Apple explores use of Intel chips -report

[FG Lurker]

Apple explores use of Intel chips -report
Reuters, May 23, 2005

Apple Computer Inc. has been in talks that could lead to a decision soon to use Intel Corp. chips in its Macintosh computer line, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday.

The report, citing two industry executives with knowledge of recent discussions between the companies, said Apple will agree to use Intel chips.

Neither company would confirm the report and an Apple spokeswoman told the Journal she would characterize it as "rumor and speculation."

(Full Story)

Why oh why would Apple move from IBM to Intel? When Apple was stuck with Motorolla G4s I could have understood such a consideration... But today, with the 970? (I checked the date to be sure it wasn't an April Fools article...)

In any case, if Apple was to go x86 I think AMD is a more likely supplier. But even then, why would they do it?

[FG Lurker]

The Register has an interesting article up about this too.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/05/23/why_apple_wont_embrace_intel/

[Big Booger]

A bit late I say. Would be nice to see a couple Itanium chips running Mac... 6Ghz of pure x86 power.

And you can rest assured that if Intel break into the Mac world, AMD will be nipping at their toes.

[FG Lurker]

A bit late I say. Would be nice to see a couple Itanium chips running Mac... 6Ghz of pure x86 power.

Itanium isn't x86 though... ]And you can rest assured that if Intel break into the Mac world, AMD will be nipping at their toes. [/quote]
I can't see why Apple would go with Intel when AMD has a much more elegant solution available. Two Dual-core Opterons with MacOS... That would be sweet! But even with the Opteron, there really is no big advantage over a fast PPC970, especially once IBM gets the dual core parts out the door.

The massive amount of work such a migration would create for Apple doesn't make it a likely choice...

[cstaylor]

Apple explores use of Intel chips -report
Reuters, May 23, 2005

Apple Computer Inc. has been in talks that could lead to a decision soon to use Intel Corp. chips in its Macintosh computer line, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday.

The report, citing two industry executives with knowledge of recent discussions between the companies, said Apple will agree to use Intel chips.

Neither company would confirm the report and an Apple spokeswoman told the Journal she would characterize it as "rumor and speculation."

(Full Story)

Why oh why would Apple move from IBM to Intel? When Apple was stuck with Motorolla G4s I could have understood such a consideration... But today, with the 970? (I checked the date to be sure it wasn't an April Fools article...)

In any case, if Apple was to go x86 I think AMD is a more likely supplier. But even then, why would they do it?

I think it's more likely that they're talking about related chips, not the CPU (for example, NIC).

[FG Lurker]

I think it's more likely that they're talking about related chips, not the CPU (for example, NIC).

The articles specifically discuss CPUs... The rumour re-appears every few years.

Maybe they will start using some Intel chips (not x86 CPUs) though. Intel makes everything from ARM chips to Flash.

[zentogo]

They have been on and off with this development for years and years. If you read

Apple: The Inside Story of Intrigue, Egomania, and Business Blunders
by Jim Carlton

You will see how much time and money has been "wasted" on this. I say wasted because most of the time it was done for good reasons and canceled for bad ones. Bascially, they have worked and fought for years inside Apple to create a more flexible system so they can take more Market share. OSX -- especially if you use the UNIX FReeBSD and all the free soft that goes with it -- is amazing. So, again, inside Apple -- people are trying to create an OS that can go on Wintel systems.

I really recommend this book. It is good for drama and history.

ZTG

[Big Booger]

A bit late I say. Would be nice to see a couple Itanium chips running Mac... 6Ghz of pure x86 power.

Itanium isn't x86 though... ]

Oh the technicalities...

[FG Lurker]

A bit late I say. Would be nice to see a couple Itanium chips running Mac... 6Ghz of pure x86 power.

Itanium isn't x86 though... ]
Oh the technicalities...

Yeah, they're a real bitch.

I wonder if Intel will end up killing Itanic? They've hung in for a long time with it, but they've got to be getting sick of not making any money off it.

[Big Booger]

A bit late I say. Would be nice to see a couple Itanium chips running Mac... 6Ghz of pure x86 power.

Itanium isn't x86 though... ]
Oh the technicalities...

Yeah, they're a real bitch.

I wonder if Intel will end up killing Itanic? They've hung in for a long time with it, but they've got to be getting sick of not making any money off it.

I think they already have... That ship is just sailing down the shitter. WHy would anyone by an Itanium chip when you can get a comparable AMD opteron at a much better price?

[Papa-Lazarou]

Didnt Jobs pull the plug on a similar project about 3 years ago?

[mr. sparkle]

I think they may be talking to other chip manufacturers because IBM is dragging their feet in delivering new and faster chips, like they promised they would do after the G5 chip was made. At WWDC 2004, Jobs said that Mac Users would be in dual G6 if not Quad G6 land by now. Since they have not delivered and does not seem they can deliver, Jobs has no choice but to look elsewhere.

