Breaking News! Hell Freezes Over—

Apple Switches to Intel Processorsprocessors that were used in per-sonal computers, the 68000 ex-celled in dealing with on-screengraphics. In this, the 68000 bestedthe top processors made by Intel.

Along came Steve Jobs and AppleComputer. Apple was already us-ing earlier Motorola processors inits Apple][ line. Jobs and his engi-neers wanted to do somethingnew. They wanted to build a com-puter with a Graphical User Inter-face (GUI). A GUI means that thecomputer uses pictures to conveyinformation and also respond tocommands through graphics.Thus, the Lisa project was bornalong with icons, mouses andscreen displays that looked just

like the printed page (in other words, the computer experiencethat we have today). No computer processor except the Motoro-la 68000 could handle these requirements. So, Apple chose the68000 for the Lisa and, two years later, for the Macintosh (Com-modore and Atari also choose the 68000 for their GUI basedcomputers at about this time).

Intel in 1980 partnered with Microsoft and provided the proces-sor for IBM’s PC line of desktop computers. Intel’s processorswere fine for the light requirements of the PC, but couldn’t evenbegin to deal with the needs of a GUI. It wasn’t until the adventof the 386 that Intel could provide a processor capable of sup-porting a GUI. By 1992 Microsoft had developed a GUI (Win-dows 3) to take advantage of the 386's capabilities. But, it wasn’tuntil 1995 that Microsoft’s Windows 95 began to approach whatthe Motorola 68000 and Mac OS had been doing since 1984.

However, all those years of supplying processors to IBM and itsimitators made Intel very, very rich. With the advent of Windows95, Intel saw that their future would be rosy indeed. It began re-investing piles and piles of money into research and develop-ment. In fits and starts they produced the 486, 586, Pentium,Pentium II, 3 and 4.

Motorola, also, saw its fortunes change. Cell phones were be-coming such a huge business that Motorola put most of its at-

Look’s like Lucifer’s in a snit! His lake of fire has become an iceskating rink. What a month ago would have been unthinkablehas occurred. Starting next year, Apple will begin phasing outIBM and Freescale (Motorola) PowerPC (PPC) processors andreleasing Macs equipped with X86 class processors from Intel.

This incredible announcement was made Monday, June 6 (D-Day, hmmm...) at the annual meeting of Macintosh software de-velopers. Virtually everyone in attendance was stunned to learnthat the very hardware core of the Macintosh was going tochange in a way that makes the developer’s software no longerrun. With characteristic bravado, Steve Jobs assured the soft-ware developers that the transition will be complete in twoyears. If you would like to see the announcement and demon-stration, a Quicktime movie of the event is available here:

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc05/

Well, that certainly scared the Devil out of the developers, butwhat does this announcement mean to us users? As usual, to ex-plain we must take a trip to the past for a history lesson.

At the dawn of time (that would be 1981), there were two bigmakers of desktop computer processors: Motorola and Intel.Motorola was on the verge of a major breakthrough. They hadjust designed the 68000 processor. Unlike the other mainstream

Special report Apple Switches to Intel Processors ©2005 California Computer Care

tention there. At the same time, Commodore and Atari werefailing, weakening demand for Motorola’s desktop computerprocessors. Soon, Apple was the only major buyer of Motorola’s68000 series processors.

This meant that Motorola couldn’t invest the kind of researchand development funds necessary to keep pace with Intel. So,Apple brought together Motorola and IBM to form a three-partconsortium named the PowerPC Alliance to fund research anddevelopment (R&D) of the next generation of Motorola desk-top computer processors: PowerPC.

Under the terms of the PowerPC Alliance, Apple, Motorola andIBM shared R&D and Motorola and IBM shared manufacturing.At first, PowerPC processors matched or exceeded the capabil-ities of the Intel Pentiums. This lasted until 2002, when Motoro-la, again falling on hard times, due to cell phone competition,pulled out of active R&D and decided to concentrate on pro-ducing the older PowerPC processors for other uses. This leftR&D and production of newer PowerPC technologies in thehands of IBM.

IBM got into the PowerPC Alliance to develop PowerPC proces-sors for its own high-end products. By doing so, it broke its de-pendency on Intel.

