On The Insider: Britney's Bikini-Clad Top 10
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 10 of 27:
Next »
« Previous
Mactel
First, let me say great comments. That info should have been in the article, and the errors taken out (Alpha was killed by HP in favor of Itanic due to investment and interest; it's still the better processor).

On the Mactel, you made a very interesting observation. It wasn't until you mentioned it that I realized that Jobs never mentioned what Intel processor is to be used. It is universally assumed to be a Pentium since it has been mentioned that they will not prevent Windows from running on a Mactel. Also, since OSX is BSD based, it could easily be retrofitted to all the processors you mentioned.

While Alpha would be nice, that would give HP a stake in the Mac, and they are trying to convert the Alpha loyalists away. Itanium is definately a no for the reasons you state. Xscale is an interesting prospect, especially from a power saving perspective, but I wonder if it is a powerful enough processor to replace the PPC.

I think we're more likely to see Mactels using a Pentium-M processor, or perhaps a variation of it. I say variation because there has to be some mechanism to prevent OSX from being easily ported to non-Mac hardware, though this lock will more likely be in the chipset. Jobs has to be cautious about saying Pentium, as many will paraphrase it to mean Pentium 4. This would be wrong, as the Pentuim 4 has the similar issues with heat and power consumption, and would raise more questions about the move. I also expect Intel gave up a good chunk of profit to clinch the Apple deal.
Posted by: jheine   Posted on: 12/07/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

poor performance per dollar  ~doolittle~ | 12/07/05
Not really  Roger Ramjet | 12/07/05
and you had a fantastic compiler  balsover | 12/07/05
The idealized one  Roger Ramjet | 12/07/05
Then it is pointless, isn't it? Not such a great idea after all  balsover | 12/07/05
History lesson  Roger Ramjet | 12/07/05
Great Comments!  DemonX | 12/07/05
Well...  techboy_z | 12/07/05
The InHell mac  Roger Ramjet | 12/07/05
Mactel  jheine | 12/07/05
Actually...  techboy_z | 12/07/05
Partly true  Roger Ramjet | 12/07/05
Re. compile for speed  techboy_z | 12/07/05
In a perfect world...  balsover | 12/07/05
Remember the InHell iAPX432 ?  Steven J. Ackerman | 12/07/05
From the article you linked to  balsover | 12/07/05
A few comments on what is "good" architecture for the future  michael_t | 12/08/05
Always starts. . . . . . .  a.techno.geek | 12/07/05
What people don't get  Roger Ramjet | 12/07/05
Perhaps you are the one that is wrong  balsover | 12/07/05
Did they really blow it?  Roger Ramjet | 12/08/05
Yes they did.  balsover | 12/09/05
Thumbs up!  sys_engineer | 12/07/05
A better question  Roger Ramjet | 12/08/05
cost?  balsover | 12/09/05
Message has been deleted.  myfevertoy | 10/22/06
How a big company MISSES a good chance and conversely  michael_t | 12/08/05

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
  • Smart Tech Expert advice on innovations in healthcare and the green technologies that make it happen. Find out more
  • Smart Business Discussion and advice on management issues that revolve around making your world smarter and more useful. More Smart Advice
  • Smart People The best and worst moves in the management and strategy trenches. Learn More