Linked by David Adams on Tue 27th Jul 2010 07:44 UTC
Intel An interesting article at Ars Technica takes a look at some compelling data (the longer-than-normal processor update cycles in Apple's personal computer lineup) and speculates that Apple's enthusiasm for its partnership with Intel might be cooling. Like Apple's soured relationship with once-BFF Google, this may be the result of Intel's increasing activities in the mobile computing space.
Permalink for comment 434637
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: PPC
by LobalSurgery on Tue 27th Jul 2010 23:57 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: PPC"
Member since:

PPC delivered in spades. Apple switched to Intel for two reasons: Intel gave them a better deal for processors, and it made it easier for Macs to play Windows games... and that second reason is probably more important than the first.

I agree with the first point, but I don't see any real push from Apple on the gaming side (and it's been four years since the switch to Intel). If anything, I'd say they continue to be, at best, rather indifferent to gaming on the Mac. Case in point: not even an Nvidia card option on the new Mac Pro. The new iMacs are ATI-only as well.

The G5 was a very good chip when it first appeared in 2003 (I bought an original dual 2 GHz Power Mac G5 -- now retired in favor of a $1000 Hackintosh that outspecs/outruns a Mac Pro priced at $3300), but it ran quite hot and required liquid cooling in its later iterations. Apple's laptop processor at that time, the G4, was stalled at a bus speed of only 167 MHz for nearly 4 years before the Intel laptops were released.

Apple switched to Intel because it gave them processor parity with the rest of the PC industry and there's no way they could put the G5 in their laptops, which have constituted a majority of Macs sold for quite some time now.

Reply Parent Score: 2