MAC OSX on INTEL PLATFORM - yum yum

[dulcepixels]

---

well almost ol' of us here n'intel r' anti-mac, it's a corporate-culture. hehehehe

Hehe. Not for long.

[Greyfox]

Ang label sa MAC in the future kai .... MAC / Intel Inside Bwwwaaahahahahahahaha

[archille]

I am PPC fan but I dont blame Apple for this move, IBM has put Sony and Microsoft on the top of the list as clients. Future development for its PPC architecture are unclear, even though apple will still be ramping updates for its PowerMacs. I can remember this situation a few years ago when Motorola was making their G4s and got stuck at 800mhz while Intel and AMD were making 1.8 ghz. Apple cant afford another Motorola senario.

As what the analyst are saying m id 2006 will see apple using pentium m for lower-end product line its compact desktop and laptops. They could use its Yonah by that time, and for its higher end they could have Presler and Cedar Mill.

[JunO]

Please check this out:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc05/

[dulcepixels]

I guess, someone is getting broke for this... http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050609.html

[tolstoi]

Apple wants a Pentium M, IBM wants an Xbox
Long term partners seek new interests for fun, profit

Tom Krazit, San Francisco

A processor alliance between Intel and Apple Computer would have seemed unthinkable five years ago, when Apple Chief Executive Officer Steve Jobs first began setting up the company's "just in case" plan for moving to Intel's chips if its relationship with IBM and Freescale Semiconductor faltered. With IBM and Freescale moving in different directions from Apple, the backup plan moved front and centre.

Jobs confirmed Apple will use Intel processors in its Macintosh computers starting in 2006. This will require software developers to port their applications away from IBM and Freescale's PowerPC architecture to Intel's x86 architecture, a significant undertaking for some developers.

The first Apple systems in 2006 will use Intel's Pentium M processor, according to sources familiar with the companies' plans. The Pentium M uses the same x86 architecture as the Pentium 4, but consumes far less power than Pentium 4 chips and its design philosophy is expected to be the model for Intel's future processors. Apple spokespeople did not return repeated calls seeking comment, and an Intel spokesman declined to comment on Apple's product decisions.

Jobs justified the move away from the PowerPC architecture to Intel's x86 architecture based largely on Intel's ability to deliver a high-performance per watt ratio compared to IBM's future chips. This would tend to favour the Pentium M, which is just as powerful as high-end Pentium 4 processors yet uses far less power, Intel executives said earlier this year.

Industry analysts agreed that the Pentium M product Intel plans to launch in early 2006, the dual-core Yonah processor, could be an industry leader in performance per watt at that point.

IBM's PowerPC 970FX chip, which Apple called the G5, simply doesn't lend itself to PC designs that require low power consumption, such as notebooks and small form factor desktops, Jobs said. Apple was also frustrated by IBM's inability to supply it with sufficient processors last year as the chip maker struggled with yield problems while getting its new manufacturing facility in East Fishkill, New York, up and running.

But Apple accounted for just around 2% of IBM's chip wafer production in East Fishkill, according to industry sources, and IBM is moving away from making chips for the PC market in favour of gaming consoles and high-end servers. An IBM spokesman declined to comment on the nature of his company's relationship with Apple, but the company put out a statement indicating it probably won't miss Apple's business.

"IBM is aggressively moving the Power Architecture beyond the PC, as shown by our recent successes with the next-generation gaming systems announced by Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. ... IBM is focused on the highest value opportunities in each marketplace, and our direction with the Power Architecture is consistent with that strategy," the company says in a written statement.

Console makers like Sony Computer Entertainment, Microsoft, and Nintendo will sell tens of millions of units combined over the next couple of years, and it's likely that IBM would rather focus its attention on the deals it has struck with all three companies, as opposed to taking on the engineering challenge of making a low-power G5 processor to suit Apple's small market share.

Freescale, Apple's other PowerPC chip supplier, introduced a dual-core PowerPC chip last year that used two G4 cores. The G4 processor currently ships with Apple's Mac mini, Powerbook, iBook, and eMac products. This chip might have been able to compete with Intel's Yonah, and would have staved off the painful software transitions for at least another year, says Nathan Brookwood, principal analyst with Insight 64 in California.

But Freescale is primarily concerned with the embedded and mobile phone markets, and is not prepared to make the same investments in future PC chip design as Intel is guaranteed to do, says Dean McCarron, principal analyst with Mercury Research. Therefore, Apple had little choice but to make the historic move to standard PC chips, he says.

One chip company on the outside looking in is Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) Several industry analysts felt that if Apple was ever going to move to x86 chips, it might have found AMD a more suitable partner given the underdog status of both companies and the competitiveness of AMD's Opteron and Athlon 64 processors. Apple and AMD have indeed talked about a relationship at certain points in their histories, and have worked together as members of the Hypertransport Consortium, says Drew Prairie, an AMD spokesman.

However, Prairie was not able to comment on any recent talks between AMD and Apple.

[tolstoi]

Apple wants a Pentium M, IBM wants an Xbox
Long term partners seek new interests for fun, profit

Tom Krazit, San Francisco

A processor alliance between Intel and Apple Computer would have seemed unthinkable five years ago, when Apple Chief Executive Officer Steve Jobs first began setting up the company's "just in case" plan for moving to Intel's chips if its relationship with IBM and Freescale Semiconductor faltered. With IBM and Freescale moving in different directions from Apple, the backup plan moved front and centre.

Jobs confirmed Apple will use Intel processors in its Macintosh computers starting in 2006. This will require software developers to port their applications away from IBM and Freescale's PowerPC architecture to Intel's x86 architecture, a significant undertaking for some developers.