Of course, I'm just speculating.

I would be really surprised if OS X would ever be ported to Windoze. Of course, Steve's primary goal is to sell more Macs.

[cstaylor]

I would be really surprised if OS X would ever be ported to Windoze. Of course, Steve's primary goal is to sell more Macs.

I think you mean the x86 architecture, not Windoze.

[FG Lurker]

I think they already have... That ship is just sailing down the shitter. WHy would anyone by an Itanium chip when you can get a comparable AMD opteron at a much better price?

The two don't compare. The Opteron is as fast (or sometimes faster) in Integer math. Certainly faster per $ spent. However in floating point math the Itanic will destroy the Opteron...completely.

The problem is that everything has to be ported to it. That, and optimizing code for it is apparently quite tough.

[mr. sparkle]

I would be really surprised if OS X would ever be ported to Windoze. Of course, Steve's primary goal is to sell more Macs.

I think you mean the x86 architecture, not Windoze.

Yep. That's what I meant.

[cstaylor]

A bit late I say. Would be nice to see a couple Itanium chips running Mac... 6Ghz of pure x86 power.

Itanium isn't x86 though... ]
Oh the technicalities...

Yeah, they're a real bitch.

I wonder if Intel will end up killing Itanic? They've hung in for a long time with it, but they've got to be getting sick of not making any money off it.

I think they already have... That ship is just sailing down the shitter. WHy would anyone by an Itanium chip when you can get a comparable AMD opteron at a much better price?

And you can MP the Opterons as well.

[FG Lurker]

A bit late I say. Would be nice to see a couple Itanium chips running Mac... 6Ghz of pure x86 power.

Itanium isn't x86 though... ]
Oh the technicalities...

Yeah, they're a real bitch.

I wonder if Intel will end up killing Itanic? They've hung in for a long time with it, but they've got to be getting sick of not making any money off it.

I think they already have... That ship is just sailing down the shitter. WHy would anyone by an Itanium chip when you can get a comparable AMD opteron at a much better price?

And you can MP the Opterons as well.

I'm playing devil's advocate now as I really think developing Itanic was a waste of money.

That said, Opteron and Itanic have very different strong points. If you want to run a database server then a dual-core multi-processor Opteron will give killer performance at a reasonable price. I don't think there is any doubt that it is the best server or workstation x86 processor on the market.

If you are a scientist crunching floating point math though... Opteron will do it of course, but Itanic is designed for it. If Intel lowered prices considerably certainly they would see much more adoption in such fields -- and over the next several years Intel wants to do just that. They have stated publicly that their goal is to have price-parity and pin-compatibility between Xeon and Itanium. If that happens things will get interesting.

Maybe K9 will improve floating point performance to the point it can compete with Itanic... I don't really expect it though as FP is very unimportant for general use.

[GuyJean]

[FG Lurker]

IBM, Sony: We'll open Cell
The Register, May 25, 2005

IBM, Sony and Toshiba have vowed to open the specifications to the Cell processor to the world, and provide libraries for software libre developers.

The news comes three days after the Wall Street Journal published a story that Apple was seriously looking at Intel chips for future systems. IBM is Apple's primary source of CPUs. The Cell, unlike IBM's G5, will be suitable for low power operation in notebooks, if not handhelds quite yet. Open specifications will permit Apple to develop for the Cell without a potentially costly licensing agreement. It's tempting to see these facts as related, but of course it may all be a fortuitous coincidence for Apple.

But "free" libraries may not be "free", EE Times reports.

"We're not yet sure about the right licensing terms for the libraries. It can be hard to give stuff away for free," says IBM cell chief Jim Kahle. IBM did however commit to open sourcing the software for cell. EE Times has a few more tidbits about the Cell that haven't been disclosed before. A team of 400 IBM engineers worked on the project across ten design centers. And the software-based I/O design was inspired by Hong Kong airport.

(Full Story)

Interesting... Hopefully they will make the libraries free -- both as in beer and as in speech. We'll see...

[Lupin4]

"Hhhmm.. iPod/tabletPC/phone?"

Tablets get the official no-go from Jobs' from time to time. Then again, the official word will always be 'no' until a it's introduced in a Keynote speech.

Apple STILL hasn't put out a portable G5, which is killing them. Well, Apple is actually doing fine, but a G5 would kick sales up a lot. If Apple got a dual-proc G5 to market in the next year, they would have trouble making enough of them. As it is, they are being held back with the old G4 for laptops.

[FG Lurker]

"Hhhmm.. iPod/tabletPC/phone?"

Tablets get the official no-go from Jobs' from time to time. Then again, the official word will always be 'no' until a it's introduced in a Keynote speech.

