logo Sign In

Mac + Intel = iFlicks?

Author
Time
Have you all read this one? From the Cult of Mac blog.

Quote

Apple Shifting To Intel, For Hollywood's Sake
The weather's absolutely beautiful here in San Francisco but I blew the entire weekend in front of the computer (again) trying to figure out Apple's purported move to Intel.

At first, it was just too hard to believe, and I dismissed it as nonsense, but two serious news organizations are reporting it as a done deal (News.com and WSJ), and on Sunday morning a couple of things fell into place making it look a lot more plausible.

I guess Apple will move to Intel, and they're relying on a fast, seamless emulator to do it.

But it's really about Hollywood: Apple's looking to transform the movie industry the same way the iPod and iTunes changed the music business.

As initially reported, there a couple of big problems with Apple moving to Intel. The biggest is shifting all the Mac software to a new platform. Apple apparently mulled moving to Intel a few years ago, when Motorola's chip development fell woefully behind, but Steve Jobs nixed it because of the massive disruption it would cause developers.

What's new this time is a fast, transparent, universal emulator from Transitive, a Silicon Valley startup.

Transitive's QuickTransit allows any software to run on any hardware with no performance hit, or so the company claims.

The techology automatically kicks in when necessary, and supports high-end 3D graphics. It was developed by Alasdair Rawsthorne, the chap at right.

When I wrote about the software for Wired News last fall, the company had PowerBooks and Windows laptops running Linux software, including Quake III, with no performance lag whatsoever.

If Apple has licensed QuickTransit for an Intel-powered Mac, all current applications should just work, no user or developer intervention required.

Programmers could port their software to the new platform slowly and steadily, and the shift would be as relatively painless as the recent move from OS 9 to OS X, which, of course, relied on emulation in the Classic environment.

But why would Apple do this? Because Apple wants Intel's new Pentium D chips.

Released just few days ago, the dual-core chips include a hardware copy protection scheme that prevents "unauthorized copying and distribution of copyrighted materials from the motherboard," according to PC World.

Apple -- or rather, Hollywood -- wants the Pentium D to secure an online movie store (iFlicks if you will), that will allow consumers to buy or rent new movies on demand, over the Internet.

According to News.com, the Intel transition will occur first in the summer with the Mac mini, which I'll bet will become a mini-Tivo-cum-home-server.

Hooked to the Internet, it will allow movies to be ordered and stored, and if this News.com piece is correct, loaded onto the video iPod that's in the works.

Intel's DRM scheme has been kept under wraps -- to prevent giving clues to crackers -- but the company has said it will allow content to be moved around a home network, and onto suitably-equipped portable devices.

And that's why the whole Mac platform has to shift to Intel. Consumers will want to move content from one device to another -- or one computer to another -- and Intel's DRM scheme will keep it all nicely locked down.

Presumably, Jobs used his Pixar moxie to persuade Hollywood to get onboard, and they did so because the Mac platform is seen as small and isolated -- just as it was when the record labels first licensed music to iTunes. The new Mac/Intel platform will be a relatively isolated test bed for the digital distribution of movies and video.

Will current Mac users like this new locked-down platform? I doubt it, which I guess is why it's going into consumer devices first.

In the PC industry, Apple lost the productivity/office era to Microsoft, but it's trying to get the jump on the next big thing: the entertainment/creativity era, and it's going to drag it users, even if they're kicking and screaming, with it.
"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."
--Vizzini (Wallace Shawn), The Princess Bride
-------------------------
Kevin A
Webmaster/Primary Cynic
kapgar.typepad.com
kapgar.com
Author
Time
Saw this posted on a console gaming board a day or two ago. The theory there was that IBM's hands were going to be full producing PowerPC chips for the Xbox 360, PS3, and Nintendo Revolution, making Apple a distant fourth in IBM's list of priorities.
Forum Administrator

MTFBWY…A

Author
Time
yeah i heard about this i wonder how apple lovers are going to react.
Author
Time
I'm okay with it actually. Some are griping. But, when you weigh the positives, it becomes clear that this is a good thing...

1. Motorola really dropped the ball on making processor chips. The chip division is practically defunct. Leaving Motorola was something that Apple/Jobs wanted to do a couple years ago but never happened.

2. The chips will be cheaper because they come from a company that specializes in them. This may translate to lower prices on Mac hardware.

3. This will make Macs even more compatible with PC networks than they already are which means that IT people can quit their whining about integrating their networks.

4. iFlicks? Hell yes!
"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."
--Vizzini (Wallace Shawn), The Princess Bride
-------------------------
Kevin A
Webmaster/Primary Cynic
kapgar.typepad.com
kapgar.com
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Shimraa
yeah i heard about this i wonder how apple lovers are going to react.


What can one say about this? I have no problems with this, as long my macs run stable, whatever chip is in it. But I don't think macs will get cheaper, because apple will still make their own logicboards with own chipsets. Apple won't leave their homogeneous architechture. If you can put every piece of crap into your mac, you'll need drivers for everything and you maschine only gets instable.
Author
Time
I can imagine the Apple folks aren't too happy because of the performance issues. As I've always understood it the MAC chips were historically faster than intel because of better architecture. Now they're getting the slower chips, on top of the DRM stuff, which just adds to the overhead. At this point, Apple may as well give up it's proprietary architecture. Go clone all the way. Their real business is going to be in consumer electronics and content delivery in a big way.
Nemo me impune lacessit

http://ttrim.blogspot.com
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: JediSage
At this point, Apple may as well give up it's proprietary architecture. Go clone all the way.