The first Apple systems in 2006 will use Intel's Pentium M processor, according to sources familiar with the companies' plans. The Pentium M uses the same x86 architecture as the Pentium 4, but consumes far less power than Pentium 4 chips and its design philosophy is expected to be the model for Intel's future processors. Apple spokespeople did not return repeated calls seeking comment, and an Intel spokesman declined to comment on Apple's product decisions.

Jobs justified the move away from the PowerPC architecture to Intel's x86 architecture based largely on Intel's ability to deliver a high-performance per watt ratio compared to IBM's future chips. This would tend to favour the Pentium M, which is just as powerful as high-end Pentium 4 processors yet uses far less power, Intel executives said earlier this year.

Industry analysts agreed that the Pentium M product Intel plans to launch in early 2006, the dual-core Yonah processor, could be an industry leader in performance per watt at that point.

IBM's PowerPC 970FX chip, which Apple called the G5, simply doesn't lend itself to PC designs that require low power consumption, such as notebooks and small form factor desktops, Jobs said. Apple was also frustrated by IBM's inability to supply it with sufficient processors last year as the chip maker struggled with yield problems while getting its new manufacturing facility in East Fishkill, New York, up and running.

But Apple accounted for just around 2% of IBM's chip wafer production in East Fishkill, according to industry sources, and IBM is moving away from making chips for the PC market in favour of gaming consoles and high-end servers. An IBM spokesman declined to comment on the nature of his company's relationship with Apple, but the company put out a statement indicating it probably won't miss Apple's business.

"IBM is aggressively moving the Power Architecture beyond the PC, as shown by our recent successes with the next-generation gaming systems announced by Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. ... IBM is focused on the highest value opportunities in each marketplace, and our direction with the Power Architecture is consistent with that strategy," the company says in a written statement.

Console makers like Sony Computer Entertainment, Microsoft, and Nintendo will sell tens of millions of units combined over the next couple of years, and it's likely that IBM would rather focus its attention on the deals it has struck with all three companies, as opposed to taking on the engineering challenge of making a low-power G5 processor to suit Apple's small market share.

Freescale, Apple's other PowerPC chip supplier, introduced a dual-core PowerPC chip last year that used two G4 cores. The G4 processor currently ships with Apple's Mac mini, Powerbook, iBook, and eMac products. This chip might have been able to compete with Intel's Yonah, and would have staved off the painful software transitions for at least another year, says Nathan Brookwood, principal analyst with Insight 64 in California.

But Freescale is primarily concerned with the embedded and mobile phone markets, and is not prepared to make the same investments in future PC chip design as Intel is guaranteed to do, says Dean McCarron, principal analyst with Mercury Research. Therefore, Apple had little choice but to make the historic move to standard PC chips, he says.

One chip company on the outside looking in is Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) Several industry analysts felt that if Apple was ever going to move to x86 chips, it might have found AMD a more suitable partner given the underdog status of both companies and the competitiveness of AMD's Opteron and Athlon 64 processors. Apple and AMD have indeed talked about a relationship at certain points in their histories, and have worked together as members of the Hypertransport Consortium, says Drew Prairie, an AMD spokesman.

However, Prairie was not able to comment on any recent talks between AMD and Apple.

http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/...=Computerworld

[tolstoi]

MAC OSX TIGER x86 leaked on the net..yum yum

http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/6012/
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/6012/
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/6012/

[danelectro]

i want mac os X hehehe

[tolstoi]

Security chip to limit OS X to Macs...yaaaayy..tsk tsk..

Apple looking to keep operating system from running on third-party hardware
Tom Sanders in California, vnunet.com 13 Jun 2005
ADVERTISEMENT

Apple could use the Trusted Platform Module (TPM) chip to ensure that only Mac computers can run its OS X operating system, according to a news analysis from Gartner.

The TPM is an open industry standard governed by the Trusted Computing Group, a non-profit organisation which develops security standards.

The chip is used to securely store and encrypt information. Because each chip has a unique identifier code, it could also be used to distinguish a Mac computer from a model made by Dell or any other Windows vendor.

Apple revealed last week that it is to switch from IBM's Power PC architecture to Intel's x86 models. The first Intel computers are expected to be available before June 2006 and Apple's entire product line will have switched architectures by 2007, the company said at its annual World Wide Developers Conference.

With Macs and Windows machines sharing the same hardware platform, users could theoretically install any software on the PCs, running Windows on a Mac or OS X on a Dell.

But Apple has stated that it would prevent users from installing OS X on non-Mac hardware.

An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment for this story, saying that the company it is not yet ready to reveal product specifications.

A spokeswoman for the TPG confirmed to vnunet.com that there is nothing preventing Apple from implementing the module.

Vendors of enterprise desktop and laptop computers, including Dell, HP and IBM/Lenovo, are already using the TPM. IBM, for instance, uses the chip securely to store user passwords and encrypt the contents of the hard drive.

The upcoming Longhorn version of Windows relies on the TPM for a technology dubbed Secure Startup, which blocks access to the computer if the content of the hard drive is compromised. This prevents a laptop thief swapping out the hard drive, or booting the system from a floppy disk to circumvent security features.

Using the TPM is not without controversy, however. The module has raised privacy concerns, and has been criticised because it could be used to enforce digital rights management technologies.

Gartner also advised enterprises to continue with purchasing plans for Apple hardware, but warned that managers should "consider delaying software purchases until vendors offer a clear roadmap for upgrades to Intel-compatible versions".

Sales of Apple computers typically drop prior to the launch of a new product as users delay purchases to get their hands on the new model.

http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/21...block-non-macs