Content deleted Content added
→Early 2000s: Reword |
GreenC bot (talk | contribs) Move 1 url. Wayback Medic 2.5 per WP:URLREQ#anandtech.com |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 27:
==History==
===1980s===
Apple's efforts to move to Intel hardware began in 1985.
===1990s===
In the 1990s, Intel often took out ads in ''[[Macworld]]'' convincing Macintosh users to switch to PCs powered by Intel CPUs.<ref>{{cite magazine | url=https://archive.org/details/MacWorld_9312_December_1993/page/n3/mode/2up | title=Intel advertisement |magazine=[[MacWorld]] | date=December 1993 }}</ref>
The first known attempt by Apple to move to Intel's platform was the [[Star Trek project]], a code name given to a secret project to run a port of [[Classic Mac OS]] [[System 7]] and its applications on an Intel-compatible personal computer.
Apple leaders set an October 31 deadline to create a working prototype. The team met that deadline, and had a functional demo ready by December. [[John Sculley]]'s departure during the Star Trek project was a factor in the project's termination. [[Michael Spindler]], who took over as Apple's CEO, instead devoted most of Apple's resources to
After Apple's 1997 acquisition of [[NeXT]], Apple began to rework their [[NeXTSTEP]] operating system into a successor to the classic Mac OS, codenamed [[Rhapsody (operating system)|Rhapsody]]. Jobs (who rejoined Apple upon the purchase) demonstrated an Intel-compatible build of Rhapsody to [[Dell]] founder and namesake [[Michael Dell]]. Jobs offered to license the new OS to Dell for its PCs, so that users could choose between it and [[Microsoft Windows|Windows]]. However, Dell declined when Jobs insisted that the company license the operating system for every PC it ships, regardless of whether or not the user wanted to use Mac OS.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Guglielmo|first=Connie|title=The Apple-Dell deal that could have changed history|url=https://www.cnet.com/tech/computing/the-steve-jobs-deal-with-dell-that-could-have-changed-apple-and-tech-history/|access-date=2021-10-29|website=CNET|language=en|archive-date=October 29, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211029173341/https://www.cnet.com/tech/computing/the-steve-jobs-deal-with-dell-that-could-have-changed-apple-and-tech-history/|url-status=live}}</ref>
Line 82:
The [[Classic environment]], the [[Mac OS 9]] virtualization measure for Mac OS X, was not ported to the x86 architecture,<ref>{{cite web |title=Why doesn't Apple support MacOS 9/Classic on Intel-based Macs? |url=https://everymac.com/mac-answers/mac-os-9-classic-support-faq/why-did-apple-abandon-macos-9-classic.html |website=EveryMac.com |access-date=23 June 2020 |date=12 July 2006 |archive-date=April 3, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190403193212/https://everymac.com/mac-answers/mac-os-9-classic-support-faq/why-did-apple-abandon-macos-9-classic.html |url-status=live }}</ref> leaving the new Intel-powered Macs incompatible with [[classic Mac OS]] applications without a proper third-party PowerPC emulator.
There were also concerns over third-party software support, with reaction to the change being mixed amongst the software developer community, due to a need to recompile software for compatibility on Intel-based Macs.<ref name="SanJoseMercuryNews1"/> In early 2006, it was reported that a number of software companies, such as [[Adobe Inc.|Adobe]], [[Aspyr]] and [[Microsoft]], were not ready to release [[universal binary]] versions of their software offerings.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Shimpi |first1=Shimpi |title=Apple Makes the Switch: iMac G5 vs. iMac Core Duo |url=https://www.anandtech.com/show/1936 |access-date=24 June 2020 |work=AnandTech |date=30 January 2006 |archive-date=July 26, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200726071220/https://www.anandtech.com/show/1936 |url-status=
===Technical issues===
Line 147:
* [[Star Trek project]]
* [[Universal binary]]
* [[Mac transition to PowerPC processors]]
* [[Mac transition to Apple silicon]]
| |||