Forums | MacLife

Your mom hasn't sang yet.

I think before you all get spastic about a Mactel future consider what makes a Mac a Mac. You're more than likely looking at it right now. It's the OpSys. I think that much of the shock comes from the picture of OSX running on off the shelf PC parts. "I'll just build my own." NOT gonna' happen. Apple will still make custom hardware for OSX to run on and it won't run on any old PC box. I suspect at the end of it all you won't be able to tell what proc you have

Jeez! This story has achieved viral proportions. Can't go anywhere without some reference to it. Have fire up my countdown widget for this.

Well its true afterall. Reason why the CPU was so important to making a Mac a Mac shows in PearPC. Yeah they could get OSX running on PC hardware but trying to emulate a RISC was something else. x86 optimizations in OSX are just gonna make it easier to port OSX onto PC.

Begun, the death of Apple's uniqueness, has . Apple just bastardized themselves. It might cause M$ to feel a lil shake up and its gonna bring a lot more ppl to using OSX but the old days are over.

So, Apple can just go mount themselves for all I care. The moment hackers figure out how to get OSX running on other x86 systems I am soo gonna just go build my own. I'm talking full dual core A64s, multiple PCI-Express GPUs, and all the bells n whistles. Hey if hackers do it and they can get OSX running on a A64 system for much less than a G5 i'll just say screw G5s. Apple ain't gonna get anymore of my $$$ when I can just go build it myself just as good .

Man Got in before the Lock!

Man the mods should be here soon to lock this and say "there's a thread already in Circuit Boards"

NightCougar_37 wrote:

Meh, circuit boards ain't no fun

Well i've let things settle in and I am still upset to the point i'm considering even switching completely to Lornhorn when its released . After looking at some other forums i've found i'm not alone either .

Not even, the procssor does not make a Mac. The design and the OS make a Mac a Mac.

Well I just read the Ars article that came out today on this and that pretty much summed up the feelings in this. Granted with less anger and rage .

The processor might have not been a big point that made Macs a Mac but it did make them unique. Regular joes won't care but ppl like me who actually are excited by something a lil more exotic will. Heck, just like Ars stated in the article: "x86 is ugly." This is a sad day to be a Mac user indeed since within a year Macs will not be anything special on the processor front. They will just be another PC in a sea of PCs but with the only difference of running OSX instead of Windows.

I don't hate Intel because its associated with Windows. I hate Intel because their processors suck!! I was glad to see this mentioned in the Ars article asking why didn't Apple contact AMD first. Who knows, maybe Apple did contact AMD, only Steve knows that.

NightCougar_37 wrote:

Well I just read the Ars article that came out today on this and that pretty much summed up the feelings in this. Granted with less anger and rage .

The processor might have not been a big point that made Macs a Mac but it did make them unique. Regular joes won't care but ppl like me who actually are excited by something a lil more exotic will. Heck, just like Ars stated in the article: "x86 is ugly." This is a sad day to be a Mac user indeed since within a year Macs will not be anything special on the processor front. They will just be another PC in a sea of PCs but with the only difference of running OSX instead of Windows.

I agree with you there, I'm hoping this does not ever come to pass. But people still pay more for a BMW even tho they know a Camero will beat it from 0-60.

NightCougar_37 wrote:

I don't hate Intel because its associated with Windows. I hate Intel because their processors suck!! I was glad to see this mentioned in the Ars article asking why didn't Apple contact AMD first. Who knows, maybe Apple did contact AMD, only Steve knows that.

But then again we don't know what will Itel have for Apple in the furure. We can only speculate.

DoctorB wrote:

The sky is not falling... yet.

You wouldn't know it reading the IMG forums

Last edited by Ceemkm (2005-06-07 5:57 pm)

I have no real opinion until apple actually gives us some information. Sheesh, I need a new line. First I say that about the consoles and now the new macs.

Yeah thats interesting to see Doc. Looks like there will be 64bit in the pipe but still it depends if Intel can make up the ground they have lost to AMD.

Doubt Intel is going to make anything special for the Mac front. So I guess Apple is going to have to completely rely on OSX to sell machines. Unless they can cut prices enough to compete against the PC makers. But already what i've been hearing is that Apple most likely will continue to charge a premium for Mac hardware. People that don't know anything technical won't know the difference between a Mac and a PC. They'll just see they have the same processors then buy whats cheaper.

Kirk got a nice point there. The life of Intel CPUs is much less. Plus what makes things worse on the PC side is Intel constantly changes socket designs which makes ppl constantly have to update their boards as well as processors. AMD is awesome in this area. They don't change sockets constantly.

pat32 wrote:

Do you people even think for a moment that after what apple has achieved in all these years, and sticking it's head out above all computerbuilders, they are going to mock it up by letting intel put in one of their processors as we know them?
I think that a whole new generation will be build for this.
If it's going to happen at all... Myself, I like my G5 just fine.

Well said

Kirk wrote:

My main real beef with this change is the shorter design life for Intel processors.  They're good for about three years before solid state migration across the P and N junctions kills them.  The G5 chip is good for ten years.  This means there will be no hand-me-down MacTels to the kids.  This will be a hidden cost in the new machines.  Other than that, I don't care either.

Again, this is only true in the more severe thermal envelope your guys are concerned with. Operating more normally and as designed, 10-20 years is considered a normal, modern x86 service life. Yes, overclocking and/or insufficient cooling accelerates electromigration.

X86 hand-me-downs are quite possible. Death from obsolence is far more common.