Apple has applied for several tablet patents recently: http://theinquirer.net/?article=23161

Apple STILL hasn't put out a portable G5, which is killing them. Well, Apple is actually doing fine, but a G5 would kick sales up a lot.

They consume too much power. IBM needs to produce a low power PPC970, but I think they have been very focused on getting the Cell design out the door that last while.

If Apple got a dual-proc G5 to market in the next year, they would have trouble making enough of them. As it is, they are being held back with the old G4 for laptops.

You mean a dual-proc G5 notebook? Not very likely considering the current state of battery technology, the amount of heat fast CPUs produce, and the space restraints in a notebook chassis. We might see a dual-core version though, once IBM finishes designing low power PPC970s...

[Lupin4]

Apple has applied for several tablet patents recently

And like I said, Apple will keep denying the rumors until BAM! the product is introduced at a keynote address.

But given that the old Newton failed and the patent application(s) in question are over a year old - I wouldn't hold your breath. It's like the whining about IBM - it's something that just happens every so often.

If tablets were to be a big seller for someone like Apple, the PC market would be selling even more of them by now. As it is, they sell relatively few to narrow vertical markets (medical- and warehouse-work).

Although... maybe tablets will be like USB: no one cared until Apple rolled out a product around it. And what I'd like to see is the current state of Apple's speech recognition - the unreleased versions were impressive over 5 years ago....but lately nothing's been said.

Maybe Apple is waiting for the tablet to come out (and everyone get one) before they roll out the now-Star-Trek-esque voice recognition.

They consume too much power.

Yeah, I read that somewhere..... At the moment, of course they do. When they don't, it's gonna rock.

I think this latest round of "Apple Goes Intel!" baloney is yet another hint from Apple to IBM - to get their act together and start putting out. And that happens every, what, 3 years?

[FG Lurker]

Speech recognition is never going to become a mainstream app in the business world. It might become so at home, but I doubt that too.

[Lupin4]

Speech recognition is never going to become a mainstream app in the business world. It might become so at home, but I doubt that too.

I see you've never tried to type on a Chinese typewriter...


Seriously, ask your Japanese co-workers how much faster they could 'type' if the text input was by voice. The Japanese system has some shortcuts compared to Chinese. But those shortcuts aren't as fast as just speaking.

[cstaylor]

Seriously, ask your Japanese co-workers how much faster they could 'type' if the text input was by voice. The Japanese system has some shortcuts compared to Chinese. But those shortcuts aren't as fast as just speaking.

Have you ever worked in a Japanese office? No walls whatsoever between employees... I can't imagine speech recognition software surviving in an environment like that.

[FG Lurker]

Can you imagine an office of 200 people who are all talking to their computers? The noise would be overwhelming. If companies went back to giving everyone private offices it might work, but otherwise I can't see it.

And at home, especially in Japan or China where houses are very small, talking to your computer at 2am really isn't an option.

My computer and the family TV are in separate rooms, but they are connected. Me talking away to the computer while my wife tries to watch TV wouldn't go over really well.

Even in Canada or the US though, can you imagine people having cyber chat sessions by talking to their computers while others slept nearby? Me neither. Even talking about daily things could be a problem -- you had a fight with your wife for example. Hammering that out in an email or chat session to a friend isn't really a problem, but you're not going to talk about it if she is around.

These are a few non-technology-related examples of why I don't think it will ever become a mainstream application.

[Lupin4]

Have you ever worked in a Japanese office?

I have, and the Japanese aren't even ready for the 1970s, let alone speech recognition. But I'm not talking about the J-folks adopting this, because they'll suck at it.

A properly motivated communist country to the south, however, could at least see their way into setting up some partitions.

[FG Lurker]

Seriously, ask your Japanese co-workers how much faster they could 'type' if the text input was by voice. The Japanese system has some shortcuts compared to Chinese. But those shortcuts aren't as fast as just speaking.

Have you ever worked in a Japanese office? No walls whatsoever between employees... I can't imagine speech recognition software surviving in an environment like that.

You beat me to it cs! Damn I hate it when work gets in the way of my FG postings!

[FG Lurker]

Have you ever worked in a Japanese office?

I have, and the Japanese aren't even ready for the 1970s, let alone speech recognition. But I'm not talking about the J-folks adopting this, because they'll suck at it.

A properly motivated communist country to the south, however, could at least see their way into setting up some partitions.

South?
http://www.weecheng.com/2002/images2/asia-map.jpg


Even with partitions though it is impossible. You'd have to have individual offices to make it work, and companies won't go that route because of cost and the inability to watch their employees.

[cstaylor]

Seriously, ask your Japanese co-workers how much faster they could 'type' if the text input was by voice. The Japanese system has some shortcuts compared to Chinese. But those shortcuts aren't as fast as just speaking.

But I'm not talking about the J-folks adopting this, because they'll suck at it.