[Treeman]

Sounds like Apple computer broke off it's long relationship with IBM. Now I hear Apple will be using the Intel CPU by 2007.
I know this is a Windows forum, but I'm just curious. Does that mean the Apple OS would run on a PC?
Your input would be interesting.
Now before the flames! I have never run a Mac, I have three pc's with XP Pro on each. However, in the future I would like to try a dual boot machine.
O.K., Let 'er fly!
Treeman

[gamehead200]

Mac OS X will NOT be compatible with PC hardware, but Windows will be compatible with the hardware the Apples will use. However, there are talks going on about hacks that might be available to let Mac OS X run on PC hardware.

[rabster1]

If you want to try it now then from your machine specs "pearpc" should emulate powerpc fast enough to make osx 'usable' on your system under windows. Otherwise wait/pray for the hack in some years time.

I think this move will result in lots of interesting devices from apple in the future. Perhaps a tablet PC and definitly faster laptops. Intel has many interesting chips/technologies That apple will be keen to innovate around.

This post has been edited by rabster1: 09 June 2005 - 07:34 PM

[gamehead200]

rabster1, on Jun 9 2005, 09:33 PM, said:

If you want to try it now then from your machine specs "pearpc" should emulate powerpc fast enough to make osx 'usable' on your system under windows.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't bother... Its too slow to use!

[bullet]

Even though Intel will be making doorstop, I mean MAC, processors I am not sure if they will be the same x86 architecture. It is hard for me to think that it will be because right now the #1 reason Intel exists is to run Micro$oft applications. It seems to be a conflict of interest in my opinion. I think that Intel will develop a chip for them that will still only run OS X, etc. but be more compatible with 3rd party hardware. I am also relatively sure that Micro$oft doesn't want extra competition, they are pretty content with their monopoly. Further more, I don't think that Apple wants to be like Micro$oft, in that they only produce software. Right now, Apple is making extra money by having MAC only hardware. I think they will want to keep it that way. It is all about money and how can each company make more.

[gamehead200]

bullet, on Jun 9 2005, 10:13 PM, said:

Even though Intel will be making doorstop, I mean MAC, processors I am not sure if they will be the same x86 architecture.  It is hard for me to think that it will be because right now the #1 reason Intel exists is to run Micro$oft applications.  It seems to be a conflict of interest in my opinion.  I think that Intel will develop a chip for them that will still only run OS X, etc. but be more compatible with 3rd party hardware.  I am also relatively sure that Micro$oft doesn't want extra competition, they are pretty content with their monopoly.  Further more, I don't think that Apple wants to be like Micro$oft, in that they only produce software.  Right now, Apple is making extra money by having MAC only hardware.  I think they will want to keep it that way.  It is all about money and how can each company make more.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Listen, the ONLY thing that Apple will be changing in their computers is the motherboard and processor. Everything will remain the same. According to this article, Macs will be able to run Windows as a dual-boot system, but PCs not using the new Mac processors and motherboards will NOT be able to run Mac OS. Mac OS is hardware dependent. Windows is not because there are many drivers for every single piece of hardware out there. As I said earlier, it MIGHT be possible to run Mac OS on our current (or future) PCs with a few hacks here and there.

The transition from PPC processors to Intel processors will also reduce a lot of headaches for developers. They will not have to write a program differently for Macs because they will no longer be using PPC processors.

As I was chatting with Cyberpawz last night, he was telling me that the latest version of Mac OS X (Tiger) will not have to be changed since it is already ready for the use of Intel processors.

If all I've said here is correct, then it seems right that my Mac OS X (Tiger) DVD did not boot on my Intel powered laptop.

One system to rule them all.

[clavicle]

I think you all read this news item on msfn frontpage.
http://www.msfn.org/...?shownews=13427

[gamehead200]

clavicle, on Jun 9 2005, 10:25 PM, said:

I think you all read this news item on msfn frontpage.
http://www.msfn.org/...?shownews=13427
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is exactly what I was referring to!

[suryad]

I think the move of Mac from PPC to x86 Intel is great. XP is not a bad OS at all and I enjoy using it but **** it is getting rather boring on the OS scene. I like the way the OS X looks and I like how the boxes are way different and so are the laptops than the run of the mill Dell, HP or Fry's home built box. And to make a box interesting I am not talkign about sticking in neon lights and spinner rims and a boom box...I am talking about elegance.

Mac is going to kick some major butt just watch. Intel is a giant in terms of processor technology and sure Prescott blew as much as it is hot temperature wise...which is a lot...and it is not as fast compared to AMDs offerings, but if you look at all the future procs coming out like Yonah, Conroe and Merom, you will see a deviation from the Netburst architecture. That is good because the pentium M architecture is providing a crapload of performance for a little bit of power. Already Yonah sports some amazing FP improvements for gaming and multimedia apps. Intel is going to kick some butt. As much as I like the underdog, AMD, if you notice, Intel is playing catch up.

Personally I cant wiat for a very nice fully decked out system...a desktop and a laptop from the x86 mac arena. These are interesting times indeed. I am looking forward to it. The only thing is, I dont know what the engineers @ Mac were thinking designing the OS as a microkernel architecture...that is why it will always be slower than Linux...and hell even XP I think!