Apple allegedly explores using Intel chips

Company has been in talks that could lead to a decision soon to use Intel chips in its Macintosh line, according to a report.

The story "Apple allegedly explores using Intel chips" published May 23, 2005 at 5:27 AM is no longer available on CNET News.

Content from Reuters expires after 30 days.

[Andrew J Glina]

Unlikely

Apple have changed from the 68000 to the PowerPC, then dropped its old code base for the BSD based MacOS X and recently ditched Motorolla for IBM. It would be stupid to make another change, especially since the IBM chips are powerful. The only reason I can think that they would do this is if IBM could not keep up the supply.

On another point, it is bit silly re-iterating the use of Intel chips in the XServe. From what I recall they are only supporting chips, certainly not the processor. (RAID or something similar I think.)

[m.meister]

Agreed

Yes, Apple may be in discussions with Intel on using some of
there chips -- but Intel makes a lot of different chips, not just
the x86 CPU stuff.

I suspect the chips may be for some other type of device.

As for large pricing differences between Apple and Dell, this is a
myth that is continued by folks that don't do real research. Yes,
Apple's machines are more expensive, but they are priced
competitively ( BMW 3-series cars continue to be more
expensive than than the Ford Focus ). I'm pricing a Dell for a
family member, and trying to get a real machine for < $1K is
more challenging that folks would lead you to believe (at least
when you need more than email and browsing).

Yep. And AMD Chips are in the G5 Towers

AMD chips are used as support chips today, but AMD has a bug that causes potential packet drops between PCI and Firewire/USB busses. A move to Intel for the support chips could be a way to fix the problem.

[alucinor]

Not a serious blow ...

Apple switching from IBM to Intel wouldn't be a serious blow to IBM considering all three next game console systems use PowerPC-based chips, and that totals a LOT more sales than Macs.

Meh.

PowerPC chips are the way to go. I highly doubt Apple's going to go with someone else on this. They've made the world aware of how powerful the PowerPC chip is, and everything from MArs Rovers to Gaming Consoles are using them now.

DEATH TO x86!!!!!!!

[gefitz]

AMEN!

Why IBM would care about Tandy---ERRRR---Apple is a mystery to me.

[Earl Benser]

Intel would be a poor choice

The Intel processors are essential 8088's on steroids. The basic
design is arcane, the legacy deadwood is almost totally
overwhelming, and Apple doesn't need to lose the ground that a
shift to Intel would create.

But, Intel is long overdue to dump the X86 line and to move into
the 21st century. As long as Intel is hobbled with Windows,
that's not a likely move. But Intel may have something under
wraps that really is innovating and which would provide a
performance boost over the PowerPC chips. That would be of
serious interest to Apple.

But it won't be an X86 design, if anyone at Apple has a brain at
all.

[aabcdefghij987654321]

The problem is not Intel, it's the x86

But Intel has a new chip line that isn't x86, it's also not doing too well due to a lack of customer interest but Apple might be able to change that if they decide to use those chips.

And the two shall become one...

Let's see:
Apple experiences security flaws with their software.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://news.com.com/Apple+plugs+security+hole+in+iTunes/2100-1002_3-5701556.html" target="_newWindow">http://news.com.com/Apple+plugs+security+hole+in+iTunes/2100-1002_3-5701556.html</a>

Apple patches their OS
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://news.com.com/Apple+patches+a+batch+of+Mac+OS+X+flaws/2100-1002_3-5694907.html" target="_newWindow">http://news.com.com/Apple+patches+a+batch+of+Mac+OS+X+flaws/2100-1002_3-5694907.html</a>

Again
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://news.com.com/Widget+security+worries+dog+Apple/2100-1002_3-5715752.html" target="_newWindow">http://news.com.com/Widget+security+worries+dog+Apple/2100-1002_3-5715752.html</a>

Buy Cheap sell Expensive
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://news.com.com/Apple+recalls+more+G4+batteries/2100-1005_3-5715002.html?tag=nefd.top" target="_newWindow">http://news.com.com/Apple+recalls+more+G4+batteries/2100-1005_3-5715002.html?tag=nefd.top</a>

And now the Switch?
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://news.com.com/Apple+allegedly+explores+using+Intel+chips/2100-1042_3-5716539.html?tag=nefd.top" target="_newWindow">http://news.com.com/Apple+allegedly+explores+using+Intel+chips/2100-1042_3-5716539.html?tag=nefd.top</a>

What is going on at Applesoft? Bill Gates visited Steve Jobs the other day. The following is a recording of what Bill said to Steve after knocking on the door and Steve saying, "Whooo is it?"

We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us.

...

lmfao.

