Intel Inside "Apple"?

[jac006]

It'll be an interesting battle, that's one thing for sure...

 

[alvino]

Too bad for IBM. They own Intel. For one, they're 128bit not 32bit and their multi-core processors aren't two crappy cores slaved with a logics processor.

 

[Redspade]

I wouldnt just go with one of them. I will hybrid them. Max os and Windows (Dual boot)
Will be very nice. Windows to play games, Mac OS to do pretty much anything else.

 

[TRDCorolla1]

Yeah, that's the big controversy right now is that mix of both OS's. Jobs doesn't comment on the possiblity, but he did say from an iinterview on PC World magazine that he "hope it doesn't happen". There are people out there that can crack this though and I wouldn't be surprised if there was a way to make the twp OS usable on the same PC.

 

[alvino]

I don't think Steve Jobs or Bill Gates would really approve of a hybrid Apple computer, but that would be interesting...only if it had a IBM processor. (Which own all Intel processors, so ha!)

 

[connchri]

As you all know, Apple has dumped IBM's PowerPC processors in favor of the Intel engine. Could a PC actually load Mac OS X? Steve Jobs don't want to. Could an Apple run Windows? He said, it's possible but he's not going to promote it. The "hybrid" of both will be coming soon. I can see Jobs big grin on his face.

Apple will finally get the power boost they need with Intel. Apple has always struggled to match the chip speed of it's Intel based Windows competitors and now, Apple will no longer have to cope with this issue. Now the war is officially on. Apple vs Microsoft war is heating up. Apple's newest OS X (Leopard) is coming out almost the same time Vista's coming out and they will all be able to run on the same Intel compatible processors. How do you like that? Things just got a bit more interesting...

Yeah, a Intel based CPU can run Mac OS X. Seen it. I'm at Strathclyde uni in Glasgow and I installed MacOSX on my Athlon64 PC. If memory serves it was using a leaked version of the EM-64T compiled version of Tiger (OSx86). I still have it installed in dual boot with WinXP so I might add a screen shoot.

It even reads the CPU as being my Athlon 64 and all the Mac programs work on it. Pretty smart.

As for the old IBM G5 v Intel/AMD CPU debate, I'll not go into that. Theres things that the G5 was terrible for, and things it exceled. At the end of the day though, it was impossible for them to raise the clock speed any higher. You think P4's are hot...G5's are something else. At least Intel and AMD have furture workable roadmaps.

This will all prove to be interesting. I certainly won't mind using MacOSX. If I shift completely to it though is another question. It will need to have the software and hardware compatibility for me.

 

[Delta1]

Incorrect. Apple have always ran faster then PC's and WAY more stable. 128bit vs 32 bit. I mean you cant compaire them lol Risk>Sisk BIG TIME.

Man that was fantastic! You even thought about stand up comedy? your comic talents are wasted on these boards!!

So Apple took a downgrade last year? Going from the 128-bit G4 to the 64-bit G5? Oh and Sisk, thats Simplistic Instuction Set Kompootaa right? Moron!

Too bad for IBM. They own Intel. For one, they're 128bit not 32bit and their multi-core processors aren't two crappy cores slaved with a logics processor.

Im pissing myself here, you guys need to do a double act

 

[connchri]

Incorrect. Apple have always ran faster then PC's and WAY more stable. 128bit vs 32 bit. I mean you cant compaire them lol Risk>Sisk BIG TIME.

Dont mean to be a critic, it's CISC, not sisk. Complex Intruction Set Computer, RISC is Reduced Instruction Set Computer. Because of the nature of both the CPU's in question here, the clock speed difference between the higher clocked Intel P4 and the lower clocked makes up the difference. It's other architecture differences that provide the performance differences.

Originally Posted by Redspade
Incorrect. Apple have always ran faster then PC's and WAY more stable. 128bit vs 32 bit. I mean you cant compaire them lol Risk>Sisk BIG TIME.
​

Man that was fantastic! You even thought about stand up comedy? your comic talents are wasted on these boards!!

So Apple took a downgrade last year? Going from the 128-bit G4 to the 64-bit G5? Oh and Sisk, thats Simplistic Instuction Set Kompootaa right? Moron!

Originally Posted by alvino
Too bad for IBM. They own Intel. For one, they're 128bit not 32bit and their multi-core processors aren't two crappy cores slaved with a logics processor.
​

Im pissing myself here, you guys need to do a double act

Now Now Delta, I don't want to pee myself. LMAO!

 

[TreeHugger]

Who cares, who buys macs anyways, the only worthy apple products are the ipod and the their operating systems. Plus the ibm is reborn in the nintendo revolution and xbox 360 get one of those to fufill you ibm desire.

 

[alvino]

Mac desktop computers have some of the best construction ever. Apple's products are well thought out and built very nicely. Very few, if not any, pre-built computers have the same thermal cooling zones like the Mac G5 does. The Apple HD Cinema display is just as nice too...aluminum construction, it is just pure beauty.

Even if you don't like Macs, and you hate the price tag, you have to admire the hardwork and precision that goes into designing them. Apple products are like art. They may be expensive, but they're masterpieces.