[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by turtle777

Do we have to buy Apptel Intmac hardware to be allowed to post here ?

-t

What are defectors going to do here other then try to convince everyone that Apple is no longer Apple?

[legacyb4]

So THAT was the source of the squealing/purring G5s!

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

Personally I don't care if Apple used wind up rubber bands or hamsters in a wheel in the computers as long as it was FAST and runs the Mac OS in the end.

[loki74]

sounds to me like you'll still be able to use a PowerPC, but with rosetta you'll also be able to run a Pentium... i only skimmed so im definately wrong. oh well. I hope that while the Pentium is faster than the PowerPC, it is not less stable/prone to trouble. The description of the damascine process used for the PowerPC on Apples site I think is ingenious, and it sounds much more stable than the conventional methods used on the Pentiums...

What im afraid of more than anything is hearing the "do-do-do-ding" intel music thingy in apple commercials... and seeing that annoyng animation at the end of them *shudders*

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Well, that settles it. I'm moving to Linux.

No, I mean it. The root of just about every advantage the Mac had lay in the superior hardware architecture, and the most important aspect of this was in the clean, efficient PowerPC processor. Everything else -such as the software/hardware integration- came forth from it. With Apple settling for what is cheap over what is good, this no longer applies, and the remaining Mac advantages are not enough to justify the extra cost. My next machine will be a homebuilt PC, probably running Ubuntu.

So long, Apple. It's been a good 21 years. But my platform is truly dead.

That's weird reasoning.

Your platform died over ten years ago, when the last 680x0 box was sold.

I'm amazed you ddidn't jump ship back when Apple switched to the horror, the Evil Empire, Big Brother, Grand Bleu - IBM. But they didn't make a big announcement of that, so nobody noticed.

Don't get me wrong: Intel is pretty close to the devil incarnate. But the Mac was never about the processor, and Apple hasn't sold a single Mac on "superior hardware architecture" since the first generation of G5 Power Macs.

[d0ubled0wn]

Linux won't run any of these so I'm not interested…


For me, using a Mac was all about the apps and the easy to use gui with a minimum of problems. That was all. I cared nothing about the architecture of the cpu. I think it's silly that anyone would, unless your profession is writing compilers or hand-tuning assembler code. It's certainly disappointing that IBM couldn't keep up with the Joneses. They obviously didn't try hard enough. What I do look forward to is that Intel and AMD will continue to be competitive against each other and produce faster and faster products.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker

So when you leaving? At the end of your next post hopefully?

I'm on your ignore list. Keep it that way.

Thanks.

[IFLY2HIGH]

What's funny is reading all the bullcrap. No one has any clue of what kind of processor they could actually use. Evidently for 5 years this has brewing, since OSX 10.0!! Software this and that, hum companies have plenty of time to work it out and get it right. Pentium 4? That will be outa date by the time the new Macs are out with some new high-tech processor to stop the other people.

No one knows! Those who sit there and say, oh I'm going to Linux, hey go ahead, your running on x86 platform anyway, so big whoppde doo!

The hard prt for Apple is most likely over anyway, 5 years ago! Since they have had OSX running on x86 platform since it's release, so the OS is prepared and that to me is looking way far far ahead in time, and relizing where things will be at in years to come.

I fell this is a good move, even those who want to upgrade and get a mac the G5's to me are not outa date, since the OS will still work just fine on both platforms, and by then the developers can get their ducks in a row and build in the one language that works for both, almost looks 10 times nicer than the transition from 9 to X.

[d0ubled0wn]

Keynote is up folks. Wow it must be in h.264.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by IFLY2HIGH

What's funny is reading all the bullcrap. No one has any clue of what kind of processor they could actually use. Evidently for 5 years this has brewing, since OSX 10.0!! Software this and that, hum companies have plenty of time to work it out and get it right. Pentium 4? That will be outa date by the time the new Macs are out with some new high-tech processor to stop the other people.

No one knows! Those who sit there and say, oh I'm going to Linux, hey go ahead, your running on x86 platform anyway, so big whoppde doo!

