Toasting Intel Chip

Burn Baby Burn, comercial viejo de la Power Mac G3 parodiando un comercial de intel, exelente.

An Old Ad of the Power Mac G3 imitating an intel ad, it's a fact, so Cool

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• intel
• ad
• mac
• g3
• apple
• macintosh
• computers

[ni189]

No, Macs (at the time) did not use Intel chips because they were slow and crappy. Intel got better so Apple switched to them in 2005 , but at the time of this they used a chip made by IBM.

The IBM chip at the time was up to twice as fast as a pentium 2.

[avalableusername]

YES THATS BAD!!! thats horrible!! exchange it NOW!!!!

[Donaldk52796]

@PowerRider16 exactly lol

[Donaldk52796]

@angrymarketing5 how? this is the exact opposite

[angrymarketing5]

Proof that macs were never good.

[JackBandicootsBunker]

@JohnMLTX And me too.

Now, Apple could go back to RISC and use POWER chips, but they are only targeted at server customers, unfortunately.

[JackBandicootsBunker]

@BlueMicrowave G3 is a RISC architecture. Intel and AMD produce CISC chip architectures.

[JackBandicootsBunker]

@ni189 1-The AIM Alliance (Apple,IBM and Motorola) was getting fragmented, as the PowerPC RISC architecture stopped being viable, as there was no compatibility unlike CISC chips (Intel, AMD). IBM and Motorola left the program, and Apple had to choose Intel

2- Windows was not compatible with RISC architectures (ARM, PowerPC, POWER, but Windows 8 will support said architectures), but it was getting popular, and it was making all UNIX/LINUX platforms, including MacOS bite the dust in applications.

[JackBandicootsBunker]

@ni189 The AIM chips were still better than the NetBurst architecture, let me tell you. It wasn't Intel's new awakening in 2006 which made Apple switch platforms, but two reasons that are unrelated to Intel

[PowerRider16]

so back then g3 was to intel as intel is to amd now

[os3476]

@ikilluish Actually, it was the opposite. They advertised better performance *despite* lower clock speeds, IIRC.