It's Official...Apple is Switching to Intel

[Kent Pribbernow]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html' target='_blank'>http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html</a><br /><br /></div><i>"At its Worldwide Developer Conference today, Apple® announced plans to deliver models of its Macintosh® computers using Intel® microprocessors by this time next year, and to transition all of its Macs to using Intel microprocessors by the end of 2007. Apple previewed a version of its critically acclaimed operating system, Mac OS® X Tiger, running on an Intel-based Mac® to the over 3,800 developers attending CEO Steve Jobs’ keynote address. Apple also announced the availability of a Developer Transition Kit, consisting of an Intel-based Mac development system along with preview versions of Apple’s software, which will allow developers to prepare versions of their applications which will run on both PowerPC and Intel-based Macs."</i><br /><br />Well it looks like the rumors were true after all. Apple will begin rolling out new Intel-based Macs starting a year from now, with a complete transition to take place by 2007.

[Mike Temporale]

8O I never really thought they would do it....

[Jerry Raia]

I wonder if it will make any difference at this point. I think they will still be at the bottom even if the transition is successful.

[Jason Dunn]

Wow. Stunning. 8O

[Felix Torres]

No word on the actual chips and/or chipsets, huh?
Soon enough, I guess...

[Mr. MacinTiger]

I am glad that I just only spent a few hundred bucks on a Mac Mini (my work paid for most of it) than big $$$ on a PowerMac G5 or something. :roll:

Question: WHY DOES APPLE NEED TO SELL HARDWARE NOW? If OS X will be able to run on cheapie Wintel boxes, then I'll buy a cheapie Wintel 3rd party box and install OS X and Longhorn on it and run both, right?

Apple fans and shareholders have lived by an insane meglomanic and now we will die by one.

Simply stunning... :x

[Jerry Raia]

This could just be their swan song.

[Jason Dunn]

No word on the actual chips and/or chipsets, huh?
Soon enough, I guess...

What chipsets do Macs use now?

In terms of chips, my hunch is Intel will also provide the chipset, and we'll be looking at a dual-core version of the Pentium M.

[James Fee]

So is this x86 or Itanium?

I suspect Apple will do something to make sure only their hardware can run OS X.

[Jason Dunn]

http://www4.macnn.com/macnn/wwdc/05/index.html

"Mac OS X has been leading secret double life. Every Mac project build for Intel and PowerPC and Intel. Every release of Mac OS X has been built for both Intel and PowerPC-based Macs. For the last 5 years. Mac OS X is cross-platform by design. Apple's demo is on an Intel-based system. Jobs shows all Mac OS X Tiger features are already compatible with Intel-based processors. Not done yet. Will put into the developer hands to help Apple finish it. [10:32 am]"

I find it fascinating that they were able to keep it secret for so long... 8O

[mar2k]

Apple Episode II: ATTACK OF THE CLONES

[Jason Dunn]

Question: WHY DOES APPLE NEED TO SELL HARDWARE NOW? If OS X will be able to run on cheapie Wintel boxes, then I'll buy a cheapie Wintel 3rd party box and install OS X and Longhorn on it and run both, right?

I'm very sure that Apple will find a way to lock their OS onto their hardware. They got their asses handed to them by clones in the late '90s, so they won't allow that to happen again. But I'm equally sure that the tech community will find a way to hack it and yes, allow us PC users to run OS X if we want to. :D

[Felix Torres]

No word on the actual chips and/or chipsets, huh?
Soon enough, I guess...

What chipsets do Macs use now?

In terms of chips, my hunch is Intel will also provide the chipset, and we'll be looking at a dual-core version of the Pentium M.

Apple designs their own.
This is the critical point.

If Apple keeps on making their own chipsets and/or BIOS, the software will still be locked to their hardware.
(Over the weekend there were reports that Apple had made job offers to eastern european programers to work on ACPI-BIOS. :-) )
So the best guess is that even if they use Intel chipsets they probably do a proprietary BIOS. They might even use the new security/drm features in current Intel chipsets to lock the software to one single system.

As I said, I expect a brisk business in MacOS/X cracking to try to get it running on generic hardware.

BTW, I love the MacAngst going around.
(Megalomaniac? Now they notice? :lol: )
At least he knows when to jump off a sinking ship...)

[klinux]

I find it fascinating that they were able to keep it secret for so long... 8O

Maklar has been long suspected and its existence would be logical (Apple's core - Darwin - already works on x86).

I agree that a dual core Pentium-M is an ideal candidate for the new Macs. However, WSJ's schedule has low end Macs going through the transition first. My prediction is a 2.0 ghz P-M.

[Felix Torres]

Here's a quote for ya, from CNET:

"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."

