Free shipping.
Apple USB Modem. Easily connect to the Internet using your dial-up service. $49.00.
The New iPod with Video. The ultimate music & video experience on the go. From $299. Free shipping.
Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.00.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Report: Intel-based Mac mini, iBook, iMac models due June 6th in Taiwan market – December 06, 2005
IT consultant: Apple Intel-based Macs coming later than you think – December 05, 2005
Apple resellers in the dark about Intel-based Mac transistion plans – December 03, 2005
Should you buy a new Apple PowerBook G4 now or wait until they have Intel Inside? – December 03, 2005
It’s official: Apple CEO Steve Jobs to deliver Macworld San Francisco 2006 keynote address – December 01, 2005
Citigroup: Intel-based PowerBook in January, Apple target price raised to $71 – November 30, 2005
Intel: no comment on Apple participating in ‘Viiv’ entertainment platform – November 30, 2005
Intel starts up internal ‘Apple group’ – November 22, 2005
RUMOR: Intel-based Apple iBooks coming in January with extremely low price tags – November 17, 2005
Will future Intel-based Apple Macs offer multiple OS worlds via virtualization? – November 16, 2005
Intel-based Macs dominate January’s Macworld Expo 2006 rumor mill – November 14, 2005
JupiterResearch analyst wouldn’t be shocked to see Intel-based Mac debut in January 2006 – November 09, 2005
UBS: Apple to unveil Intel-based Mac mini in January; AAPL share price target raised to $74 – November 07, 2005
Apple patent application describes Intel-based Macs that run Mac OS X and Microsoft Windows – November 05, 2005
RUMOR: Apple’s Intel-based Macs coming in first quarter 2006 – November 04, 2005
Truly cretinous, if true. Which I have no reason to doubt.
Still, the concentration on Xbox 360 is really paying off at the moment and PS3 is still a way off – so I hope IBM are sure about the choices they’ve made otherwise East Fishkill is going to be looking a little under-utilised.
yeah, IBM really gave apple the finger in that regard. so many people were looking forward to a 64-bit PB, but to no avail. i remember sitting on the edge of my seat even a year ago, ancipating a PB G5.
i guess to IBM, they’re just losing a minor client, whose sales will be made up for by microsoft and sony. bastards.
Well now, huh. MDN gets it right again. Let’s hope that Intel has some 64 bit chips on its roadmap. Some 64’s for portables will be nice too.
dub said: “i guess to IBM, they’re just losing a minor client, whose sales will be made up for by microsoft and sony. bastards.”
Apple will yet get the last laugh as they slowly but surely ramp up their market share and make themselves a company to recon with. IBM will eventually regret this decision. They will really need their xbox contract!
just goes to show how forward-thinking Jobs is, yet again.
Is he just regurgitating the line that steve gave us? Cuz IBM has since announced some very notebook friendly G5’s. Does he know something about this chips, such as IBM never had any plans to mass produce them, that is new information? If IBM was the one who left the relationship that makes more sense to me and quells my fears that apple is switching just to get extra strength DRM or access to intel’s movie store or any of the many non processor things intel is doing that i couldn’t care less about and am hoping apple doesn’t start using.
It can’t be true. Sammy said it was all about “low power” and efficiency. Not about IBM cutting off the pipeline…He’ll post article links (I’m certain) to prove that Mayer doesn’t even know what he’s talking about.
Ponder this…would Apple have even survived long enough running Intel crap starting back in 2000 to have let the iPod take off and rescue its business?
Dude, you’d be getting a Dell by now if they did.
Capt. Steve Zissou
Whatever happened to the Motorola G5? I’d sure like to get the story behind it.
– Mark
tooting his own horn? Maybe not, just makes you wonder if he’s exaggerating about how much he personally achieved.
And when Steve “wanted to” go Intel before, did that mean he was actually set on it back then? Probably not. It meant he was THINKING about it and planning to be able to. Which we already know he was doing, of course.
I can’t believe there are 54 Freescale chips in a 7 series BMW.
That’s more than in a small bag of Frito-Lays.
It’s definitely informative to hear another voice in this, but some of what he says just doesn’t add up.
First, he claims he sold the G5 to Apple, and yet everything I’ve found on the subject says Apple and IBM worked in conjunction to develop G5. They paid IBM to make it to their specs. The way he puts it, its as if IBM sold Apple a finished, already paid for product. That’s a huge departure from what was reported at the time.
