<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

[IP] more on Apple to ditch IBM, switch to Intel chips | CNET News.com





Begin forwarded message:

From: Jeff Porten <civitan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: June 4, 2005 5:38:57 PM EDT
To: David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [IP] Apple to ditch IBM, switch to Intel chips | CNET News.com


For IP, a write-up of the Intel issue that I sent around to my clients this morning.

Best,
Jeff

CNET is reporting that Apple will announce a switch to Intel chips on Monday at the WWDC. The article was posted after 5 PM Friday, presumably timed to avoid affecting the stocks of the companies involved.

<http://news.com.com/Apple+to+ditch+IBM%2C+switch+to+Intel+chips/ 2100-1006_3-5731398.html?part=rss&tag=5731398&subj=news>

This follows a report in the WSJ that said that Apple was talking to Intel. The original article pointed out that Intel makes many chips that are of interest to Apple (notably WiMax and portable electronics devices), and so this didn't necessarily cover the PPC family. Most of the people who parroted the article on the Internet and elsewhere extrapolated this to mean a chip change and left out the finer details. John Gruber wrote an article last week debunking these rumors, which I agree with:

<http://daringfireball.net/2005/05/intelmania>

However, CNET has a good rep and presumably would not have run this story without a strong source. Presumably we'll know about the details on Monday. The Jobs keynote is scheduled for 1 PM EDT; from what I can see there isn't a public web stream, but it's safe to say that whatever he says will hit the Internet within seconds after it occurs.

As Gruber points out, an architecture shift would require the re- release of all Mac software recompiled for the new chip. In some cases, changes to the source would be necessary (although not all cases, since software relying on libraries within OS X would continue to run with the same code). But it would mean getting new binaries, and it's safe to presume that in some cases this would mean repurchasing the software as opposed to a free download. The 680x0 to PPC transition was eased because the latter could emulate the former; in this case, barring an engineering miracle from Apple, you can forget about that happening at reasonable speeds.

More to the point, I'm highly skeptical of this report because of the uncertainty it raises for Apple's core business. Apple makes most of its money on hardware, and even if they deliberately try to prevent OS X from running on other Intel machines, this will inspire a legion of hackers to release workarounds to allow OS X to run on the cheapest hardware at Wal-Mart. I have trouble believing that Apple could engineer something that would make all such hacks impossible, and that would be a big hit to Apple's hardware business. There would also be a significant dampening of Apple hardware purchases leading up to the release of Intel models. I have similar trouble believing that Apple doesn't realize this.

On the side saying this is all true, it's long been rumored that an Intel Mac OS X would cause a shift in market share as people had a cheap way to try it out. (The Mac Mini is seen as exactly the hardware that would dispel such rumors, being its own entry level path.) Jobs is said to be very annoyed about the lack of a 3 GHz G5 chip, and the inability of IBM to produce a low-power G5 for laptops. If Apple's engineers decided that IBM was going to drop the ball on this going forward, then that's a potential reason for a shift of this magnitude.

According to CNET, the shift will start with the Minis in 2006, and hit the towers in 2007. No word as to how the migration will occur in laptops, iMacs or Xserves.

If this is true, then we should expect to see a somewhat slower release schedule for new features in software, as engineering resources will be bled off for the migration. [Client-specific discussion redacted.]


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/