Innovation Apple Intel Wow!

Rumors for some time created by reports from this NY Times reporter. Apple even created a Mac based upon Intel hardware a decade ago. But back then, Apple management could not even find its own ass. All I can say this time is WOW!

from the NY Times:
Apple Plans to Switch From I.B.M. to Intel for Chips
Steven P. Jobs is preparing to take an unprecedented gamble by abandoning Apple Computer's 14-year commitment to chips developed by I.B.M. and Motorola in favor of Intel processors for his Macintosh computers, industry executives informed of the decision said Sunday.

Repeatedly noted here is the threat to Moore's law. Current transistor technology may be hitting a brickwall which is why quantum physics and other possible new technologies are so important to this American industry.

Apple, according to analysts, has become increasingly alarmed by I.B.M.'s failure to deliver a new version of its Power PC chip, called the G5, that does not generate much heat...
"That's a huge looming problem for Apple, if it can't keep up with Intel notebooks in performance," said Charles Wolf...

IBM demonstrated problems earlier when they missed delivery on a contract involving a new Hi-K material. The material would peal off semiconductors while in production. Hi-K materials (Hafnium Dioxide, La2O3, and other compounds) are but one possible solution to increasing CPU speed. Unfortunately many were having trouble manufacturing with these materials.

Moore's Law may be confronting a brick wall; compounded by a government that is subverting science with political agendas such as a Man on Mars, Iraq, and ISS at the expense of basic research. Material science research and basic sub atomic research is being stifled along with other sciences.

I know that intel cpu does not necessarily equate to PC Compatible, but I'd still dearly love to be able to dual boot XP and OS X.

If that ever came about, I wonder if it would marginalize Linux?

I'm hoping, praying this is a deal where Intel manufacture Cell derivitive or PPC chips for Apple rather than Apple switching to an Intel designed chip, IBM is so far ahead of where Intel seem to be going chip wise it's not funny. Laptop wise the 970FX is meant to be doable in a 5 pound laptop, Apple engineering is good, wait and see.

If OSX was put on commodity hardware it'd have the same support issues Windows does with shitty hardware, it'd be a disaster.

Apple switching to x86 hardware means the end of the Mac. Apple, if it survives, will be the iPod company.

Which means my son's Imac will probably not be able to run future programs.

I'm thinking that around 4:30 this AM, some butthead at CNN had this story ass back wards. on the tag line running across the bottom of screen. Naw. Must have been me 1/2 asleep. CNN would never do that!

But I'd bet a black land farm, that it said "Apple picks IBM over Intel."

Putting more details to the story:

From ABC News Apple to Switch Macs to Intel Chips
In a speech to software developers Monday, Apple CEO Steve Jobs admitted the change will not be fast or easy. The first Intel-based Macs won't appear until 2006, and the full product line won't shift to Intel until the following year, he said.

"This is not going to be a transition that happens overnight," Jobs said. "It's going to happen over a period of a few years."

He said the move was driven by the fact that its current chip suppliers IBM Corp. and Freescale Semiconductor Inc. could not promise the same horsepower and power efficiency as Intel, the world's largest semiconductor company.

Programmers can immediately start developing software in a format that will run natively on both existing and future Mac chips, he said. Apple also will have a technology in place that will translate the code so that older programs will run on the Macs with Intel inside.

Jobs revealed that Apple has been working on the move for at least five years, creating two versions of its Mac OS X operating system for both the current Mac chips and those built by Intel.

The next generation chips will probably use 45 nm transistors. TI and Tiawan Semiconductors have both publically stated they don't think Hi-K technology will work at this technology. Freescale Semiconductor (formally Motorola) and IBM have both suggested that they will not be able to meet the preformance requirements Apple Computer expects. Most damning is that Intel has gone silent meaning they are committing to the next technology - probably 45 nm transistors, a Hi-K material based upon Hafnium Dioxide, probabilistic simulation tools, and other manufacturing changes. Intel is also talking about Extreme Ultra-violet (EUV) lithography for their 32 nm technology sometime in 2009.

Is Intel simply scaring off the competition? Maybe. Maybe not. But others in the industry are becoming frustrated with these technologies now that CMOS has been taken to such extremes.