Second, he makes the claim that IBM wasn’t interested in developing a G5 for laptops, and yet the current 970FX – announced just a month or so after Jobs announced the Macintel transition – is low power enough to be used in a laptop. There’s no way they could have rolled it out that fast if it hadn’t been on the drawing board for a while.
Last, he says something in the article that’s just plain confusing:
“CNET – Because there is no innovation left on the PC?
Mayer – It’s not that the PC is dead. It’s a huge
business. We are most probably going to revitalize our
PowerPC. I don’t know if it’s going to be called
PowerPC. A lot of people have questions on the PowerPC
architecture and what’s going on.”
He then goes on to essentially say PPC is in so many things that NOT being in on computers is all good.
So which is it?
And that whole thing about Apple moving to Intel 5 years ago – that strikes me as implausible. With the size of the Classic userbase as it was then, there’s no way Apple could have survived a transition to x86 without bringing them along. Massive stock valuations and iPod cash were but a gleam in everybody’s eye, so there was no margin for that kind of error.
How much of this is factual, and how much is trying to make things look a certain way after the fact?
Think about what this means. Since Apple really had no (or little) choice but to go with Intel, there’s no reason to think that there’s anything amazing coming up that Apple got a sneak peak at in order to convince them to drop PPC.
So Steve thought PowerPC chips sucked about 5 years ago but kept deceptively spreading the koolaid that they were the greatest (Intel sucked) so we would all buy them.
Steve´s probably already in talks with AMD to switch to them, “Intel just won´t make enough chips fast enough for my needs – Intel thinks Windows PCs are their biggest customer!!! So AmD ready to make a deal???”
Well…….so much for Steve deciding Intel was better – IBM basically told him the deal is over….take a hike. Steve did not have any other choice but Intel.
I am waiting for the new Mactels – they better be lots faster…but why do I smell this line coming from Steve: “They may not be as fast, but the battery life is longer….”
IBM knew full well the needs of it’s clients.
What IBM believes and so does Microsoft and Sony, is that consoles will take the place of personal computers.
This is why M$ and Sony take a bloodbath on every console shipped. (they make some up in the software licenses)
Think about it, the X-Box 360 has three PPC processors that are probably worth three times the cost of a X-Box 360 retail.
It must be spring, cuz I smell fertilize.
I’d like to point out that, Mayer has had several months to come up with that ‘version’ of the story.
All evidence has been buried
All tapes have been erased
But your footsteps give you away
So you’re backtracking
Accept it Odessey67…
Your darling IBM f%^ked up.
They did not COMMIT to MOBILE solutions, note your precious 970FX is yet to ACTUALLY be used in a laptop solution. And ALL power/thermal claims are just that CLAIMS, no one has tested it apart from IBM’s PR – umm I mean – semiconductor unit.
When he says he SOLD the G5 to IBM AND Apple, this still fits with what you described.
You first have to SELL/convince Apple and IBM that this product should be pursued and THEN they worked together to develop it. As you said yourself, chips don’t get designed in a short time, and it is likely IBM would not INVEST development costs without Apple agreeing that at least were intereted in buying the end product!!!
Your next point once again proves that you are blind to any information that doesn’t support your stance.
“CNET – Because there is no innovation left on the PC?
Mayer – It’s not that the PC is dead. It’s a huge business. We are most probably going to revitalize our PowerPC. I don’t know if it’s going to be called PowerPC. A lot of people have questions on the PowerPC architecture and what’s going on.”
He then goes on to essentially say PPC is in so many things that NOT being in on computers is all good.
So which is it?”
You are only CONFUSED because comprehending this simple dialogue would mean you’d have to admit that your DRM conspiracy theory may not be the WHOLE reason Apple chose to leave PPC.
What he is saying is
1) The PC business is not dead (as CNET tried to suggest) and that it is BIG business.
2) Freescale are going to revitalise their PowerPC products.
3) They may not brand it PowerPC (and here’s the reason)
4) These CPUs are most likely going to be used in devices that are NOT PCs!!!!
His last point is, the PC business is BIG (but Intel and AMD have that business), and hence it is GOOD for Freescale and IBM NOT TO BE IN THAT BUSINESS where they can focus on other imbedded solutions (also a big market!)
So yes it is ALL GOOD for them.
But of course I’m sure you are convinced that YOU know more about this than Michel Mayer and hell probably even more then Steve Jobs.
my 2 cents
Luke
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”tongue wink” style=”border:0;” />
“Well now, huh. MDN gets it right again. Let’s hope that Intel has some 64 bit chips on its roadmap. Some 64’s for portables will be nice too.”