"However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said. "
-------------------------------------------------------------------
There yo go, spoken like a true hardware vendor; you can run anything on your state of the art IntelMac as long as you buy the hardware from Apple.
That's good OS-obsolescence insurance, no?
If you can't get good apps for MacOS, you can always install Windows to get the job done. :)

(I wonder if Intel's new OS-virtualization features that let one computer run multiple OSes will get a lot of us on IntelMacs...)

[Jason Eaton]

WHY DOES APPLE NEED TO SELL HARDWARE NOW? If OS X will be able to run on cheapie Wintel boxes, then I'll buy a cheapie Wintel 3rd party box and install OS X and Longhorn on it and run both, right?

My take is that developer kits will be able to emulate using current intel chips, what is rolled out however will be intel in name but a cpu specialized for Apple.

As such the chip *could* have a proprietary motherboard that only Apple makes or a specific bios that is also proprietary. In short the cpu could be just one small component and not available to other third party computer assemblers.

Naturally this is all speculation but would be my guess on how Apple can maintain it's tight control over what is or isn't in an Apple machine. Part of Apple's success in making clean code is the fact that they do not have to currently account for the multiples of 3rd party hardware options. If they say what goes in a box to some extent they can continue business as they currently have and control the enviroment.

I could also be way off and Apple *is* taking a large risk and is stepping up to Microsoft in a 'Hey, hardware isn't an issue anymore, it is now Apples to Apples in OS comparisions.' I however have reservations there but what we could be looking at is software now surpassing hardware value in terms of business strategy. An era of productivity where code is the last item to be comoditized.

[mar2k]

I don't think it would be the end of the world for Apple if they allowed PCs to run OS X. If they can push their OS and software into the enterprise market, there will be big bucks to be made......

[James Fee]

If you can't get good apps for MacOS, you can always install Windows to get the job done. :) Brilliant if you ask me. Heck, I wouldn't mind paying a premium for hardware if I knew I could triple book Windows/OS X/Red Hat.

[Tim Williamson]

/me checks today's date...nope not April 1st... :drinking:

[Felix Torres]

If you can't get good apps for MacOS, you can always install Windows to get the job done. :) Brilliant if you ask me. Heck, I wouldn't mind paying a premium for hardware if I knew I could triple book Windows/OS X/Red Hat.

And Bill Gates won't mind either as long as its not a pirate copy of Windows. In fact, the more MacPeople install Windows the better.
(Guess why they bought Connectix and added it to MacOffice?)
That means they would be buying Windows apps not MacOS apps.

The MS game plan has always been to sell the API-set at all costs.

[Jason Eaton]

I don't think it would be the end of the world for Apple if they allowed PCs to run OS X. If they can push their OS and software into the enterprise market, there will be big bucks to be made......

*Phew* I am post happy today...

I don't necessarily agree there. Entry into the enterprise market is extremely difficult where the market is already entrenched in one platform. The value of the new OS would have to greatly exceed the cost to remove legacy items.

That is... if both OSes can run current apps equally well, hardware cost are identical or can piggback on current hardware, what would be my incentive to switch? How would Apple make a lot of money selling just software if their own software would need to be purchased on top of what they already paid? Not to mention the growth in code length and complexity to match MS on independent hardware.

In my opinion what makes Apple good in the field of security, stability and usability is that they CAN focus on the limited hardware set and cater the experience with great control. A total unsubstansiated number for me would be that 95% of my problems with Windows stems from hardware behaving badly with other hardware that creates crashes. Software written to cover so wide a base that it would be seemingly impossible to create a low price OS that handled everything flawlessly and be written before I was dead or retired. We won't even mention hardware that has been so low balled in price wars that the quality itself suffers.

I don't believe MS hired poor coders or intentionally writes bad code. The situation they are in I believe is dictated by the decision to be hardware independent.

More then two cents but I feel chatty today.
*lots of edits because I am a poor writter :D

[aro]

I just wonder what Bill and his little pals thinks about this...

Longhorn >> 2006
Tiger on Intel >> 2006

It will be a funny year for OS.

Hmm,..

aro

[Kent Pribbernow]

Apple has posted the video of Jobs keynote:

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

Lots of great information as Jobs goes into detail explaining how the transition takes place, especially Rosetta. Jobs also whimsically confirms rumors that Apple has had OSX running on Intel hardware for the past several years, calling OSX's "Secret double life". I laughed my arse off at his Longhorn jab in the Dashboard demo..that was a true class act. :)

By the way, be sure to listen to Bruce Chizen's speech. Was he drunk, or is his speech always this slurred? :drinking:

My biggest concern is that developers aren't likely to offer "universal binary" versions for free. Meaning if you want native Intel compatible apps, you have to buy the next software release of each respective app. That's definitely going to be a BIG hurdle.

[Felix Torres]

My biggest concern is that developers aren't likely to offer "universal binary" versions for free. Meaning if you want native Intel compatible apps, you have to buy the next software release of each respective app. That's definitely going to be a BIG hurdle.

