Apple switches, adopts the Intel x86 architecture

Sidney · 10th June 2005, 14:54

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/

10th June 2005, 20:28

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, 21:27

jmke · 10th June 2005, 23:30

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..

11th June 2005, 07:56

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

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.

11th June 2005, 10:50

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.

11th June 2005, 15:02

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, 15:08

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)

11th June 2005, 16:16

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

jmke · 11th June 2005, 16:18

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

it's FAB30 btw

10th June 2005, 14:54	#1
Sidney Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 15,738	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/ __________________ lazyman Opteron 165 (2) @2.85 1.42 vcore AMD Stock HSF + Chill Vent II

10th June 2005, 21:27	#3
piotke [M] Reviewer Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 5,003	__________________ .

11th June 2005, 16:18	#10
jmke Madshrimp Join Date: May 2002 Location: 7090/Belgium Posts: 79,021	google.. seriously! [g]fab30+amd[/g] it's FAB30 btw __________________

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nokia works with Intel on custom x86 silicon, to ditch TI/ARM?	jmke	WebNews	0	16th February 2010 16:43
Apple ditches 32nm Arrandale, won't use Intel graphics	jmke	WebNews	0	5th December 2009 11:44
Intel Architecture Driving Future of Supercomputing	jmke	WebNews	0	16th November 2009 13:26
Intel next generation architecture “LGA 1366” platform - GIGABYTE X58-EXTREME	windwithme	General Madness - System Building Advice	0	1st September 2008 15:13
Intel to move to common CPU architecture	Sidney	WebNews	5	23rd August 2005 20:27
Intel Pentium 4 Developer Kit for Apple Adored by Software Makers.	jmke	WebNews	0	7th June 2005 22:08
Apple to Move to Intel Processors in 2006	Sidney	WebNews	0	7th June 2005 01:38
Apple will switch to X86 processors - AMD?	Sidney	WebNews	7	5th June 2005 23:27
Apple may use Intel chips: report	Sidney	WebNews	0	23rd May 2005 18:37
Intel Helps to Develop 64-bit Software for x86	jmke	WebNews	0	6th October 2004 09:57

10th June 2005, 20:28	#2
Xploited Titan Posts: n/a	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.

11th June 2005, 07:56	#5
Xploited Titan Posts: n/a	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 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.

11th June 2005, 10:50	#6
Faiakes Posts: n/a	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.

11th June 2005, 16:16	#9
Faiakes Posts: n/a	And what kind of design is it? Tower of Babylon? How long is it going to take to complete?