Done. Intel’s current Celeron and Pentium chips are 64-bit capable. Also, in the second half of 2006, Intel will release Merom, a 64-bit capable Pentium M.
“And that whole thing about Apple moving to Intel 5 years ago – that strikes me as implausible. With the size of the Classic userbase as it was then, there’s no way Apple could have survived a transition to x86 without bringing them along.”
This point doesn’t make any sense. Believe it or not, there’s no reason Classic couldn’t have been made to run on the x86. The reason it isn’t happening with this transition is presumably a combination of knowledge atrophy, higher expectations of Classic, reduced need and other cost-related factors rather than strictly technical reasons.
MacDude, consoles won’t take the place of personal computers, but they do have a better shot at the living room. Of course if Apple does a decent job of marketing a Mac mini with Front Row, it’ll have a good crack at it too (especially with the iPod and burgeoning iTMS content).
Oh yeah, and the one thing working against consoles is their perception as games machines. A Mac mini would have no such perceptions.
Luke! How’s things down under?
Listen, I’m not saying what he says isn’t food for thought, but I’m going to need to hear and see more than this before I take it whole cloth. Like I said, there’s just a tad too much contadiction in these brief statements here.
As for a ‘real’ 970FX mobile solution, um, it’s kind of hard since Apple isn’t buying them. That’s the thing that’s always conveniently glossed over in this particular debate. Apple is (for now anyway) the only company that would make a consumer computer with PPC, and since they have no reason to make one now, there’s no chance of seeing new products of any stripe. Its intellectually dishonest to assert the impossibility of something when the only agent for it’s creation won’t build it.
Last, you say: “His last point is, the PC business is BIG (but Intel and AMD have that business), and hence it is GOOD for Freescale and IBM NOT TO BE IN THAT BUSINESS where they can focus on other imbedded solutions (also a big market!)” You could be right about his intent, but that’s not logical. Assuming the obvious – that every PPC Mac sold is an Intel unit that isn’t – then there is no reason to not support Apple, if you’re IBM especially (they aren’t really in the imbed space). You directly hurt your major competitor in the field they value the most. Maybe that escaped IBM, but I doubt it.
BTW – here’s some very recent info that I just came across, contradicting the assertion that IBM isn’t interested in low power CPUs:
http://news.com.com/IBM,+AMD+further+cut+chip+power+consumption/2100-1006_3-5982887.html?tag=nefd.top
“AMD and IBM have essentially added two technologies to their manufacturing repertoire that strain the silicon layers inside their chips. Straining makes the silicon layers more uniform and rigid, which allows electrons to travel faster. This in turn lets engineers design chips that perform better than existing models, or perform at a similar level but consume less electricity… The … technologies inserted into the AMD-IBM processes reduce power consumption by 40 percent… “
Based on 65nm process that the article says AMD will be shipping in second half of 2006. Nothing said about what IBM’s schedule is, but I’m sure it’s not too different.
Anyway, you don’t do this kind of work in low power if it isn’t a part of your business plan.
There’s probably a grain of truth in what all industry leaders say. However most of that is hidden in all the FUD that they spout.
IBM probably did promise a lot to Apple. And they did produce the G5. At the time it had a lot of potential and Apple probably liked the idea of a 64 bit chip.
Apple probably talked about Intel, using it as a carrot to force IBM to commit a lot of resources to get the G5 up and running.
However, IBM probably lost interest in the PC business since Apple were not make huge strides in increasing market share and thus G5 sales. The lack of volume sales for IBM and some costly technical hurdles were making it not worth their while.
At the same time, Apple were getting frustrated that the G5 were not faster enough and production of high end chips were only a trickle. Apple publicly dissing IBM for the lack of G5s for the iMac probably didn’t go down too well.
Finally Intel offers Apple a deal it can’t refuse. Question is, are they, like IBM before, promising the earth without really knowing whether they can actually make those lofty targets.
If Apple could ever get a good supply of fast CPUs for desktop, laptop and now device use, M$, Dell and the others will be in big doggy do-dos
fookin’ hell my brain hurts . . . . too many words . . . . 75 bucks by friday
The sooner Apple gets rid of PPC the better. It’s the last goofy non-standard hardware turd left – they’ve dropped NuBus, Apple Desktop Connector, SCSI, proprietary RAM, and the one button mouse. Bring on the x86 CPUs, it’s about frikkin time.