IBM began to focus its R&D on processors that performed limit-ed functions but performed them really well. An outgrowth ofthese efforts were PowerPC processors that are superb at run-ning video game machines.

Video games may seem an inconsequential market, but thatmarket dwarfs, in potential, the desktop computer market. IBMhas developed fabulous processors for video games and has sto-len the Sony Playstation and the Microsoft XBox from the handsof Intel. This was a huge blow to Intel in sales, prestige andsomething else that has Intel more afraid than at any time in thecompany’s existence.

Microsoft and Sony have big plans. They are fighting each otherfor space in our living rooms. Each company sees its videogame console as the core of an entire home entertainment cen-ter. They seek to take the place of our DVD players and VCRs.They want to be our cable or satellite provider, and they wantour music, movies, TV, games and more, to come through theirboxes, from their internet. If they succeed, Sony, and muchmore importantly, Microsoft will be making and selling billionsof disguised computers that owe nothing to Intel. Every one ofthese systems sold means one less Intel inside home computer.For Intel, that is terrifying.

Because IBM is focused on other needs, about a year ago, it be-gan giving Apple the cold shoulder. It promised new advances

in PowerPC processors for our Macs, but didn’t deliver. It espe-cially lost ground in providing processors that used less energyand created less heat (a factor where early PowerPC processorsexcelled). With the advent of the G5 processor (which only IBMmakes), it produced a super fast, ultra capable processor that useselectricity by the gallon. This put Apple into an untenable bind.

The G5 processor uses so much electricity and casts off so muchheat that it cannot be used in laptop computers like Power-books and iBooks, or in small form-factor computers like theMac Mini. That is why two years after the introduction of the G5,there still are no G5 laptops, and only recently has the G5 beenshoehorned (by some extraordinary Apple engineering) into theiMac. And, this will not change. IBM doesn’t consider the Macin-tosh market worthy of sufficient attention.

Intel has not been idle. It has created processors that are as fast(in real world terms) as G5s but use a fraction of the electricalpower and create much less heat. Such processors are ideal forlaptops, Minis and iMacs. Down the road, Intel has even fasterand more capable processors under development. Intel is ad-vancing, while PowerPC for desktop computers is stagnating.

This leaves Apple in its accustomed difficult position. Apple hasinvested billions of dollars in PowerPC development and promo-tion. Macintosh software is written to run on PowerPC proces-sors and will not run on Intel processors. If Apple cannot getIBM to produce faster, lower-powered PowerPC processors, theMacintosh market will be gone in a few years. Add to this theplans of Sony and Microsoft to take over our entertainmentneeds (a place where Apple has had great success with iTunesand Quicktime), and Apple is in a squeeze that cannot be ignored.

Well, Steve Jobs ignores nothing. Jobs started all of this with theApple ][ and Lisa and Macintosh. He’s too smart to be caught inthis bind. As he announced last Monday, a secret Apple projecthas for the last five years, written versions of all Apple softwarethat run equally well on Intel processors. So, now that the timehas come, Jobs has in place the necessary ingredients to turnfrom IBM and begin to adapt Macintosh hardware to Intel.

Another factor has also emerged. Despite Sony and Microsoft’splans, Apple is the company best positioned to open the marketfor entertainment provided over the internet and downloadedinto hand-held devices. Apple has already demonstrated that itcan work with the providers of entertainment products with theadvent of iTunes, the iPod and legal music downloads. SteveJobs, because of his other job as head of Pixar Studios, isuniquely placed with one foot in the computer industry and theother in the entertainment industry. But, as it has repeatedlydemonstrated, the entertainment industry is paranoid about thevery real possibility of its products being stolen through illegal

Special report Apple Switches to Intel Processors ©2005 California Computer Care

duplication and distribution. Unfortunately, the computers thatmake legal distribution of music, movies and such possible alsomake it simple to steal the same products. Intel has the solutionto that problem, IBM does not. Intel is working on a processorthat will make illegal copying nearly impossible, but which willallow legal distribution to be unimpeded. This should satisfyboth the entertainment industry and our needs as consumers.Both sides win, and if Apple brings this to market, Apple winsbiggest of all (and Intel short circuits Sony and Microsoft!).