I don't have an issue with X86, I own an Athlon 64 box. I simply refuse to buy Intel products.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

It will definitely fracture the Mac market. Individuals, schools and companies will be divesting themselves of their Macs.

Why, in God's name?

How on earth will anybody be able to ever tell the difference looking at the OS and the box - apart from *knowing* which models contain an Intel chip, or checking the "About this Mac" info box?

There won't be a difference, except that Virtual PC will finally be usable.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally Posted by osxpinot

I wonder if there will be a yellowbox for windows. If so, Mac developers should be shitting in their pants...talk about leveling the playing field.

I've been thinking about the same thing as well. Apple had a yellow box for Windows NT that would run NeXT code. Think if Apple released a yellow box for Longhorn that would let you run all the cool apple stuff at native speeds on your POS Dell box. Developers would be jumping over each other to write code for it... or better yet, release it for Linux.

I wonder how pissed Microsoft would be if Apple sold a yellow box to Linux users for $20 that would let Linux boxes run Office, Adobe, Illustrator, general etc. etc. etc. on Linux?

[IFLY2HIGH]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

I don't have an issue with X86, I own an Athlon 64 box. I simply refuse to buy Intel products.

Why, give valid reasons?

[osxisfun]

Originally Posted by d0ubled0wn

Keynote is up folks. Wow it must be in h.264.

linky.

i looked around and could not find anything but a placeholder page.

[greenamp]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

I've never owned a computer with an Intel processor, and even though I love Apple, I won't start now.

When my Dual 1.42 gets long in the tooth, I'll be building a dual (or more) Opteron Linux box.

Oh well, it's been fun Apple, loved you ever since my IIe over 25 years ago. It's now time to part ways and move on.

Who says you may not be able to get a Dual Opteron Power Mac at some point?

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally Posted by MacNStein

I'm on your ignore list. Keep it that way.

Thanks.

Na you leaving is worth a reply.

Thanks

[osxisfun]

http://stream.apple.akadns.net/

[analogika]

Originally Posted by osxisfun

linky.

i looked around and could not find anything but a placeholder page.

Posted above:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc05/

[demograph68]

...

[d0ubled0wn]

Hmm, audio is seriously out of sync with video. My G4 can't keep up…

edit: NM, it caught up.

[solero]

Hmmm don't know what to think about this "Intel" announcement. I wanted to get a new Powerbook soon (12"), but this announcement makes me double think my decision. It's as if Apple is telling me that I shouldn't do it, because even Apple thinks the G4 is underperforming.

[greenamp]

Quote: After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that." http://onebutan.com/Apple_on_x86_FAQ

So it will be possible to run Windows on intel-based Macs. I assume it would also be possible to run any flavor of linux as well.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by analogika

Why, in God's name?

How on earth will anybody be able to ever tell the difference looking at the OS and the box - apart from *knowing* which models contain an Intel chip, or checking the "About this Mac" info box?

There won't be a difference, except that Virtual PC will finally be usable.

Take off the rose colored glasses. How on earth will anyone be able to tell the difference? Well, why don't you take a look at the Universal Binary PDF and tell us again how seamless this transition will be. Apple wants you to buy this spin. We now effectively have two platforms where there was previously one. 3% market share could not sustain one platform very well, let alone two. The depreciated Mac platform will die away, slowly, and there will be a considerable amount of upheaval for those left with the Mactel fallout.

[osxisfun]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Take off the rose colored glasses. How on earth will anyone be able to tell the difference? Well, why don't you take a look at the Universal Binary PDF and tell us again how seamless this transition will be. Apple wants you to buy this spin. We now effectively have two platforms where there was previously one. 3% market share could not sustain one platform very well, let alone two. The depreciated Mac platform will die away, slowly, and there will be a considerable amount of upheaval for those left with the Mactel fallout.

I do not agree. I think apple is now on tract to double its market share in 3 years.

Time will tell.

[d0ubled0wn]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Take off the rose colored glasses...

You really should change your sig.

[TheJoshu]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Well, that settles it. I'm moving to Linux.