Apple has been using Intel technologies for many part of the Mac - ie PCI bus, AGP video, USB. What is known is that Apple has been testing CPU providers simply because both Freescale and IBM cannot provide what Intel has provided and has promised. Symptoms of the approaching a brick wall?

Putting more details to the story:

From ABC News Apple to Switch Macs to Intel Chips
In a speech to software developers Monday, Apple CEO Steve Jobs admitted the change will not be fast or easy. The first Intel-based Macs won't appear until 2006, and the full product line won't shift to Intel until the following year, he said.

"This is not going to be a transition that happens overnight," Jobs said. "It's going to happen over a period of a few years."

He said the move was driven by the fact that its current chip suppliers IBM Corp. and Freescale Semiconductor Inc. could not promise the same horsepower and power efficiency as Intel, the world's largest semiconductor company.

Programmers can immediately start developing software in a format that will run natively on both existing and future Mac chips, he said. Apple also will have a technology in place that will translate the code so that older programs will run on the Macs with Intel inside.

Jobs revealed that Apple has been working on the move for at least five years, creating two versions of its Mac OS X operating system for both the current Mac chips and those built by Intel.

The next generation chips will probably use 45 nm transistors. TI and Taiwan Semiconductors have both publicly stated they don't think Hi-K technology will work at this technology. Freescale Semiconductor (formally Motorola) and IBM have both suggested that they will not be able to meet the performance requirements Apple Computer expects. Most damning is that Intel has gone silent meaning they are committing to the next technology - probably 45 nm transistors, a Hi-K material based upon Hafnium Dioxide, probabilistic simulation tools, and other manufacturing changes. Intel is also talking about Extreme Ultra-violet (EUV) lithography for their 32 nm technology sometime in 2009.

Is Intel simply scaring off the competition? Maybe. Maybe not. But others in the industry are becoming frustrated with these technologies now that CMOS has been taken to such extremes.

Apple has been using Intel technologies for many part of the Mac - ie PCI bus, AGP video, USB. What is known is that Apple has been testing CPU providers simply because both Freescale and IBM cannot provide what Intel has provided and has promised. Symptoms that Moore's Law is approaching a brick wall?

From the Wall Street Journal of 7 Jun 2005 page B1:

"Macs May Advance With Intel"
Mr Jobs said that Intel's main draw wasn't its existing products but the company's plans for future chips, which he said offer a superior combination of computing power and low power consumption - a critical feature for laptop computer and other mobile devices that run on batteries. ...

The Apple-Intel deal does not mean Apple will be selling Mac OS X for Intel based comuters sold by other hardware makers, despite persistent industry speculation about that possiblity. Mr Jobs said someone who takes the operating system software from a Intel based Macintosh and tries to put it on another machine will find that it does not run. He would not describe the security methods used to prevent that possiblity, or how difficult they would be to defeat.

But Mr Jobs said Apple could "envision some exciting products" for the future adding "we don't know how to do that with the PowerPC roadmap." ...

Mr Jobs discussed several efforts to help software developers to convert their products so that they will run on either Intel or PowerPC microprocessors. The conversion job could take only a matter of weeks for many developers, who created their product using a programming technology called Xcode, Mr Jobs said. For fewer than 20% of programs, developers will have to start using Xcode before their products can make the transition; he didn't estimate how long that process would take. ...

Using Intel chips does mean that a user could run Windows on future Macs as efficiently as other PCs do. Mr Jobs said Apple will not provide the technical support to anyone who decides to do so. Even if it doesn't, some analysts suspect that the improved capability to run Windows could make the new machines more acceptable to companies. ...

Despite Apples' desire for secrecy, word of Apple's alliance with Intel first leaked out two weeks ago, when The Wall Street Journal reported the two companies were in discussions about a deal. "Most of you are hearing about this for the first time," Mr Jobs told Mac developers in his speech yesterday, "unless you read The Wall Street Journal."

oh fuck.

Apple fans don't panic.

Good reading (and the linked articles within it): http://arstechnica.com/columns/mac/mac-20050608.ars

Also I'm not sure what "brick wall" is looming for Moore's law. Which really isn't a law but more of a prediction anyway.