New ideas on careers

Apple WWDC 2005-The Intel Switch Revealed

Here we see Steve Jobs announcing that Apple will begin using Macs with Intel processors & that Mac OS X was being built for Intel since the beginning.

26 Responses to Apple WWDC 2005-The Intel Switch Revealed

  1. espnchris says:

    man Steve was chunky back then…..get well soon steve we need ya

  2. xRaIDeNx69 says:

    @oOJampisOo

    Tell us something we don’t know:

    holy crap wheres his blue jeans?
    1q23dg posted 3 YEARS AGO

  3. oOJampisOo says:

    HOLY FUCKING CRAP!

    …Steve Jobs isn’t wearing jeans.

  4. SamsonGiles says:

    SIMPLY`.;COPY`.`&,`.PASTE,`,
    WWW.WATCHFULLMOVIE.TK
    SIMPLY:,`COPY`:;&::,PASTE:..

  5. JoelB3783 says:

    This is sorta a depressing thought…. “Set us up for the next 20 years…” It’s 11 years later steve. Get ready for OS 11/XIXI

  6. huggeebear says:

    Steve looked Buff back then…goes to show, your health is the most important thing you have folks…

  7. spameister says:

    @rg6ivan Aww, at least he’s honest. He gave you a 2.7ghz powermac, and lets be honest it could still melt your face now.

  8. Molo9000 says:

    @HypnoticSuggestion
    The tri-gate transistor is still a transistor. It’s more power efficient and offers more performance, but it’s still just another step forward in manufacturing transistors. Using transistors efficiently is another story.
    I’m no expert on computer architecture or x86 or ARM, but I can’t believe that an instruction set that established a monopoly 25years ago and had lots of stuff added to it over the years is still the best possible instruction set today.

  9. AnimeFunTV says:

    @rg6ivan They did make a 3.0Ghz Mac, but it was short lived since lower clocks and more cores made up for the 3Ghz.

  10. HypnoticSuggestion says:

    @Molo9000 Also you don’t give ARM enough credit, they’re already manufacturing as good as anyone in the world, you just don’t understand, ARM is a VERY specific technology, with very low power form factor it’s target. To develop an ARM, with ZERO instruction sets that support modern operating systems, for high end heavy lifting processing is the most bizzare notion I’ve read on this subject. Please, please I’m not beating up on you, you simply do not understand what ARM is. Go to Wiki, PLEASE.

  11. HypnoticSuggestion says:

    @Molo9000 Look, I’m all for a debate, but your not educated enough to have this discussion. It is 100% a new architecture, what in the world are you talking about….I ask? They’ve completely redesigned the transistor itself, this is a tock cycle for Intel. You’re terribly misinformed, and dare I say arrogant.

    ARM is efficient in extreme low power devices, you simply don’t understand what X86 is. Put a 3 watt ARM Cpu into a desktop PC, and watch it take a full year to boot< Metaphor, it wouldnt

  12. Molo9000 says:

    @HypnoticSuggestion
    Intel’s new tri-gate transistor is just another advantage in manufacturing technology, not architecture itself. There is no reason why ARM manufacturers couldn’t develop equally good manufacturing processes soon.
    ARM has partnered with IBM to achieve just that.
    Fact is that ARM is a more efficient architecture. The main reason it’s not used in desktops is the Wintel monopoly.

  13. HypnoticSuggestion says:

    @Molo9000 Did you not here about Intel’s next gen Tri-Gate? You obviously haven’t. And why don’t you elaborate on just exactly the type of hard lifting processing the ARM will be capable of? You think it can handle Gaming? Video rendering? What about VIRTUAL MACHINES?

    You’re making serious assumptions about ARM capability, that couldn’t possibly come within 5 years, “no roadmap exists for what you suggest!” If, and when, Moore’s Law fails, then perhaps the entire industry will move to ARM.

  14. Jason says:

    Good Day, interesting Blog, should be developed! I have bookmarked for future reference! All the best

  15. Molo9000 says:

    @HypnoticSuggestion
    Just because there is no desktop class ARM chip at the moment doesn’t mean there won’t be in a few months/years.
    Intel has an advantage in manufacturing technology and years of development of desktop class processors, but the x86 architecture itself is less efficient than ARM.

    I think it’s very unlikely that the architecture that established itself a quarter of a century ago and kept dominant so long for compatibility reasons is still the most efficient today.

  16. HypnoticSuggestion says:

    @LessthanJake14 Never. ARM cannot handle OSX, or any software that runs on it. Also Ivy Bridge is coming, with Tri-Gate/3D Transistor technology that will allow x86 to perform on low power like ARM, but also allow great, x86 performance. ARM will never enter the notebook space. It will not penetrate any higher than medium spec Slate/Tablet.

  17. HypnoticSuggestion says:

    @JoelB3783 It will never, EVER happen. With Intel’s new 3D transistor, x86 will be as good as ARM in the mobile space, and consider Apple already has a solid relationship with Intel.

    Also, no Arm exists that could possibly handle OSX plus ‘any’ software of such caliber. ARM will most certainly not makes its way into any Macbook, , not even the Air. Don’t worry :)

  18. JoelB3783 says:

    @LessthanJake14 oh GOD! I hope they stay rumors.

  19. LessthanJake14 says:

    @JoelB3783 There are rumours they’re shifting over to ARM processors on Macbook by 2013.

  20. JoelB3783 says:

    I hope to god that this was the last Fuking transition!

  21. ma5599 says:

    @supercooldude2121 search tenfourfox (it’s firefox 4 for PowerPC) and if you’re on a G4 (slower ones) install mactubes it play well when switch to quicktime!

  22. vastrevenue74Ad says:

    NEW`:;IPAD2:::FREE;”SITES;““`
    WWW.DONTMISSFREEIPAD2.TK
    COPY SITE & PASTE

  23. TAKEAPlLL says:

    @Jullzzzz exactly…

  24. Jullzzzz says:

    @TAKEAPlLL its the smartest move because people can run windows + os x

  25. Tulanirebe says:

    @wingnutstudios apple sucks

  26. codeythesilent says:

    @1997mf878
    You don’t multiply the clock speed x cores on the die. It simply doesn’t work that way. For example, I might have a 2 GHz dual core, but the operational frequency of both cores may only be 2.5 GHz all together.

Leave a reply