Apple goes Intel. Why?, Apple |
|
|
|
 |
Réponse(s)
|
jeu. 9 juin 2005, 19:30
|

Moderator In Chief (MIC)

Groupe : Editors
Messages : 15,189
Inscrit : 23 déc. 01
Lieu : Paris - FR
Membre no 2,758

|
here is the post of a friend on Gaygeeks.orgQUOTE Here's two interesting posts from the Vintage Mac mailing list on the Apple - Intel thing. Pretty interesting, I think. ocdude38 Post 1: Despite all that, the developer documentation that Apple released specifically says that the new platform will use a BIOS, not Open Firmware. Anand on http://anandtech.com covers some of this (http://anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2439). You can also download the documents for yourself and read them if you want. I breezed over them just to get an overview. As I said before this wil be VERY, VERY, VERY good for the Apple platform. Are you aware that the 128MB ATI 9200 Mac Edition costs $125+? The same card for a PC can be purchased for $39.99 at Newegg!!!!!!!! THAT is why BIOS based motherboards will be better than OpenFirmware. The chip makers should only need to produce one BIOS that will be compatible on any x86 platform when Apple starts using the new motherboards. Post 2: Apple's move to Intel designed chips caught me by surprise a much as anyone. I was certain that Apple would use Intel to build PowerPC chips in the same way Apple moved AltiVec to IBM designs. The move to Intel designs for laptops designs make sense as the M series are a superior design to desktop Pentiums (NetBurst, heat, hide design problems with clock speed, yada yada) The move to Intel for desktop machines seems foolish on it face until you look at the time frame for their integration into the high-end Macs. High-end Macs migrate to Intel LAST at the end of two years. What is happening in 2 years at Intel? That appears to be the timeframe for the release of a chip designed by a very NON-Intel design team. Specifically, the old DEC Alpha team. If anyone remembers DEC Alpha's they were the fastest processors available in the 90's. Consistently outperforming everything. 64-bit, multiprocessor from day one with a very elegant, efficient design. DEC was, unfortunately, a foundering company with a very 70's management style and vision. As a result a superior chip design lost in the market place. Compaq knew even less than DEC so the design team jumped ship. HP was even more clueless. For several years now Peter Bannon and his old Alpha design team (over 300 of them) have been working on Intel's next generation 64-bit designs. Their first design for Intel, not-polluted by previous Intel in-house missteps, is planned for a 2007 release. Interesting timing is it not. Here is some background: * "Intel's Tanglewood pumped full of DEC Alpha goodness"* "Intel Appoints New Fellow"* "Mister Tanglewood tapped as Intel Fellow"* "Intel's 64-bit Man Appointed 'Fellow' Status"Apple's high end machines may be running on an Intel CPU but it may be unlike any other Intel cpu seen before. Designed by a team that has been producing elegant, efficient designs (two words not used to describe Intel designs) a more than a decade before IBM had a 64-bit desktop design. I LOVE this post
--------------------
|
|
|
|
Les messages de ce sujet
news Apple goes Intel. Why? lun. 6 juin 2005, 20:42 BobbiStyle Hi Peeps
Had a Mac since 1987. Always for Muzak..... lun. 6 juin 2005, 20:42 vaal Everyone needs to relax, it's going to be just... lun. 6 juin 2005, 21:07 BobbiStyle Hi Vaal
I agree about the IBM "lack", w... lun. 6 juin 2005, 21:24 maxryzone can someone explain in clear terms what this all m... lun. 6 juin 2005, 21:31 vaal No, absolutely nothing is wasted, it won't aff... lun. 6 juin 2005, 22:12 Jsegura Apple cannot marry with anybody. If IBM, that by t... lun. 6 juin 2005, 23:02 lepetitmartien I didn't put everything into the news, I tried... lun. 6 juin 2005, 23:25 indebttome Let's remember this, as well - although OSX is... mar. 7 juin 2005, 00:13 abcdaniel this is CRAP! Longevity, come on!
it won... mar. 7 juin 2005, 00:15 lepetitmartien Just wrote something really stupid, it'll run ... mar. 7 juin 2005, 00:19 abcdaniel Yeah, really, f*** it. New versions, new versions,... mar. 7 juin 2005, 06:05 vaal QUOTE (abcdaniel @ Jun 7 2005, 00:05)At this ... mar. 7 juin 2005, 08:30 abcdaniel Isn't mr Steve known for being a bit** to work... mar. 7 juin 2005, 10:25 coldharbour Yeah well, at the moment PPC is looking pretty goo... mar. 7 juin 2005, 11:27 abcdaniel QUOTE As Steve said, it won't be nothing like ... mar. 7 juin 2005, 12:35 chidders Er... Am I missing something?
When this move to I... mar. 7 juin 2005, 12:48 coldharbour QUOTE (abcdaniel @ Jun 7 2005, 11:35)Just as ... mar. 7 juin 2005, 13:07 vaal QUOTE (chidders @ Jun 7 2005, 06:48)Er... Am ... mar. 7 juin 2005, 14:40 abcdaniel i've might have worked myself up a bit here...... mar. 7 juin 2005, 18:15 lepetitmartien The big problem we face is altivec, it'll need... mer. 8 juin 2005, 00:31 coldharbour QUOTE (lepetitmartien @ Jun 7 2005, 23:31)The... mer. 8 juin 2005, 10:36 stratology "- No one will be able to say macs are crap b... mer. 8 juin 2005, 17:02 lepetitmartien An interesting article on Ars Technica, not far fr... mer. 8 juin 2005, 17:03 stratology Ars Technica was always one of the best sources I ... mer. 8 juin 2005, 17:18 jeffca Hey, Guys!
If you read between the lines of S... mer. 8 juin 2005, 19:15 lepetitmartien It's clear Steve decided that enough was enoug... jeu. 9 juin 2005, 03:12 lepetitmartien And Apple posted in its news a link for the column... ven. 10 juin 2005, 16:23 abcdaniel Oooh, then maybe OSX will go 64bit! And maybe ... sam. 11 juin 2005, 18:53 lepetitmartien Uh, OS X is partly 64 bits, G5 are 64 bits (with a... dim. 12 juin 2005, 03:48 abcdaniel Yeah, I at least am approaching the limit where th... dim. 12 juin 2005, 08:20 lepetitmartien The 64 bitness of an OS is at multiple levels, OS ... lun. 13 juin 2005, 01:39
1 utilisateur(s) sur ce sujet (1 invité(s) et 0 utilisateur(s) anonyme(s))
0 membre(s) :
|
|
|