It seems like this kind of talking is inevitable, given that the OS X core (Darwin) can run on Intel hardware already. I mean, they'd be silly not to even ask the questions, right?

My first reaction is "cool - OS X on commodity hardware; cheap Macs. I wonder how Apple will make up for the loss of hardware sales."
But then, replacing the CPU wouldn't necessarily mean replacing all of the Apple electronics with off-the-shelf ones from other manufacturers; they could keep some proprietary hardware on the motherboard, if only to maintain their lock on the hardware supply.

So, I'm left with, "not cool - OS X on an old-fashioned CISC processor."

(I'll admit it's been more than a few years since I've looked closely at the CPU specs, so I could be way off-base, there. Good thing nobody is asking for my opinion on this one, eh?)

Brian, I wouldn't expect Apple to take OS X backwards in terms of processor technology. What I don't know about CPU architecture would fill volumes, but I understand that Intel does have a RISC processor (XScale). However, I'm not sure it's being used in any desktop PC designs. It seems to be geared more to mobile tech like PDAs and cell phones.

I'm way past my prime on this... I worked for Motorola's R&D lab back in the mid-nineties when Moto was (with IBM) making Apple's chips.

I think you're right about the RISC chips, that was and still(?) is one of the main keys to the way Apple worked so well. There were also dedicated memory caches within the body of the chip, and all sorts of quirky things the design teams had to put in there... I just don't know if Intel's off the shelf stuff can do what a chip designed for the Mac can.

Again, this was eight plus years ago... but some of the stuff we were working on is in the last generation chips, and some of it hasn't even made it, yet.

Jack, given your background (very interesting, by the way) you might jump over to the MacWorld forum to which I linked in the update to assess the accuracy of some of the comments being made there, a number of which address Motorola's products and their use by Apple over the years.

Very interesting link on the update.

I'm with you, I'm guessing WiMax. I just do not see Apple sharing the technology behind the PowerPC with Intel... which they'd have to do if Intel was to be a secondary supplier. Intel's motto may be "only the paraniod survive", but from the brief encounters I had with Apple reps- they took that lesson to heart.

In '95 we were quite possibly the most advanced fabrication facility on the planet, and Moto (wanting to show off) invited the Chinese (whom they were sucking up to re cell phones) to visit. My impression was that the Apple people were none to happy when they found out... Not that the Chinese could "see" anything but...

Anyhow, the PowerPC is unique. It does stuff the x86 just can't. The design engineers used to gripe about things that Apple "had to have" (which may have something to do with IBM making them now), but the point was, Apple knew what their customers wanted.

WiMax, probably. An Intel microprocessor... um, No.

Speaking as a network dude, it will be a looooong time before WiMax even remotely approaches common availability -- way outside the 2-3 year horizon. Betting on WiMax is a sucker bet...it's 180° from WiFi. That spectrum is controlled by the phone companies. Who still can't seem to deliver SDSL to my home, 3G data to my 6 month old Treo, or satellite speeds past 128K uplinks.

Speaking as a geek, this is desperation time for Apple in getting past the inherent, built-in limitations of the G5. Go read some of the old Den Beste posts on the Apple and Moto/IBM conundrum. They're illuminating, if you care to dig into the specifics.

Speaking as a technology salesman, this is an effort to spook some IBM microchip dudes. Who, frankly, couldn't care less about Apples 3MM per year sales...unless, of course, you're the Apple rep, in which case, I hope you stashed some of that cash, bub.

My bet is that IBM will say bye-bye to Apple. It's not profitable for them. And Apple will try to wrangle some specialized chip (Itanium+ ?) out of Intel. Intel won't bother to do that - look at IBM and PPC. My humble prediction is that it won't be too long (2 yrs?) before I'm running OS X on a $200 frankenstein box. And won't you Mac elegantos be weeping then??? heh heh

NB: SDB predicted this a couple of years ago. All that it's going to take is for IBM to say to Apple, "Sorry -- ain't worth it." Considering IBM's recent woes, that's a serious possibility -- even a probability.

OK, Scott...I've got a follow-up note on my PDA for 5/23/2007.

Well, you asked...it's not like I've got money on it or anything. Except the WiMax thing, and I'll make that bet right now. By commonly available, I mean reaching me at the ranch, right outside a major metropolitan area, on a major US highway. We rurals are theoretically the beneficiaries of WiMax.

(PDA? Not iReminder or iTickler?)

I couldn't care less about the WiMax prediction. I'm just stowing away your prediction about Apple's descent into madness.

??? Intel=madness?

??? Intel=madness?

An allusion to the idea that Apple would port its OS to x86 chips and try to compete with Dell et al.