“Apple is becoming increasingly irritated with its prime PowerPC provider, Motorola, to the extent that it talking to fellow PowerPC partner, IBM, about how the platform can continue to evolve without the chips-to-cellphones giant’s participation, sources close to the Mac maker have claimed.” TheRegister analyzes the situation and proposes alternatives for Apple. In the meantime, more information about Motorola’s new G5 CPU are coming to light. Our Take: The article proposes that Apple should look into Itanium and Sun SPARC CPUs to port MacOSX into, but I think the author has left out a more realistic candidate, if indeed Apple is getting a divorce from Motorola: the AMD Hammer. Except Linux and some rumours that a new version of WindowsXP may run in this new AMD 64-bit CPU, I believe that MacOSX could enrich and also gain from this new platform.
Apple Looks to Future – Post-Motorola/PowerPC world?
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Every time Apple has a problem with Motorola, some rumors about Apple looking for IBM spreads around. That sais I’de prefer apple going with Sparc’s than Itanium. Eugenia why did you forget the Mips CPUs ? Mips are not that bad.
I still believe Apple would rather use a Z80 in future machines than pit OS X directly against other OSes in the x86 environment by using AMD CPUs. Just my bit of rumour to add: maybe buying Alpha makes sense? but then again I would rather think pple gets closer together with IBM and sticks woth PPC…
Why doesn’t Apple check out Transmeta? They could program it to use a PPC instruction set for awhile and then slowly work their way away from that over several hardware generations to whatever chip they want to use without anyone even noticing. At least, that is how I understand that chip to be able to work with its code translating and all that.
I don’t think Apple will leave the PPC platform, especially now that it seems like the G5 might finally arrive. They would piss on all their existing users and software companies who would have to rewrite/purchase all their software for a new CPU. The 680×0->PPC transition was possible due to massive speed differences which made the emulated 68k on PPC as fast as the real 68k models. An emulated G4 on a SPARC or Itanium would be by far slower than a real PPC (think Virtual PC).
Here is from AMD web page :
Q: Which OS will support “Hammer”?
A: Future processors derived from the “hammer” architecture will be able to use existing and future 32-bit operating systems such as Windows98, Windows ME, Windows NT, Windows 2000, WindowsXP & Linux. Additionally, the “Hammer” products are planned to enjoy 64-bit operating system support from the open source community.
ZDNet journalists are ‘consumer-oriented’ , their opinion is not even worth mentioning here.
There is a bit more inside the computer than just CPU. Apple is controlling most vital parts inside – buses, bridges etc. If it was only instruction set then it wouldn’t be such an issue.
Apple would not be well advised in producing x86 machines. See what happened with SGI when they released overpriced Windows NT workstations. Nobody bought them. As far as MIPS is concerned, it will be soon end of life from what can be read in the past years. Alpha is canned too, so what remains is Sparc and PPC. Sparc is more expensive than PPC, making the price difference between Macs & PC even greater. Also I don’t see Sun developing Ultrascparc’s for notebooks. PPC depends on Motorolas manufacturing ability which does not seem to match Intels or IBM’s.
So after all it is a tough situation. I think the best bet for Apple would be to team up with IBM and buy PowerPC from Motorola. It is a good platform, but as the article said, Motorola’s main customer is not Apple, which is really the point. If you have a specialized CPU as opposed to the x86 standard then you have to have full control over it, otherwise you can get into trouble… Sun couldn’t make it if they would buy CPU’s from somebody else. SGI bought MIPS a few years ago to have full control and push lagging development. It would be no surprise if Apple would buy PowerPC…
If I remember correctly, Microsoft and Apple signed an agreement in which they stated, that Apple wouldn’t use the x86 architecture, because if they would, Microsoft wouldn’t produce Office and IE for them anymore.
So they would sign their death sentence, if they did.
>If I remember correctly, Microsoft and Apple signed an agreement in which they stated, that Apple wouldn’t use the x86 architecture, because if they would, Microsoft wouldn’t produce Office and IE for them anymore.
So they would sign their death sentence, if they did.<
Well you forgot one bit of that tale… Microsoft also does not want to see Mac OS ever making it to the x86 platform in fear of hard competition with Windows that would shatter Microsoft’s longterm goals. Don’t forget that Apple almost became a total software company in the early 90’s as John Scully had envisioned and one thing Microsoft can tell you… Apple knows how to build software!!!
I’m still speechless on this subject in someways… It seems like Apple can’t win for losing here.
Ever since Iridium became (pretty much) a total failure, Motorola can’t seem to get it together anymore… like they have a string of bad luck and is becoming a sinking ship for the rest of the industry. Personally I don’t want to see Apple ever jump in bed with Intel and what it has to offer, I have never been impressed with Intel and I only see them as a second hand shop (so to speak).
IBM could be a good thing or a bad thing… IBM doesn’t fear anybody, not even Microsoft and flirting with Apple wouldn’t be a big deal and might lead to better things. I kinda agree with Eugenia that Apple should consider AMD, but don’t rule out Sun and the SPARC, because I work on that platform now and have done so for 8 years and it is a great CPU to work with.
Well I guess time will tell!!!
Hmmm…. x86 (Hammer, too) is dominated by M$.
On the Itanium platform, M$ is a lot steps ahead.
SPARC… interesting, but why should Sun allow another server-capable OS preinstalled on it.
Alpha… well… now owned by Intel.
Hi,
there is one thing, that beware us of a x86 port from Apple:
Microsoft holds 30% of Apple and they will never let such things happen.
For all greater changes in the company plan you must carry out a shareholder meeting. And Microsoft will definitely vote against such thing.
So folks no x86 port.
Transmeta has yet totally failed to produce any significant speeds at all, SPARC is way to expensive (PPC is already expensive) and x86 wouldn’t really help Apple at all.
As suggested, the only logical choice here is for Apple to join forces with IBM and make it possible for IBM to use Darwin in their high end products (yes, the ones you can’t afford;)) and preferably have IBM build Macs too. They would have to buy enough of PowerPC to be able to produce them on their own, making them fast enough for the market and cheaper as well.
The question, would Motorola let go of PPC? Not completely, since they are using the PPC in way more places than Macs.
>Microsoft holds 30% of Apple
Apple is worth over 5 Billion!
Microsoft bought 150 Million in stock in 1997 (so they maybe making some cash now)
So where did the other 25% come from?
It must be another Microsoft monopolistic trick again… where is the DOJ when you need them!!!
Considering, most of you out there have double majors and are above average intellectually. One would only assume that the obvious must be considered. Apple would never port there operating system to a microprocessor that would enable Windows or anything like it to run on the same processor in question. DAH!!!! Apple makes hardware remember? A great deal of their revenue derives from hardware sales. If they were to do something as blind as porting to the windows platform, Why wouldn’t most of you, not myseft go out and purchase a $1500 wintel platform and run OSX on it? For me not in a million years. Come on, next time think before you start scareing people.