Comments on: 2008 Intel converts: Bigger flock than Apple

In 2008, Intel not only won the PC processor war against AMD but walked away with a new PC market that it now virtually owns.

[iamrta]

i used to be an exclusive amd guy...

[Mr. Dee]

Its still 2 out of 2 here, my Acer laptop has an AMD Turion, my generic desktop (which I am using as a Server now) has a AMD Sempron, my main Desktop, a Dell 8300 has Intel P4 3.2 GHz and my new HP Workstation, an Intel Core 2 Quad 2.5 GHz.

I am staying for from AMD for the foreseeable future, Intel is where its at and we must just accept it and move on.

[D3vildog699]

I use what works for me, i used to be strictly Intel but i have an AMD laptop, im impressed with it.. now as for the ATI graphics.. thats another story...

[gsmiller88]

I never have been much of an AMD fan. All of their processors I've had were slow and over heated. The Intel processors in my iMac and MacBook are far better than any AMD I've ever owned.

[SpiritWater]

Now Apple has move to using Nvidia GPUs and has all-but-ignored the Atom chipset for their iPhone and iPod Touch lines. Is MacTel's relationship on the rocks?


Break the wedge!
www.breakthewedge.com

[montex66]

By Intel's own admission, it's Atom processor do not offer as favorable a performance-to-watt ratio as the ARM processors used by Apple in the iPhone and iPod touch. Pretty amazing that a tiny company like ARM can still produce a chip that runs circles around anything by the behemoth Intel.

[johnroche--2008]

@montex66:

Technically, ARM only design the specifications of the chips. They then license the specs to other companies like TI or Samsung (as well as Qualcomm and Nvidia).

[Scryer_360]

Mr. Cothers: great article. This was really the year of the netbook, and I don't see why more people don't take notice of these devices. Other than that some lack a DVD player (something that maybe isn't even needed anymore, as many of todays useful programs can be downloaded), a Netbook accomplishes just about everything someone wants to do with their laptop these days. Some say "well the processor has to be soldered to the motherboard," but who here has ever changed their laptops processor? I assure you that you are in the minority.

Surf the internet? Check. Write documents? Check. Powerpoint presentation? Might need better graphics, but otherwise, check. Music? Check. The only thing an Netbook won't do is games or good graphics, and few gamers or developers will tell you they really wanted to use a laptop over a desktop for that kind of play anyway. And there is the DVD issue, but for the price of a good NetBook, you can buy a portable DVD player. Or, just load them up from an external drive all at once and save to your HDD. Done.

And Atom made all this possible. $4 a processor, I never though I'd see the day. My only question is that with Intel having so much of the mainstream and NetBook processor market, monopoly questions start to surface. Clearly they have the best business model and best products, at (usually) unbeatable prices. But can we continue to let Intel have that monopoly?

[Norseman]

Intel better enjoy the good times with Atom while they can. Look for the Atom boom to turn into the Atom bomb. Netbooks are a fad, and their popularity won't last.

[Get_a_life_Leo]

Too true. Netbooks are essentially clumsy handhelds. I can't do any work on one aside from surf the internet (which, admittedly, is easier on a NetBook than say an iPod Touch). There again, the NetBook has done a lot better than the tablet format. Apple hasn't used the Atom for its handhelds for several reasons, the most important of which is that it provides more control and makes clones more difficult.

[freemarket--2008]

My understanding was that the Atom, while great for low end laptops and netbooks draws too much power for most handhelds.

[cyberDJ-2038765336053745013836]

Intel is the ONLY reason I'm considering adding a Mac to my collection of fine PCs.
In '98, I asked some Apple reps why Macs weren't using the Intel proc and I got laughed out of the store.

I knew then what Jobs figured out years later, that software is nothing without solid hardware.

[ckurowic]

kinda doubt you were literally laughed out of the store. Insiders knew of the transition for many years prior to 2006

[martin1212]

ckurowic, very few insiders knew before. The number of people who knew years before was close to zero. The kind of Apple rep that you would find in a store would certainly not be among those with this kind of information years in advance, I guarantee it.

[JuggerNaut]

I wouldn't totally say that Apple's switch from PowerPC to Intel made Apple hardware more solid, I would beg to differ based on real user experience with both sides of the Apple fence. I figure that Apple will hopefully have the Intel kinks worked out by 2010 and I may convert from a PowerPC-based Mac to an Intel one around 2011 (only if me iMac G5 needs to be replaced when that time comes).

