The first commercial Apple Macintosh computers running on Intel processors may be released a bit earlier than expected, believes UBS Investment Research analyst Ben Reitzes. He claims that Apple will have new products and content to announced at the Macworld Expo scheduled for early January and notes that Intel is expected to unveil its dual-core Yonah processor for mobiles also early next year. The analyst, excepts from whose research notes were published by AppleInsider web-site, believes that early January, 2006, is a possible timeframe for the first Intel-based Apple computers to debut. UBS researchers suppose that the first of Apple’s computers to use Intel processor, in particular, Intel’s next-generation Pentium M flavour code-named Yonah, will be Mac Mini. The firm claims that Apple’s strategy will be to equip its computers with Intel processors starting from the most affordable models.
“We continue to believe that both the PowerMac and PowerBook will be introduced at a later date (late 2006 or early 2007) – with the possible use of the Intel’s Merom processor for the PowerBook and Conroe processor for the PowerMac,” Mr. Reitzes is reported to have said.
View: The full story
News source: Xbit Labs
“We continue to believe that both the PowerMac and PowerBook will be introduced at a later date (late 2006 or early 2007) – with the possible use of the Intel’s Merom processor for the PowerBook and Conroe processor for the PowerMac,” Mr. Reitzes is reported to have said.
View: The full story News source: Xbit Labs
Dupe Article
from what i 'hear' you just need a SSE3 supporting CPU and a intel mobo for 100% support for ALL features
A Mac is a PC.
A Mac and a PC are different things.
Now, if you said IBM-compatible PC, then it would be different.
Meanwhile, back in in reality:
Take a look at a PC-CD-Rom game. Notice how it WON'T RUN ON YOUR MAC?
It's made for a PC, not a Mac. I guess a Mac must not be a PC.
Only Apple and their legions of Mac users still insist on calling a Mac a PC. Everyone else just calls it a mac and doesn't pretend that it's a PC. It's been that way since at least 1995, perhaps ealier.
You can insist that Mac is a PC all you want, but that doesn't make it so.
By the way, 'betasp' (if that is your real name, and not just your beta codename); Apple is a hardware company AND a software company. They have been since they started out. Little thing called Mac Os ought to have clued you into that one. It's an OS, It's software, it's made by Apple. There aren't two companies with the same name, one making OsX the other making the Mac hardware. No, only one Apple Computer Inc. Did you
As for you who seem to think that just becasue the CPU is made by Intel that it can run both mac and PC hardware natively... well, it doesn't work that way. The CPU and it's attendent circutry must conform to a set of specifications that are able to be understood by the OS or the OS will not be able to comunicate with the computer properly (if at all).
Quite simply, you cannot make a CPU that will work both in a Mac and in a PC (yes, yes, you can fake it with an emulator or a VM, but that's cheating). The only way this could be so is if Microsoft and Apple got together and agreed on a common set of protocols and a new operating system to work with the new priotocols. I expect this to happen shortly after hell frezzes over, or the one company buys the other out (whichever comes first.)
man, here's the deal. PC means personal computer, nothing more, nothing less. A Mac is a PC that runs a different operating system - Mac OS. IBM-compatable PC's run, Windows, Linux, Unix, etc. Is a Linux box different from a Windows box in terms of hardware? No. Will the new intel based Macs be different in terms or hardware? Most likely not, if they are, it'll be a hardware lock to prevent OSX from running on a generic IBM-campatable PC.
Apple makes its money on hardware sales. Sure, there is some income from preople who need to upgrade to a new version of Mac OS, and a few that use the Pro software, but their profit-maker is hardware. Can you run any of their software if you don't buy a Mac? No. Software compliments the deal.
And lastly, software determines what hardware it can and cannot be run on. The intel chips in the new Macs will be the same chips that Vista and XP machines will be using - no different. Apple may make a special motherboard to lock OSX to their computers (the OS makes the Mac). Want proof? There's always been a Mac OSX that was compiled for intel chips. It wasn't known until Steve Jobs told everyone earlier this summer, but it's always existed (look for old rumors of Apple Marklar).
The "PC" in "PowerPC" stands for "Performance Computing", NOT Personal Computer.
It's made for a PC, not a Mac. I guess a Mac must not be a PC.
Wait, that PC-CD-Rom game will run on my Dell Dimension running Linux? Oh wait it wont, I guess that means a Dell Dimension isn't a PC.
Yes it is nice here, care to come back as well?
It's made for a PC, not a Mac. I guess a Mac must not be a PC.
I'll just quote Colonel_Angus response since it's better than what I could come up with:
As well, I've never seen a "PC-CD-ROM". Is that some standard you just made up? I know there's "CD-ROM" and I know that there's Win32 executables that run on Windows and Cocoa that run on OS X, but ones the hardware specifications the other is the API. All the CD-ROMs I see just say "CD-ROM" and then list the system requirements.
Funny definition of "everyone". Who does that include? Yourself and a few friends? I don't own a Mac and I know it's a PC. Kinda shoots down your theory right there.