No, I mean it. The root of just about every advantage the Mac had lay in the superior hardware architecture, and the most important aspect of this was in the clean, efficient PowerPC processor. Everything else -such as the software/hardware integration- came forth from it. With Apple settling for what is cheap over what is good, this no longer applies, and the remaining Mac advantages are not enough to justify the extra cost. My next machine will be a homebuilt PC, probably running Ubuntu.

So long, Apple. It's been a good 21 years. But my platform is truly dead.

Hm, pretty sure I read something remarkably similar on Fark...

[turtle777]

A little OT, but here an astonishing fact.

http://www.heise.de/newsticker/foren...forum_id=79820

In the German IT newsite Heise.de, the thread about Apple switching has more than 2,000 (!!!) posts in around 4 hours. OMG

-t

[icibaqu]

y'know... nothing wrong with switchers still spending $500 on a mac mini. so then the intel chips start to come, and the switchers who are pro osx stick with a mac... a faster mac.

not quite sure how this is a stupid strategy. most people switch their computers frequently, and it seems like it will run all the same stuff....so... y'all mac-aficionados are crazy.

i'm switching this week (wanted to wait post-keynote just in case) and the entire time i've been wanting to switch and getting ready to switch it has had basically jack to do with the chip. it's not like i was standing in the store thinking how wonderful the chip was, i was thinking how nice the user interface was.

y'know...and lastly laptops are outselling desktops, and that is really really key.

[Spliffdaddy]

Finally....

Steve Jobs won't have to get armpit-deep in the BS when he compares the performance of the current PowerMac with (typically the previous year's) Dell offerring.

And no, games won't run as fast on a x86 Mac as they do on a peecee. It's the operating system that's the bottleneck - it ain't the hardware.

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

It will definitely fracture the Mac market. Individuals, schools and companies will be divesting themselves of their Macs and developers will have to choose how much they wish to support this new bifurcated monster platform. Device driver support will be particularly ugly. I can just imagine the terrific quality of the resultant code, on both the Mac side and the Mactel side.

Oh, for the love of God, you're not even making sense.

There is no "bifurcated" platform. You code with XCode and compile for either platform. This makes it much, much easier on developers as they only need one code base. Adobe, Microsoft and other big companies will love this. These are some of the exact same arguments used when Apple made the transition from 68k to PPC.

What Apple has known for years now is that computing is now a commodity industry. Hardware specs do not sell machines any more, because 95% of the hardware is the same. What sells machines is usability, marketability and hype. Apple excels at all three.

All of these comments ignore one, huge thing: IBM can't make the chips Apple needs, and I will bet that, in the coming weeks, we will learn that IBM told Apple the low power and faster G5s were not going to happen. Given this situation, Apple had no choice.

[osxisfun]

All of these comments ignore one, huge thing: IBM can't make the chips Apple needs, and I will bet that, in the coming weeks, we will learn that IBM told Apple the low power and faster G5s were not going to happen. Given this situation, Apple had no choice.

IBM was ok for today (if you did not want a laptop) but it was not ok for tommorrow...

plain and simple.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh

I've been thinking about the same thing as well. Apple had a yellow box for Windows NT that would run NeXT code. Think if Apple released a yellow box for Longhorn that would let you run all the cool apple stuff at native speeds on your POS Dell box. Developers would be jumping over each other to write code for it... or better yet, release it for Linux.

I wonder how pissed Microsoft would be if Apple sold a yellow box to Linux users for $20 that would let Linux boxes run Office, Adobe, Illustrator, general etc. etc. etc. on Linux?

"Yellow Box" was Cocoa. Selling Cocoa wouldn't allow you to run any of those apps.

[IFLY2HIGH]

Adobe has announced in the keynote they are ready, as so microsoft, and a few others, and I think this will be a very good transitions for Apple. It also seems like it's gona be Apple Hardware and Design just drivin with Intel Processors. This still doesn't look like say a PC app will work on OSX since it needs to be in Xcode or some Binary format. Seems all New Goodness to me, now I know when I'm getting my next computer and it will be when the new machines come out. Those who already wite in Xcode, walla, the port is done with Xcode 2.1, no problems at all, and is universal with both platforms, and those in coca and anything else goto Xcode, change some things and boom, both platforms

HA WOZ is there good to see him!

goto the developer tab and watch the keynote and I think alot of these assumptions will be put to rest

[finboy]

Originally Posted by Krypton

The most bizarre thing: no announcement on Apple's main page - are they just not going to draw attention to "the roadmap"?

