Apple & Intel

[Archived in Apple, Entry, Intel]

[engadgeted.net] Read John Gruber for the reasons - there’s no way this is gonna be a smooth switch, putting an incredible burden on users and developers, what with the huge architectural differences. Even more importantly, should apple announce this at wwdc and the switch will take until 2006 (as suggested in that cnet rumor), they’ll cannibalize their sales for the rest of 2005 and i really don’t think apple’s willing to take that hit.

Some related posts from Technorati and Google.

MacBlog: The Macintosh Weblog: I like his idea of something like Intel-manufactured chips for iPods or wimax chips for new, spiffy Airports, or something of the like. Another popular counter-rumor is the idea of Intel manufacturing PowerPC chips. (via Cosmos)

The Life Terrestrial: It’s been speculated, and I just have to post about it (my timing is largely due to the fact that Daring fireball posted about it and he’s pretty on-point about this sort of thing most of the time). There has been speculation, largely because of the Wall Street Journal’s rumor column, that Apple wants to move from PowerPC towards an Intel/80×86 proccessor. (via Cosmos)

Noah's Weblog: If you have been living in a Faraday cage for the last 24 hours and haven't heard the big news yet, Apple is switching processors from IBM and Freescale (formerly Motorola) to Intel chips. The transition starts now for developers, but the first Intel based Mac won't be in consumer hands till this time next year. (via Cosmos)

Nosce te ipsum : Jeff Powell's blog: Daring Fireball's Take on the Intel Chip Switch RumorsThe himself, John Gruber once again nails it with his thoughts about the less-than-legit rumors that circulated last week about Apple's rumored switch to the Intel platform. Article highlight: Reading between the lines, I think this is less about whether Apple actually intends to switch processors, and more (via Cosmos)

Squidly: ...this means is that something extraordinary must occur: either Apple is going to announce the biggest hardware transition in company history (and, arguably, industry history), or, two well-respected news organizations have committed enormous blunders. (via Cosmos)

sparque: Read more rants from Technorati Blogs Read updates on Monday live from Apple-X's coverage or right here in the sparque WWDC coverage. Also read Daring Fireball's Intel-mania , which explains that similar rumours have surfaced in years past about this (read Qwerty). (via Cosmos)

[Coty's Weblog] MacOS on Intel: It seems that IBM has been unable to bring the G5's power consumption and heat generation down enough to fit comfortably into an Apple notebook and the G4 chips currently in use don't seem to be scaling very well. Meanwhile, Intel's Pentium M has gotten consistently faster since its introduction and currently tops out at 2.13 GHz.

[Shawn Hartley - sh2.com] Apple and Intel: Personally, my money is on a possible switch to Intel as a either a pressure play on IBM by moving to Intel for PPC chip production or for a new device based upon Intel’s Pentium D chips which include onboard DRM (for say iTunes-like movie downloads?) .

 [Bob Congdon] I'll See You Intel: What this means is that something extraordinary must occur: either Apple is going to announce the biggest hardware transition in company history (and, arguably, industry history), or, two well-respected news organizations [CNet and WSJ] have committed enormous blunders.We'll know the full story on Monday. No matter how this plays out, Apple certainly keeps things interesting.

[Charles on... anything that comes along] Credit where it?s due (again): First Paul Thurrott gets Tiger early, now he’s been early and accurate on the question of Apple switching to Intel processors. I had thought that it might be some product - eg an iPod or similar bit of consumer electronics - rather than the computers themselves.

 [Marteydodoo.com] This is Martey Dodoo » Blog Archive » Apple & Intel: Perfect Together?: Some of them (including Russell Beattie and John Gruber) suggested that Apple might move to Intel-based PowerPC processors. If this was the case, the CNet report would remain basically true (although this would invalidate a story published over the weekend in the Wall Street Journal), and Apple would be assured that its “new”

 [Netscape.com.com] Sun's McNealy on Apple's Intel move | News.blog | CNET News.com: As for the Intel move, McNealy said he expects the transition will take the better part of five years and ultimately could cause a challenge for the software developers that write for the Mac.

[Macmove.com] Macmove: If you can read this and you write a weblog, then you need to check out Dashblog, ... Apple to ditch IBM, switch to Intel chips | CNET News.com ...

 [Yjblog.stupidchicken.com] yjblog.stupidchicken.com: Actually, the real reason I thought about coding that little snippet up? A good friend is moving on from being bonded to hopefully much greener pastures.

 [Randomfoo.net] random($foo): An interesting aside, MacRumors was using AJAX for its live updates (although MacObserver's page handled much better regardless).

Reflected tags on Technorati: Blog, Intel, Desktop Computer News

Posted at July 05, 2005 01:02 PM