Apple ditches IBM power PC chip and will use Intel.

Configure and optimize you computer for Audio.
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

Borogove wrote:I say this as someone who is perfectly content to write SSE on Windows.
whether it's better or not, think of it like this...

"When are we getting altivec support?!"
"Altivec support! WE NEED IT NOW!"
"Why is there no altivec support?!?"
"Will you using altivec optimizations?"
"It's really disturbing that there is no altivec support!"

:hihi:

it has to be about the most asked question ever from mac heads who want their software performing where you'd expect it... So on the developer end it might in fact suck (more).. but man.. I sure won't miss these kinda posts! :lol: :D
Last edited by ModuLR on Mon Jun 06, 2005 7:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ModuLR / Radio

Post

After this move I dont see any reason of Apple keeping in hardware business.
"If I could just say a few words... then I'd be a public speaker" -- Homer Simpson

Post

Dude where're my benchmarks?
"If I could just say a few words... then I'd be a public speaker" -- Homer Simpson

Post

arguru wrote:After this move I dont see any reason of Apple keeping in hardware business.
I do. You have to look at the big picture. Where are Apple's growth markets right now? Things like content delivery (se iTunes and Quicktime, look at Apple's plans to deliver movie content in the future, too) and consumer electronics (iPod and the MacMini to start, but content delivery appliances, like hooking up an Apple appliance to watch movies delivered via the net, just take a look at how their airport express thingie works). A side factoid: did you know that it's estimated that Quicktime is installed on 400 million devices, mostly Windows-based.

I think the move to Intel has to tie in to their plans of making low cost consumer electronics and content delivery. Microsoft are heavily focused on the media centre model (look at the new Xbox 360 and all of what it will be able to do), so the two don't seem to be heading to compete. The PC market is stagnating right now, as computers get smaller and more powerful, people will be able to buy things that are phones, cameras, PDAs and media players reducing their need for PCs.

These guys think in big terms, but a lot of stuff in this thread is thinking small. Whether they pull it off or not remains to be seen, but I guarantee the thinking behind it goes way beyond "So will I be able to have an OSX/Windows dual boot now?"

Post

well i'll be.. so it is true. :P i'm curious to see how this pans out. the fact that you will be able to run PPC osx apps on the intel processor is a huge saving grace for this transition.

and good post shamann.

Post

Sorry if it has already been posted.;;

The official announce:
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html

Post

Hey, Kraznet, did they indicate whether their eventual main line of PowerMacs would be using *dual* Intel CPUs? Because in that case, they will be able to go head-to-head marketing against Dell. The Windows PC world has always treated dual processor systems as a premium niche market. If Apple comes along with a "well, of course we have dual CPUs, why wouldn't we?" at only a small price increase over Dell's single-CPU machines...
Image
Don't do it my way.

Post

This is true. Precisions are big heap expensive, and competing for the same market. It's going to be very messy.

Groet, Erik
Pop music delenda est.
Image

Post

Just a few observations.

1) Altivec optimized stuff will a lot harder to port. Which is most audio stuff. My guess is emulation of altivec instructions won't be fast enough.

2) Mac DAW users will have to go through another painful application/plugin upgrade cycle similar to the OS X upgrade. Although this one might be a bit easier since there is no new protocol such as Audio Units being introduced.

3) Porting VST plug-ins that use VST GUI will be close to trivial. This means that possibly devs like ConcreteFX, RGC, and Big Tick might port their plug-ins.

4) Apple will probably use a custom motherboard with their own chipset as opposed to a standard chipset. This will make it harder for people to hack the Mac OS to run on a generic Intel PC. The open source Darwin kernel might make it a bit easier for hackers.

5) Phil Schiller from Apple has stated that they will not be focused on making Windows work on Intel Macs, but they won't prevent others from doing it. He stated that they will actively prevent the Mac OS from running on non Apple PCs.

6) In the long run, update hassles and plummeting resale values aside, this will be good for most Mac users. There will no real difference in the way their
Macs behave, other than being more current with processor speed upgrades. Not sure if Apple will pass along any of the cost savings (it will probably have to, to some extent).

-Shehryar

Post

Sorry couldnt resist post this link:

http://www.apple.com/powermac/performance/

Post

If Apple also drop the price of their machines to compete head-on with the prices of commodity PC's, this'll be worth it.

If not, expect to see x86 kit thats still twice as expensive as anything not in a designer case. I really cant help but think that unless they drop prices heavily they're going to have a problem selling kit that competes directly with the heavy-duty PC workstations out there. There's nothing I can imagine in the engineering that could validate a big difference in price, and d'you really want to be paying £500 for an OS, Garageband, and next years fashion-parade case?

The guy I share an office with is gonna have a fit ;)

[edit]I really dont think Apple's production lines and marketing are going to be able to deal with the speed of change in the PC market.
Last edited by whyterabbyt on Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
my other modular synth is a bugbrand

Post

I don't think they'll lower their prices (much)
they still want to maintain their upmarket brand

but as you said whyter, how are they going to justify their prices for 'basic' pc components? you can sell a design, but even then you have limits how far you can drive it
My other host is Bruce Forsyth

Post

slasi quoth
4) Apple will probably use a custom motherboard with their own chipset as opposed to a standard chipset. This will make it harder for people to hack the Mac OS to run on a generic Intel PC. The open source Darwin kernel might make it a bit easier for hackers.


I really doubt it, to be honest. I expect to see them using standard Intel chipsets, even if the mobo's are their own. I dont think Apple have got the expertise that's needed.

6) In the long run, update hassles and plummeting resale values aside, this will be good for most Mac users. There will no real difference in the way their
Macs behave, other than being more current with processor speed upgrades. Not sure if Apple will pass along any of the cost savings (it will probably have to, to some extent).


This is contradicted by your point (4). If its custom motherboards and chipsets, yes there will be a 'difference in the way their Macs behave'. And keeping up development of your own chipsets for Intel processors is going to be an expensive business. That would rule out those cost savings. Plus if the make their own chipsets and they arent up to the standards of Intel, VIA or NVidia, the move to x86 is going to make their kit look foolishly dated. Thats already a criticism of the current Mac's, and it would be a real blow if Apple couldnt get out those little 'technology leads' that they've managed in the past (first with mainstream USB, Firewire, DVD et.c.)
my other modular synth is a bugbrand

Post

So there's this thread opened now, too.

Ties in to what I was saying, as the Wired article suggests DRM for movies is a big factor.

Post

I cant see the Mac audience being amazingly happy if they find that they're getting sold a box which ties them to DRM...
my other modular synth is a bugbrand

Post Reply

Return to “Computer Setup and System Configuration”