And what the hell are they going to sell for the next year?!

Right... who would buy an Apple until all this gets straightened out.

I think it's the last step in Jobs' master plan, and I think it will make Apple another BeOS. Remember them?

[finboy]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Well, that settles it. I'm moving to Linux.

No, I mean it. The root of just about every advantage the Mac had lay in the superior hardware architecture, and the most important aspect of this was in the clean, efficient PowerPC processor. Everything else -such as the software/hardware integration- came forth from it. With Apple settling for what is cheap over what is good, this no longer applies, and the remaining Mac advantages are not enough to justify the extra cost. My next machine will be a homebuilt PC, probably running Ubuntu.

So long, Apple. It's been a good 21 years. But my platform is truly dead.

I can understand your frustration. I'm inclined to think the same thing.

[d0ubled0wn]

Originally Posted by finboy

Right... who would buy an Apple until all this gets straightened out.

I think it's the last step in Jobs' master plan, and I think it will make Apple another BeOS. Remember them?

Apple survived the 68k -> PowerPC transition yada yada yada. Sales will go down but they'll survive.

BeOS never had an established base of users. How can you even compare Apple to Be?

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by finboy

Originally Posted by Millennium
Well, that settles it. I'm moving to Linux.

No, I mean it. The root of just about every advantage the Mac had lay in the superior hardware architecture, and the most important aspect of this was in the clean, efficient PowerPC processor. Everything else -such as the software/hardware integration- came forth from it.

You couldn't be more wrong. The roots of the advantages Apple has are 1) a very specific vision of how an OS should operate 2) engineering absolutely committed to making that vision a success and 3) tight integration between software design and hardware design. The only proprietary hardware in my G5 is the processor. Everything else is industry standard. What makes the difference is the great OS and the way that OS is integrated.

Despite what you may think about "superior processor architecture," the real world sales numbers shows that does not matter at all. 99% of computer purchases are made without reference to the processor, and 95% of computer owners couldn't name the processor in their machine, PPC, Pentium, Athlon or Z-80. Most people want reliability, features and usability. They don't care about architectures.

[pliny]

Seems ok to me. IBM couldn't produce the chips. Apple has to sell computers. Intel is #1 maker of chips.Apple gave Motorola and IBM a looooong time to develop and produce chips for their machines. They came out with some good stuff but the big gaps between products has cost Apple alot.

Intel has clear roadmap and high production capability, two things they've had for a long time. Maybe with Apple as a customer they will start designing some more interesting chips.

I just hope this brings down the price of Macintosh computers.

[osxisfun]

The Soul of a Mac is its Operating System... and we are not standing still... - Steve Jobs WWDC 2005

Enough said.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

The hardware doesn't even exist, and the Mac users are leaving in droves. What a pathetic bunch you all are.

Many of us are still stinging from the switch to OS X, the last "painless" switch. In fact, I'm still stinging from the switch to PowerPC.

[version]

This is a mess, and I feel sorry for Apple. In a year's time, the Intel version of Photoshop might be running on a compatibility layer incurring speed hits.

Of course, it might go native, but who knows. Rosetta makes me just laugh. 80% performance? LOL

[thunderous_funker]

Have to say I'm really really really conflicted about this announcement.

First and foremost it hurts because it hard not to see this as losing. Many of us really believed in PPC and its advantages all along and now there is a lot of crow to eat.

Beyond the blow to my ego, I have to admit that I cannot shake the feeling that there is zero chance Apple can survive as a company, at least as we know it.

If they keep the platform closed, they cannot compete on price. Direct CPU-CPU comparisons of Windows and OSX will make justifying a price premium really really hard. If they remain a niche premium hardware market they negate most of the advantages of using Intel chips.