[murbo]

g5 was a monster when it was released, and it still is a monster. ibm is a very solid architecture, my quad g5 from 2005 hasn't crashed yet while all my intel macs (macbook pro c2d, macbook cd, mac mini cd) have to be restarted every now and then. there is a reason why only one intel system makes to the top 10 supercomputers in the world today. oh and quite surprisingly amd has a lot of machines up there along with ibm powerpc architecture processors...
intel is the mazda miata of processors, its a good run for the buck, but it doesn't have much to offer when it comes to real performance, thats probably why they laughed at you. and the only reason apple adopted intel was to take on microsoft. now that they ridiculed microsoft enough, maybe they'll go another way.
and for the record i would take a single core powerpc cell over any quadcore intel any day of the year

[carl_the_truth]

It would be nice maybe, MAYBE, if AMD invests in a serious ad campaign, as performace is not all that matters. Shareholders should demand it, and consumers might start to pay attention.

[8301]

I disagree. Most people who care/know about the performance differences between AMD and Intel are competent enough to make an informed decision without relying on advertising. This isn't Mac versus PC.

[superaznman]

i agree that netbooks are a success, but if you keep your eyes peeled, you can usually find bargain notebooks for the price of a netbook but with more ram, a better cpu, and windows vista. i would much rather get one of those than a netbook.

[3rdalbum]

Yes, you can find bottom-of-the-range notebooks that are the same price as the Windows XP netbooks. Yes, they have more RAM, a better CPU and Vista. Vista makes them run slower than the price-comparable netbook, and loading an anti-virus program onto a budget laptop is an exercise in patience.

When it comes down to it, netbooks basically do everything that people want to do on the road. Unless they want to do video editing or gaming, but when laptops (especially budget laptops) can't do the job either.

[websterphreaky]

Is this author an IDIOT or just stupid about Apple / IBM / Motorola / Intel FACTS!!??

QUOTE: "iBook G3: Apple's conversion from IBM-Motorola to Intel pales against the conversion of PC makers to Intel's Atom.

FIRST OFF, what the hell does the G3 iBook have to do with any Intel conversion!!?? It had a MOTOROLA G3, NOT an IBM and it was RISC not X86 Intel !!

Second - MOST IBM G3 / G4 RISC processor chips were ONLY in Desktops, NOT notebooks!! Which used the slower and lower power Motorola's!

Third - Apple will never dump Intel for two reasons. 1) they can have Macs made in the same factories on the same assembly lines in Commie China as the cheap Dells, Gateways and other off brands; and 2) Apple is ankle deep up Intel's ass in the deal to get all of Intel's NAND RAM production in exchange for DROPPING FireWire for Intel's USB -- NOTICE there's NO FIREWIRE on the Newest MacBooks and Pros???

Brooke Crothers, YOU are a MORON.

[Sausagebiscuit]

Good points, but the third point reminds of Apple fans back in the day screaming that Apple would never use Intel/AMD cpus for X reason or Y reason.

Good show.

[volfreak]

Um, I'm using a brand new MacBook Pro and it does have Firewire. You are correct that the MacBooks do not have FW but are completely off-base on the Pros.

Cheers,

[websterphreaky]

Ps. I didn't elaborate this, but for the stupid, NAND RAM (flash RAM) is what has anyways been in and what is crucial for the flash memory version iPuds and iPhony.

[JuggerNaut]

The best netbook software/hardware combination I have seen id the ASUS EEE PC running EEE Ubuntu. If I was to get a netbook, that is what I'd get.

[Sausagebiscuit]

This, I think, is what really got the netbooks going. Small device, free (in many ways) operating system, and the ability to run Windows XP if you wanted. It was your choice on how to use it, and I think alot of that choice is what people like. I probably wouldn't have bought a linux EEE if I couldn't run XP on it one day if I should choose to do so. Also easy (most cases) upgrades to the ram, ssd card, and SD slots helped too.

[luxl85]

Intel and AMD competition now is more severity. I hope Apple have more choose not only intel.
http://www.laptops-battery.co.uk

[montex66]

Intel Atom processors and AMD have absolutely nothing to do with Apple and the Mac. The only reason Apple is referenced in the title is for hit-bait. It's clear that cnet doesn't think anyone would bother reading this story unless it was somehow about Apple - even tangentially. Weak.

[datamuncher]

I'm betting on ARM Inside over AMD Inside (or even Intel inside) for netbooks, etc. from Apple. ARM SoC pricepoint and power budget are far below, for equivalent performance. iPhone shows how easy it is to port OS X to multiple processors and form factors.

[liqiong]

AMD took notice, however, and said it plans to deliver a processor for the ultraportable market (an upscale Netbook or cheap notebook--however you want to look at it) at the Consumer Electronics Show.
http://www.cheap-laptop-batteries.com/