Why didn't Apple Computer decide to use AMD processor for there Macs and
iMacs?


The feedback should be interesting.

RDN wrote:
> Why didn't Apple Computer decide to use AMD processor for there Macs
> and iMacs?
>
>
> The feedback should be interesting.

No it won't, it will be full of opinionated tossers trying to make a point
that they can't prove.

I think the answer boils down to them being fairly smart, and being in the
business to make a profit.


--
Cheerz - Brownz
http://www.brownz.org/

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 19:34:18 -0400, RDN wrote:

> Why didn't Apple Computer decide to use AMD processor for there Macs and
> iMacs?
>
Wag's. Intel gave them a better deal. Wanted the Intel name recognition.
Single source for both cpu/chipset and maybe MB. Intels got plenty of
chips to sell. My guess would be that Intel cut them a sweet deal on the
cpu's just so they wouldn't go with AMD.

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
http://mysettopbox.tv/knoppmyth.html Usenet alt.video.ptv.mythtv
My server http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
HD Tivo S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 19:34:18 -0400, "RDN" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Why didn't Apple Computer decide to use AMD processor for there Macs and
>iMacs?
>
>
>The feedback should be interesting.
>

AMD had one fab at the time, if something should go wrong at that one
fab Apple would be stuck with a limited supply of chips or no chips at
all. If one of Intel's fab were to completely blow up they have a few
more they can rely on.

Intel can offer CPUs & chipsets/boards with better support, AMD relies
on 3rd party boards and chipsets.

Basically AMD is just a small player, no matter how good their CPUs are
they don't have the means to supply and support the Apple's and Dell's
of the world.

AMD always undercuts Intel's price, but prices alone aren't always good
enough.

Ed

AMD undercutting Intel is sweet for me.
If I can buy a Mobo/CPU that is $100s cheaper, that mint.

Right now I'm running a non-overclocked
Athlon XP 1700+ on a Abit KR7A (almost over 4 years now).

I'm hoping to build an Athlon 64 3200-3500 (venice) on an Asus / nVidia
nForce 4 Ultra mobo

I don't know when AMD will ship their M2 socket 940 (Orleans) chips.

Maybe I should wait?

"Ed" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 19:34:18 -0400, "RDN" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >Why didn't Apple Computer decide to use AMD processor for there Macs and
> >iMacs?
> >
> >
> >The feedback should be interesting.
> >
>
> AMD had one fab at the time, if something should go wrong at that one
> fab Apple would be stuck with a limited supply of chips or no chips at
> all. If one of Intel's fab were to completely blow up they have a few
> more they can rely on.
>
> Intel can offer CPUs & chipsets/boards with better support, AMD relies
> on 3rd party boards and chipsets.
>
> Basically AMD is just a small player, no matter how good their CPUs are
> they don't have the means to supply and support the Apple's and Dell's
> of the world.
>
> AMD always undercuts Intel's price, but prices alone aren't always good
> enough.
>
> Ed
>

"Brownz (mobile)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Vdz2g.8793$(E-Mail Removed)...
> RDN wrote:
>> Why didn't Apple Computer decide to use AMD processor for there Macs
>> and iMacs?
>>
>>
>> The feedback should be interesting.
>
> No it won't, it will be full of opinionated tossers trying to make a point
> that they can't prove.
>
> I think the answer boils down to them being fairly smart, and being in the
> business to make a profit.
>
>
> --
> Cheerz - Brownz
> http://www.brownz.org/
>
>

And you're not an opinionated tosser?

BillL

BillL wrote:
> "Brownz (mobile)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:Vdz2g.8793$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> RDN wrote:
>>> Why didn't Apple Computer decide to use AMD processor for there Macs
>>> and iMacs?
>>>
>>>
>>> The feedback should be interesting.
>>
>> No it won't, it will be full of opinionated tossers trying to make a
>> point that they can't prove.
>>
>> I think the answer boils down to them being fairly smart, and being
>> in the business to make a profit.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheerz - Brownz
>> http://www.brownz.org/
>>
>>
>
> And you're not an opinionated tosser?
>
> BillL

No, I couldn't give a ff what hardware went in them.

And I can argue that point til daisy is happily settled in her meadow.


--
Cheerz - Brownz
http://www.brownz.org/

"RDN" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:W3z2g.314$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Why didn't Apple Computer decide to use AMD processor for there Macs and
> iMacs?
>
>
> The feedback should be interesting.
>
>

Dual core laptop chips.

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 19:34:18 -0400, RDN wrote:

> Why didn't Apple Computer decide to use AMD processor for there Macs and
> iMacs?
>
Because Macs are made for retarded customers.

"Brownz (mobile)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news_T2g.57484$(E-Mail Removed)...
> BillL wrote:
> > "Brownz (mobile)" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:Vdz2g.8793$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> RDN wrote:
> >>> Why didn't Apple Computer decide to use AMD processor for there Macs
> >>> and iMacs?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The feedback should be interesting.
> >>
> >> No it won't, it will be full of opinionated tossers trying to make a
> >> point that they can't prove.
> >>
> >> I think the answer boils down to them being fairly smart, and being
> >> in the business to make a profit.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Cheerz - Brownz
> >> http://www.brownz.org/
Considering that if it weren't for the iPod,they'd probably be out of
business by now,I wouldn't rate them that high in smarts or making a profit.