Apple possibly fed up with IBM internal PowerPlay"

Having worked in Apple product management and been
recruited to and used to work for IBM at a time when they
wanted to put Mac OS on IBM PPC hardware (gosh, thats got to
be a decade ago&), I would think that the article in the Post is a
sign that Jobs has just about had it with IBM internal politics.

There are parts of IBM that do not give didley about Apple 
actually a lot of IBM-ers talk about Apple as they wished it off
the surface of the earth. There are of course folks in
Microelectronics and some Linux on Power guys who care, but
the rest&
If IBM really cared about getting more PPC based systems into
the market, theyd have IBM Software make sure Apple was
properly supported both on the client side, but also on XServe
with their server software products. You dont see much of that.

The PowerPlay" that is going on inside of IBM, and what is
probably seriously hampering Apple these days, is that IBM is
trying by all means to protect its high-end server business. In
which the POWER processors (and dula core) play an all
important role both in the iSeries (former AS/400) and pSeries
(former RS/6000). These are low volume, very high margin
products that sustain two ecosystems in IBM with revenues and
margins that far exceeds any business IBM will do with Apple
this century.

With Apple eagerly wanting to use dual-core PPC chips in, not
only dual processor systems (customers chairing on the side),
but possibly bringing both 4 and 8 processor systems  both
workstations and servers, to the market, IBMs Enterprise
Division will increasingly see this as a threat to the i and pSeries
servers. Apple will, with a completely different price-point on
servers in particular, significantly threaten to alter the margins
IBM has on the low-end to midrange i and pSeries systems.

IBM got a very rude awakening seing Apple XServe hardware
finding the way into some of the worlds fastest supercomputer
configurations at a fraction of the cost of then priced IBM
hardware.

Now, with a possible 4 and 8 processor XServe out the doors,
the rocking of IBMs boat would still continue. Why?
Well, IBM is to a larger and larger degree touting both iSeries
and pSeries ability to run Linux software both natively in AIX and
OS/400, but also in logical partitions, as one of its major
featuresand selling points. Guess what? Apple can run Linux
software too.

The relative ease by which Linux software can be made to run
natively under Mac OS X combined with much lower priced
hardware, will make IBMs iSeries and pSeries customers
increasingly ask why not to switch if what all they want is the
ability to run Linux software on PPC.
Such a scenario could put tremendous strain on the Enterprise
Divisions margins. Which is why there are forces internally in
IBM who do not want Apple to have the powerful PPC chips Steve
Jobs needs to transform Apple into a success in the enterprise
market.

Intel does not play these games. Which is why a processor
switch may be attractive for Jobs.

Of course there are all kinds of problems with the existing
installed base in terms of binary compatibility of software, but
they have lived through this before without too many problems.
Apple knows how to handle a processor switch from before and I
think the OS will handle another chip excellently given the long
time Apple has had to prepare for this.

Now for the market? As another guy so excellently put it; 95% of
the market does not have the problem of binary compatibility of
software under Mac OS X.

[wazzledoozle]

Macintosh Computers use the Intel Pentium D Processor

I can see it now.

[gefitz]

Who cares?

Given Apple Computer's never-widening global market-share of little more than 1%, I am continuously astonished that the company gets so much pub.

Maybe when the Ipod fades away (as soon as those cellphones with hard drives become free), we won't have to wade through so much copy for so little company...

[Andrew J Glina]

True

I don't have much respect for Apple left. But I hope that Steve has another trick up his sleeve for when the iPod becomes irrelevent. It would be a shame to see Apple die. It would leave only IBM as the last of the orignal PC makers.

Give me a break.

One second you people are touting 5% market share, then it's "just above 1%." I would think it's probably closer to about 8%, because not everyone buy s a new machine every two year sthat owns a Mac. Becuase they don't have to. Mac is good for around four years.

[ygtbfkm]

facts instead of fiction

Apple's current market share (US, 4Q2004) was 2.88%, and has
shown a steady rise in the last year (increasing by almost 40% in
that one year). Apple is the 6th largest computer maker.

Worldwide market share is now 1.75%, with a slightly smaller
growth rate (about 32% over the same period).

Macintosh portables have about 5% of the market. The United
States has less than 5% of the world population, does that make
the United States insignificant?

If we just went by the holy market share, we'd all be eating at
McDonald's every day. Super Size Me!

[taznar]

Apple already uses Intel and AMD chips!

News Flash!

Apple uses an embedded AMD CPU in its Airport Exteme base
station.

Apple uses an Intel controller in its xServe RAID.

Apple has used Intel controllers for its built-in ethernet in some
models of Macs.

Apple Macs have USB and PCI -that's Intel tech too! And they
might even want to check with Intel about controllers for a next
generation PCI.

Apple has been using Intel chips for years. What's so
newsworthy about Apple and Intel talking chips? Note the
anonymous insider sources don't say CPU's, they say chips.

/insert something about a mountain and a molehill