Clarification/Misquote: Steve Jobs and OS X on Intel

The quote regarding Steve Jobs on Intel may have been misrepresented by the Reuters article. The quote came from Apple's Q3 Financial Analyst Meeting Q&A. From that broadcast, here is the entire quote in context:

(5m 40s) Steve Jobs was asked about porting Mac OS X to Intel:

Steve Jobs: "The roadmap on the PowerPC actually looks pretty good and there are some advantages to it. As an example, the PowerPC has something in it called AltiVec, we call the Velocity Engine -- it's a vector engine -- it dramatically accelerates media, much better than, as an example, the Intel processors or the AMD processors... so we actually eek out a fair amount of performance from these things when all is said and done. And the roadmap looks pretty good. Now, as you point out, once our transition to Mac OS 10 is complete, which I expect will be around the end of this year or sometime early next year and we get the top 20% of our installed base running 10, and I think the next 20 will come very rapidly after that. Then we'll have options, then we'll have options and we like to have options. But right now, between Motorola and IBM, the roadmap looks pretty decent. "

... so it looks like discussions of OS X on Intel/AMD may be a premature. (despite repeated speculation on this topic)

IBM......

i like the IBM chipsets, and chips...plus, they can get things out quickly...moto ain't as fast, but they're good too...
Moto R&R and IBM product...good idea i think

... Steve could say about the road map??? It is just typical marketing bla bla...

The road moap looked promising two yerars ago and look where we are now!

I only believe in processors that I can buy in an actual machine! Before it is only hot air! Especially when Motorola is involved!

So bring it on Steve! Give us pro users gear again that makes us remember why we chose Apple once as our primary platform... with every day you wait longer more pro users are looking for alternatives.

groovebuster

Well personally i think this sounds promising.... Steve is obviously not going to be that happy about clock speeds that a quite away behind the competition, and he'll undoubtedly be aware of the next major revisions of the PPC chip whether it be from IBM or Motorola........ but I keep saying I'd like to see the 2 working closer together with regards to the future of the PPC..... then we'll really begin to see performance increases!

PPC chip architecture still has enormous potential...... and in my opinion is still the superior chip architecture in comparison to Intel and AMD.........

What ever proccessor Apple goes with, the chip needs to be like the P4 where it is easy to increase the clock speed, even if it is not the fastest. P4 chips are not as fast as AMD in the mid range, but their high end P4s are much faster than AMD.

This is the only way Apple will get into the other 95% of the market, making computers that look great and sound great value to money. I can remember a time with the PPC chip actually had higher clock speeds than Intel / AMD and the Macs sounded better value for money as well. (about 1997).

OS X on x86-64? totally doable, has a pretty nice register set for an x86 chip, cool hypertransport technology, and so on. I just wanna see windoze DIE! Not that I'm biased or anything =P

I couldn't give a damn what processor is inside my Mac, so long as it's fast, stable, decent value and runs the software I want.

I echo the same sentiment as others around here, I don't care what chip is in my Mac as long as its fast. I just hope if they did this that we don't get the same MB architecture as the PC, keep the Mac chipset, change the CPU and works around it.

On the other hand its nice to see Steve not using the RDF™ full tilt. Notice he said "decent" instead of intense supelatives. I think internally they reliaze they need to look elsewhere when the chips are down so to speak...

What would be nice is if I could buy a Mac (lets ignore technical and marketing issues for a moment) which would allow me to have a dual boot Mac OS X/Win XP system.

That way I could use 3dsMax and play games on the Windows boot, and use OS X for everything else and not need the two computer set-up I have now.

Although I'm sure this could be done, I'm equally sure it won't.

Alternativly, I'd be just as happy if they released ALL games for the Mac at the same time as the PC versions and 3dsMax was made for Mac OS X.

Oh well, I can dream...