You are right to worry; that is *exactly* how they handled OSX native-app deployment.
With Rosetta in place to offer emulation, that means they can wait until the installed base of IntelMacs is enough to justify the expense, which means it'll likely be 2008 before the big apps go native, possibly 09.

[James Fee]

Another scenario that might occur is people buying Macintosh hardware to run Windows. Much like the iPod, style does matter to many people and they might just be willing to pay a premium for the Apple look. I used to work at a company that had only one Macintosh for the receptionist because they liked the look. The IT guys hated it because it was an odd ball, but now it wouldn't matter. Just load Longhorn on it and its all good to go...

[Kent Pribbernow]

I doubt you'll be able to run Windows on a Mac. Keep in mind this agreement is simply involving microprocessors. You can bet money Apple is still going to be designing their own proprietary motherboards, etc. It's not like the new PowerMacs are going to be equipped with ASUS boards.

[jeffd]

gotta wonder though, cracking an OS to work on a whole new cpu and set of instructions is just not feasable (ie...possible), how ever now that that part is done, how hard will it be to crack OSX, insert the needed drivers to run on your standered x86 PC, and bypass all the hardware checks?

[Darius Wey]

Actually, I was never surprised by this announcement. Anything can happen in this day and age, and I've always had a hunch on Apple and Intel doing something crazy together. Also, Intel happen to be doing very well at the moment, and this bit of news only reinforces their high-ranking position in the market.

[Kent Pribbernow]

gotta wonder though, cracking an OS to work on a whole new cpu and set of instructions is just not feasable (ie...possible), how ever now that that part is done, how hard will it be to crack OSX, insert the needed drivers to run on your standered x86 PC, and bypass all the hardware checks?

Actually, according to Jobs, OSX has been secretly running on Intel for the past five years. He also said that every version of OSX since the very first release has been secrectly compiled by design to run on Intel processors. So it's not a matter of "cracking", the supports Intel by design.

[Felix Torres]

gotta wonder though, cracking an OS to work on a whole new cpu and set of instructions is just not feasable (ie...possible), how ever now that that part is done, how hard will it be to crack OSX, insert the needed drivers to run on your standered x86 PC, and bypass all the hardware checks?

As pointed out OSX will come in a version pre-compiled for x86, but configired to only run on Apple hardware.
Where the hacking will come to play is getting it to run without the (likely) proprietary Apple bios and in getting it to work with generic Darwin drivers. Quite doable.

[Mr. MacinTiger]

One of the Mac bigwigs (not Jobs) is quoted yesterday as saying that plans are NOT to let cheapie Wintel computers run OSX (without hacker intervention, I suppose), but that they basically have no problem with someone running OSX and Longhorn and Linux on a Mactel.

[James Fee]

I doubt you'll be able to run Windows on a Mac. Keep in mind this agreement is simply involving microprocessors. You can bet money Apple is still going to be designing their own proprietary motherboards, etc. It's not like the new PowerMacs are going to be equipped with ASUS boards.10-1 Apple uses a standard Intel motherboard. All they need to do is mess with the BIOS. I doubt Apple will support it, but running windows should be no problem.

[Kent Pribbernow]

I doubt Apple will support it, but running windows should be no problem.

We'll see. I'm all for it, if this is possible. Saves me a considerable amount of money having to buy both Mac and PCs. A lot of people would LOVE this solution; Buy a Mac...run Windows and OSX side by side. Sweet! :)

[jeffd]

Actually, according to Jobs, OSX has been secretly running on Intel for the past five years. He also said that every version of OSX since the very first release has been secrectly compiled by design to run on Intel processors. So it's not a matter of "cracking", the supports Intel by design.

uhmm..err..yes.. that does seem to be what the entire article/event is about isn't it. How ever.. supporting just intel does not.. a pc make.

As was ALSO mentioned..many times... Apple wants it to only work on THEIR hardware. As mentioned by a few folks, that probably means a motherboard chipset and maybe a design that standered windows PC's don't use. If they choose to go with a chipset allready used on windows PC's, then that makes cracking OSX even easier. Otherwise we would need to crack OSX to load the motherboard drivers nessecary should we want to get it to run on standered windows computers.

[James Fee]

If they choose to go with a chipset allready used on windows PC's, then that makes cracking OSX even easier.Unless they use some DRM features that are built into either the Intel chips or chipset. I'm pretty sure you won't be able to run OS X on a Dell given how protective Apple is of their OS. Running Linux or XP on a Mac workstation, that is most likely possible.

[jeffd]

right, from the sound of it, apple will prolly not stop anyone from installing xp on their new macs. However..most prospective new apple users would rather want to try out mac OS on their exhisting computer, they either don't want or can't addord $1000 in new hardware.