That means this has to be the first step in making OSX available on non-Apple hardware. I just don't see how they could possibly succeed otherwise. That means Apples becomes a software company and a gadget company.

I think Jobs believes that Apple can succeed where Linux has failed--as the legitimate alternate OS for business desktops. Again, that will require licensing the OS to other hardware vendors.

So at the heart of all this is really the fear that directly competing with MS and Linux might be too much for Apple. I'm really not sure they can do it.

Pros:

• cheap hardware
• fast hardware
• legit hardware roadmap
• games are coming to the Mac
• legit biz platform
• laptops should rock

Cons:

• lose the current PPC advantage (64-bit, system bandwidth)
• not going to sell any hardware this year
• have to juggle dual platform for a while, could be messy and confusing
• lose the hardware integration advantage
• will have to compete on same hardware; go gimmicks
• workstations are gonna suck
• direct competition with MS and Dell; suicide

[osxisfun]

never mind.

[chris v]

Originally Posted by pliny

Intel has clear roadmap and high production capability, two things they've had for a long time. Maybe with Apple as a customer they will start designing some more interesting chips.

No, according to Murphy's Law, as soon as Apple releases the first batch of these, Intel will his some kind of roadblock, and bog down for two years, right as Freescale hits a major breakthrough, and Dell switches to PPC.

[d0ubled0wn]

Originally Posted by version

This is a mess, and I feel sorry for Apple. In a year's time, the Intel version of Photoshop might be running on a compatibility layer incurring speed hits.

Of course, it might go native, but who knows. Rosetta makes me just laugh. 80% performance? LOL

What are you talking about? Maybe you mean PPC version of Photoshop running on Rosetta, but then you would be wrong because Adobe has committed to making a universal binary to run native on both cpus.

[d0ubled0wn]

Originally Posted by chris v

No, according to Murphy's Law, as soon as Apple releases the first batch of these, Intel will his some kind of roadblock, and bog down for two years, right as Freescale hits a major breakthrough, and Dell switches to PPC.

[pliny]

Originally Posted by thunderous_funker

Have to say I'm really really really conflicted about this announcement.

First and foremost it hurts because it hard not to see this as losing. Many of us really believed in PPC and its advantages all along and now there is a lot of crow to eat.

PPC is good, when you can get it. IBM can't produce worth s.h.i.t. They are a mess. They are good at their old itme business--servers.

MS preening about dual core 3.2 PPC's in a new console....oboy, it will be good to see how many of these IBM can make. Couldn't even get one out the door for a demo.

[osxisfun]

Originally Posted by pliny

PPC is good, when you can get it. IBM can't produce worth s.h.i.t. They are a mess. They are good at their old itme business--servers.

MS preening about dual core 3.2 PPC's in a new console....oboy, it will be good to see how many of these IBM can make. Couldn't even get one out the door for a demo.

Wouldn't that be hilarious. If m$, nintendo, and sony had a meltdown this christmas buying season because IBM failed to them too..

[version]

Originally Posted by d0ubled0wn

What are you talking about? Maybe you mean PPC version of Photoshop running on Rosetta, but then you would be wrong because Adobe has committed to making a universal binary to run native on both cpus.

What am I talking about? PS on Rosetta, the compatibility layer. It's bollocks. It's amazing, the rest of the world moves on, yet next year we get PS to run slower on newer Macs.

A joke. As to the native release, we'll see how it performs.

Rosetta is a joke.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by analogika

That's weird reasoning.

Your platform died over ten years ago, when the last 680x0 box was sold.

No, because back then Apple still upgraded its technologies every now and then. This is a downgrade for the sake of marketing, and hence no longer the Apple I knew.

[strictlyplaid]

Originally Posted by greenamp

Quote: After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that." http://onebutan.com/Apple_on_x86_FAQ

So it will be possible to run Windows on intel-based Macs. I assume it would also be possible to run any flavor of linux as well.

I'm terribly excited about this prospect. I have to use Windows for work and because my wife really prefers them, but having a dual-boot iMac or PowerBook would allow me to come back into the Mac fold. Awesome!