Why should apple give up their architechture? The real bottleneck on x86 systems are the chipsets, not the actual P4 (which is a RISC/CISC hybrid). The G5 is supposed to be way superior. But IBM can't deliver. There are heat problems and they can't go over 3ghz. So it's a good choice, since IBM has now more "important" customers as sony (ps3), microsoft (xbox 360) and nintendo (revolution).
The real fun will be 2005, when there is MacOSX 10.5 vs. Windows Longhorn.
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: iRantanplan
Quote

Originally posted by: JediSage
At this point, Apple may as well give up it's proprietary architecture. Go clone all the way.


Why should apple give up their architechture? The real bottleneck on x86 systems are the chipsets, not the actual P4 (which is a RISC/CISC hybrid). The G5 is supposed to be way superior. But IBM can't deliver. There are heat problems and they can't go over 3ghz. So it's a good choice, since IBM has now more "important" customers as sony (ps3), microsoft (xbox 360) and nintendo (revolution).
The real fun will be 2005, when there is MacOSX 10.5 vs. Windows Longhorn.


I've always believed that Apple makes a superior product. In fact, I use iTunes and am getting ready to get iPod shuffle. My point in saying they should allow clones was probably wrong now that I think about it. Apple is playing it smart by making good quality stuff like the iPod and licensing the tech to companies like HP. I just hope Jobs's ego doesn't get the best of him, but I think he's grown up a lot since he returned.

OS X.5 will obviously never take market share from Windoze, but it's fair to say it will be better.

Nemo me impune lacessit

http://ttrim.blogspot.com
Author
Time
OS X.5 won't be for a while. At least until 2006. X.4 just came out in Jan/Feb of this year. I'm guessing spring '06. That is what you meant, right iRantanplan? You said '05 which is where we are.

Longhorn, eh? I think the ads should star Dubya. That'll turn away the buyers.
"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."
--Vizzini (Wallace Shawn), The Princess Bride
-------------------------
Kevin A
Webmaster/Primary Cynic
kapgar.typepad.com
kapgar.com
Author
Time
Hmn...

I think changing Mac's archicteture to the x86 is one huge step that should be taken slowly, or not at all. So, basically, old Mac applications will be emulated? Will x86 coded programs run on the new Mac? Perhaps there's more than the eyes see, I don't think a full process architecture change might happen just because Apple wants to "copy-protect" their IFlicks with this new hardware, which, by the way, WILL be cracked in a matter of weeks. Perhaps Steve Jobs wants a better compatibility with IBM/PC?
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
There are quiete a few errors in my posting
(You should never type postings during your working time when you're on the phone at the same time )

10.5 will be released 2007 I think, since Jobs said that the last OSX versions where released to close to another.

Apple worked on cross-plattform versions of OSX for about 5 years as a safety net, so there won't be an emulated version of the os, but maybe for some of the apps. Some of the apps can be cross-compile with minor changes. And apple has a year time to optimize their main software apps for P4.
Author
Time
wow you guys have gone right over my head.
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: Shimraa
wow you guys have gone right over my head.


?
Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: iRantanplan
Quote

Originally posted by: JediSage
At this point, Apple may as well give up it's proprietary architecture. Go clone all the way.


Why should apple give up their architechture? The real bottleneck on x86 systems are the chipsets, not the actual P4 (which is a RISC/CISC hybrid). The G5 is supposed to be way superior. But IBM can't deliver. There are heat problems and they can't go over 3ghz. So it's a good choice, since IBM has now more "important" customers as sony (ps3), microsoft (xbox 360) and nintendo (revolution).
The real fun will be 2005, when there is MacOSX 10.5 vs. Windows Longhorn.


I THINK YOU MEANT 2006.

I WAS DISGUSTED AT THE THOUGHT OF HAVING AN intel CHIP IN AN APPLE COMPUTER, BUT STEVE JOBS HAS SECRETLY BEEN TESTING THIS OUT FOR THE PAST FIVE YEARS. I TRUST THE GUY. IF HE SAYS IT WILL MAKE FOR AN EVEN BETTER MAC THEN I'M GAME.

"I'VE GROWN TIRED OF ASKING, SO THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME..."
The Mangler Bros. Psycho Dayv Armchaireviews Notes on Suicide

Author
Time
Quote

Originally posted by: PSYCHO_DAYV
Quote

Originally posted by: iRantanplan
Quote

Originally posted by: JediSage
At this point, Apple may as well give up it's proprietary architecture. Go clone all the way.


Why should apple give up their architechture? The real bottleneck on x86 systems are the chipsets, not the actual P4 (which is a RISC/CISC hybrid). The G5 is supposed to be way superior. But IBM can't deliver. There are heat problems and they can't go over 3ghz. So it's a good choice, since IBM has now more "important" customers as sony (ps3), microsoft (xbox 360) and nintendo (revolution).
The real fun will be 2005, when there is MacOSX 10.5 vs. Windows Longhorn.


I THINK YOU MEANT 2006.


Please read my corrections first before you post