That was one long history lesson! Now we know why we arehere, but where are we Mac users going? According to Jobs’timeline, by mid-2006 the first Macs with Intel processors will beappearing. These will probably be laptops and Mac Minis. Asever more powerful Intel processors are released, the high endPower Macs will be converted with the tale complete by the endof 2007. PowerPC Macs will be sold concurrently with Intel Macsuntil the conversion is complete. There will be lots of choices.

I’ll bet you have some questions.

Should I buy a new Mac or wait for the Intel models?

The early Intel Macs will probably be close equivalents to thePowerPC Macs of this last generation. Also, the early Intel Macs,as all new technology does, will have bugs and problems. So, ifyou need a new Mac in the next ten months, it will be better tobuy a proven PowerPC Mac. After that you may want to wait andsee what the first Intel Macs are like though, I expect, you’d stillwant to skip the first generation and wait for the second.

Will my current non-Apple software run on the Intel Macs?

One reason for the early announcement of the switch is tomake sure that software developers have plenty of time to gettheir software ready before the Intel Macs arrive. Apple is pro-viding the necessary software and encouragement to get devel-opers to release their software in a form that works equally wellon both PPC Macs and Intel Macs for at least the next five years.Also, Apple will include software code named Rosetta that willallow PPC Mac software to run unchanged on Intel Macs. Thiswas demonstrated and appears to work better than runningClassic in Mac OS X. Even so, PPC Mac software will run sloweron Intel Macs, and some publishers won’t release Intel versions.

Will my existing peripherals (printer, scanner, camera, iPod) work

with the Intel Macs?

Cameras whether digital or video and iPods most certainly willsince they rely on Apple’s own software. Printers and scannersare another question. If you recall the Mac OS 9 to Mac OS Xtransition, you may remember that some printer and scannermanufacturers provided Mac OS X software to keep their prod-ucts working. Other manufacturers used the transition as an op-portunity to force their customers to buy newer, compatible,

products. Lots of folks were angered by this, so I hope thatthose manufacturers who tried these nasty tactics learned theirlesson. Probably not.

Will the Intel Macs be less expensive than current models?

Just a guess: not significantly cheaper. There is a lot of R&D topay for. Apparently, Intel has made big pricing concessions, so,down the road, we may see Intel Macs progressively becoming abetter value than PPC Macs.

When I buy an Intel Mac, will I have to pay to get Intel compatible

versions of my existing software?

Probably. Most software publishers will likely see the transitionas a major upgrade and charge for new versions. That happenedoften during the Mac OS 9/Mac OS X transition, though it wasn’tuniversal.

Will Intel Macs be able to run Windows software?

According to Apple, they will do nothing to stop Intel Mac usersfrom installing and running Windows software. Keep in mindthat Windows software will not run under Mac OS X, so you willhave to install a real copy of Microsoft Windows on the IntelMac first. Since Microsoft Windows and Mac OS X will not peace-fully coexist, some fancy hard drive partitioning will be necessary.

Since Mac OS X will be running on Intel processors in Intel Macs,

will Mac OS X run on regular Intel-based PCs?

Nope. Not a chance. Ain’t gonna happen. There are two mainreasons. First, and least, is that Apple makes more money sellingMacs than it does selling software; a lot more. If Mac OS X ismade available for standard Intel PCs, Apple will sell very fewreal Macs. That they cannot afford because of reason numbertwo: Apple’s great advantage in its operating systems is that theOS is designed for Apple’s hardware. Once the door is openedfor all of the regular, Windows-running PCs to install Mac OS X,the quality control that Apple now has will be gone. Mac OS Xwould be running on myriad, funky, Frankensteinian, cobbledtogether, low quality PCs. I cannot imagine the support prob-lems that this would bring to Apple. They’d lose money just try-ing to support so many weirdly configured machines. This is anightmare of the first order best demonstrated by the fact thatMicrosoft, which sells Office for Windows and Mac, makes moremoney selling Office to Mac users, who are only 10% of comput-er users, than they do to the 90% Windows market. The reason?Microsoft has to provide much more support per copy of Officeto Windows users than to easy-to-support, standardized Mac users. Apple’s experi-ence would be the same or worse.

Where’s my abacus? I’m through now.

As Dilbert says: “Technology. No place for wimps.”

Special report Apple Switches to Intel Processors ©2005 California Computer Care