Apple Announces Intel-Based iMac

Brian Ambrozy 10 Jan, 2006 at 1:19pm ET Article published in Tech

Almost live from MacWorld 2006, we have just received word that Apple is rolling out Intel-based macs earlier than expected. They are starting with the iMac line. Available immediately in the same physical configuration as PowerPC-based iMacs, the new line features dual-core Intel Duo processors. Steve Jobs announced: “What’s different is that the new iMac with intel processor is 2-3 times faster than the iMac G5. That is because we are building in the latest technology, the new intel core duo chip. It’s an amzing chip with two processors on one die, with 2mb L2 cache.”

All of Apple’s iMac line will now be dual-core, and dual-core support is native in OS X 10.4.4, which is also available today.

Special thanks to Clint Ecker from arstechnica for the live coverage of MWSF2006.

Source: Macworld 2006 via arstechnica.com live update

Comments

10 Jan 2006 ~ 1:45pm profdlp How soon are you going to get one, prime?
10 Jan 2006 ~ 2:11pm primesuspect ha!

as soon as I have enough disposable income to buy a BMW - which is to say "not likely before apple release eight-processor laptops sometime in 2017"
10 Jan 2006 ~ 4:03pm gtghm So would AMD people be laughing at Apple for not using their chips... after all while Intel would obviously be a step up from the IBM/Motorola CPUs if they had went with AMD they would have been both fast and efficient... right
10 Jan 2006 ~ 4:52pm Jengo

gtghm wrote:

So would AMD people be laughing at Apple for not using their chips... after all while Intel would obviously be a step up from the IBM/Motorola CPUs if they had went with AMD they would have been both fast and efficient... right

i agree

Intels newer stuff just aint cuttin' it, plus AMD Processors are cheaper

oh well.. i just hope that now that Intel is providing the processors for Apple, that more games will start to come over to the Mac world.
10 Jan 2006 ~ 4:55pm Sledgehammer70 The only thing fast and efficient with Mac's are the users who defend them

J/K!!!

I think Apple made a good choice going with Intel as they are both going to go down together....

Okay okay j/k

The new iMac's look promising really; I can't wait to see one in action....
10 Jan 2006 ~ 5:09pm Jengo

Sledgehammer70 wrote:

The only thing fast and efficient with Mac's are the users who defend them

J/K!!!

I think Apple made a good choice going with Intel as they are both going to go down together....

Okay okay j/k

The new iMac's look promising really; I can't wait to see on in action....

OOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooh!!

You little backstabber you!!
10 Jan 2006 ~ 5:10pm Sledgehammer70 Im an AMD guy! No back stabbing from here!
10 Jan 2006 ~ 5:15pm muddocktor I was just checking out their new iMacs myself. Too bad they are so overpriced for what you get (typical snobbish Mac pricing). (and I'm not kidding)

But as far as efficiency goes, they aren't using the P4 architecture; they are using the Yonah class architecture that's built off the P-M lineup, which is very efficient. Unlike a lot of folks here, I don't have a natural anti-Intel leaning and I will give credit it's due with whichever company comes out with a winner. And the new Intel stuff looks like it will definitely be a player.

If Jobs would ever wake up and realize that the real money isn't the hardware but rather the OS and software and start selling copies of OSX that will natively run on any x86 architecture, he would definitely put a severe hurt on Billy-boy and Microshaft. I would definitely buy an OSX OS (or maybe several, who knows) from him under those conditions, but never if the only thing I can use it on is his proprietary overpriced Apple hardware. I've been down that road before and I won't go there again (Amiga OS and Commodore).
10 Jan 2006 ~ 6:03pm Enverex Makes me wonder even more what people like about Macs. "Look, my machine costs 5x more than yours for the same hardware" "erm... yay?"
10 Jan 2006 ~ 6:23pm GrayFox If you noticed its a pentium M powering that.
10 Jan 2006 ~ 9:04pm Jengo

muddocktor wrote:

I was just checking out their new iMacs myself. Too bad they are so overpriced for what you get (typical snobbish Mac pricing). (and I'm not kidding)

But as far as efficiency goes, they aren't using the P4 architecture; they are using the Yonah class architecture that's built off the P-M lineup, which is very efficient. Unlike a lot of folks here, I don't have a natural anti-Intel leaning and I will give credit it's due with whichever company comes out with a winner. And the new Intel stuff looks like it will definitely be a player.

If Jobs would ever wake up and realize that the real money isn't the hardware but rather the OS and software and start selling copies of OSX that will natively run on any x86 architecture, he would definitely put a severe hurt on Billy-boy and Microshaft. I would definitely buy an OSX OS (or maybe several, who knows) from him under those conditions, but never if the only thing I can use it on is his proprietary overpriced Apple hardware. I've been down that road before and I won't go there again (Amiga OS and Commodore).

You said Billy-Boy!!
11 Jan 2006 ~ 4:47am Enverex Erm... you can run other OSs on Amiga and Workbench came free with the machine anyway so it wasn't exactly an espensive addition...
11 Jan 2006 ~ 9:08am muddocktor

Enverex wrote:

Erm... you can run other OSs on Amiga and Workbench came free with the machine anyway so it wasn't exactly an espensive addition...

Upgrade path for proprietary hardware combined with Commodore biting the big one, plus here in the states Commodore had much less presense than in Europe. Plus, I couldn't "borrow" my brother's programs and load them on my Amiga (he has a 386 machine about that time). Commodore started disappearing here around the time 1993-1994 timeframe.
11 Jan 2006 ~ 9:43am GrayFox Its a off the shelf pc with a infinion 1.1 tcpm chip. (To allow osx x86 to install)
11 Jan 2006 ~ 3:13pm airbornflght hold up. that p-m powering that is x86??

im sure there is a way to extract the infeon chip? I dont see why jobs just wont let osx run on x86.