You can insist that Mac isn't a PC all you want, but that doesn't make it so.
They think that because OS X for Intel runs on x86 CPUs which are the architecture that you are talking about that Windows also uses.
They did, it's called x86.
So perhaps you could once again explain to us just what the acronym "PC" means?
No, PC has become to mean "IBM Compatible PC" <<PERIOD>>. When you tell someone "I have a PC," it is commonly understood that you have what use to be called an IBM Compatible PC. However, since Apple (currently) uses IBM processors saying IBM Compatible PC doesn't make a lot of since anymore, thus why we just commonly refer to them as PCs.
Yes, technically speaking a PC is a Personal Computer which is what a Mac is. But we all know there is a difference.
It is like what happened to the word "hacker." If you tell someone you are a "computer hacker" they will assume that you mean you use a computer to hack into other people's computers illegally.
Take a Technical Writing class in college (when you get there). You will learn that it doesn't matter what your intended meaning for words are. All that matters is how people interpret what is said. Know Your Audience.
in fact, in Germany (and most of Europe I guess), games come in Amaray DVD cases. All those cases have a label at the top left, stating the "target system" - which is BS, because there's "PC CD-ROM", "PC DVD-ROM", "Mac CD-ROM" and "Mac DVD-ROM". And, as we know, the Mac is a PC, "PC" says nothing about the operating system or architecture. "Windows/ x86 CD-ROM", "Mac/ PPC DVD-ROM" and "Linux/ amd64 CD-ROM" would be _way_ better, but I guess the industry is afraid that such a "precise" labeling would confuse stupid endusers...
The first generation of microcomputers were called just that, and only sold in small numbers to those able to (build them from kits or) operate them: engineers and accomplished hobbyists (for example, the Altair 8800). The second generation micros were known as home computers, and are discussed in that section.
The initials "PC" have become virtually synonymous with IBM PC compatible computers such that they are rarely used to refer to non-IBM PC compatible personal computers such as the Apple Macintosh.
i was reading on apple insiders, that the ibooks will gain a 13" widescreen, but i thought the intelbased macs are coming out in may... now i will have to wait because it doesnt make sense to buy an ibook now, since the new ones are seem to come out in only like a bit more than two months...
ive waited for so long to get all the money...
anyway.
damn.
an example of this is the Macintosh PowerBook 145B which was only 20MHz with 4MB ram and a 70MB hard drive... yes 70 Megabytes
It's like we're in some sort of calender cycle or something.
It's like we're in some sort of calender cycle or something.
First you don't know what "PC" means and now you don't know what "almost" means?
Doesn't mean they don't get good performance from PowerPC chips, and doesn't mean the platform hasn't been good to them for 10ish years.
or something like that
The thing is with Universal Binarys, hopefully Apple wont be cutting PPC out forever and they can mix the two if they like. There are some interesting PPC technologies on the horizon.
The new line will be called 'Intelli'
IntelliMac Slendido
Quad-Core 4Ghz Pentium (4ghz and 4.2Ghz) with 8Mb of CACHE (2x4)
(Uses a new form of cooling -- You move to alaska when you buy one)
1GB of DDR2 (Max 16GB)
400GB HDD
GeForce 6800 GS (Optional GeForce 7800 GT or Quadro 4500)
SUPPORTS SLI with 2x PCI-E 16x slots.
IntelliMac Jr.
Dual-Cores at 3Ghz+ (Two Versions, 3.4Ghz and 3.8gz)
1Gb of DDR2 (Max 8GB)
250Gb HDD
GeForce 6600 (Optional upgrade to GT Edition for faster clocks)
IntelliMac Nano
Single-Core upto 3.2Ghz (Three versions! 2.5, 2.7 and 3.2Ghz)
1Gb of DDR2 (Max 4GB)
160GB HDD
Nvidia GeForce 6200
Oh, as for iBooks and PowerBooks -- They will be renamed too to the 'iTrend' range.
There you go! Think it will make it onto Apple Insider and all the other rumors sites?
So I think from what I read IBM couldn't keep up with demand, couldn't produce a 3.0Ghz PowerPC for G5 and Apple wanted cooler powerbooks.
So I think it's a good move on Intels part, not so sure about Apple.
A. x86 machines are known in the layman's world as "IBM Compatible" to differentiate them from Macintosh computers
B. IBM no longer makes these machines
C. IBM (currently, at least) makes the processors that power Macintosh computers, which, as I said were intended to be the very opposite of "IBM Compatible" machines.
That'd show them all, with their fancy jigger-bites and terror-bits. Ha!
I'll be backing slowly towards the nearest exit.
But seriously, it's not very hard at all to engineer the proper plastic for the job, even a simple thin film or adding in some plasticizer would help the cracking/scratching problem.
Tisk tisk... until then, screen guards are cheap and sold everywhere.
Apple is going to dry up if they keep on screwing their customer base. I'll never buy anything Toshiba from my experience with their customer support, as I'll never buy anything Apple from other's battery/screen/case (is there anything left?) problems, and then leaving their customers to fend for themselves.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.