Madshrimps Forum Madness

Madshrimps Forum Madness (http://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/)
-   WebNews (http://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f22/)
-   -   Apple switches, adopts the Intel x86 architecture (http://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f22/apple-switches-adopts-intel-x86-architecture-15369/)

Sidney 10th June 2005 15:54

Apple switches, adopts the Intel x86 architecture
 
For decades Apple has been bad mouthing the x86 architecture until they announced this week they'll be using Intel's x86 processors in their upcoming products. Surprised? We take a closer look.

http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1802/

Xploited Titan 10th June 2005 21:28

Too bad :( I really liked the fact Apple was opposing in almost every way with the normal computers. Now they'll become 'normal' PC builders.

piotke 10th June 2005 22:27

:(

jmke 11th June 2005 00:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Xploited Titan
Too bad :( I really liked the fact Apple was opposing in almost every way with the normal computers. Now they'll become 'normal' PC builders.
apple was already using AGP cards, IDE hard drives, IDE cdroms, the only thing they had was a different CPU&Motherboard.

and IBM has proven that they are stuck at the current speeds, so I think it's wise from Apple to go with the best offer. Intel has the factories and resources to deliver tailor mate Apple-ready CPU's.

it's not because the hardware changes, that Apple is now ":(" ; Apple is about SOFTWARE, if they keep up the original and "cool" OS side, they'll have buyers.

same as their Ipod series, which is basically the same as any other HDD mp3 player..

Xploited Titan 11th June 2005 08:56

Well, Apple first worked with Motorola, but they couldn't meet the demands, that's why they went to IBM.

Now, about using AGP cards, IDE drives: they only did much later, to lower costs.

But frankly, if they had to go x86, I would have prefered AMD. Not cos of the rivality between AMD and Intel, just because AMD already worked with IBM on similar technologies (SOI, stretched silicon...).

Well, the world can't be perfect :D

I hope one thing will remain though: the quality. Except for the Ipod Shuffle, and maybe other examples I don't know, Apple did a great job concerning the build quality of their products.

Faiakes 11th June 2005 11:50

Yes I would have prefered AMD too.

There was a remark that AMD wouldn't be able to meet Apple's volume demands.

Come on! Apple has a tiny percentage of the market. If AMD can't cover even that then they should get their head out of their *** and built another factory, because look what it has costed them already: a huge deal that would make them true rivals to Intel and not the (almost) niche enthusiast market specialists they are now.

wutske 11th June 2005 16:02

Some interesting things to read:
http://www.overclockers.com/tips00793/
http://www.overclockers.com/tips00791/

One thing I don't understand:
Quote:

AMD is just reaching crossover (i.e., new generation of CPUs outselling previous generation) now with Athlon 64s twenty-one months after product introduction, a process which normally takes six-months. [b]They are now having problems with dual core.[b]
Which problems ???

piotke 11th June 2005 16:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Faiakes
Yes I would have prefered AMD too.

There was a remark that AMD wouldn't be able to meet Apple's volume demands.

Come on! Apple has a tiny percentage of the market. If AMD can't cover even that then they should get their head out of their *** and built another factory, because look what it has costed them already: a huge deal that would make them true rivals to Intel and not the (almost) niche enthusiast market specialists they are now.

They are building a huge factory (fab37) in Dresded (Germany)

Faiakes 11th June 2005 17:16

And what kind of design is it? Tower of Babylon? How long is it going to take to complete?

jmke 11th June 2005 17:18

google.. seriously! [g]fab30+amd[/g]

it's FAB30 btw


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:45.

Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO