Why didn't Mac choose AMD after dropping PowerPC?

Actually the core duo is not overheating per se. What happens is that Apple putting it into a thin metal case with a small thermal solution results in a localized part of that case getting very warm under some heavy usage scenarios. As to battery life I get 5.5 to 6 hours under normal loads, so that is not an issue. A Turion would get just as hot (perhaps hotter as Core Duo has a better temperature to power ratio.).

Also, Core Duo outperforms Turion already, and when Merom comes out (which uses the same socket so no motherboard upgrade needed) AMD will be considerably inferior (as Merom is the mobile Conroe, which itself is wiping the floor with AMDs latest).

Simply put, AMD is not the best vendor for mobile processors. Intel has been and still is.

Intel > AMD for notebooks....

Apple went with Intel because the Intel core duo package (cpu, chipset, wifi, optional gpu) uses less power than AMD64 + 3rd party chipset + 3rd party wifi. Turion x2 may use less power than a Core Duo, but the total Intel solution uses less power than Turion + via chipset + broadcom/atheros wifi.

Since its a pain to deal with four suppliers Apple is sticking with Intel for desktops too. Intel can sell them everything they need in one go. Apple would have to deal with three vendors for AMD (amd, chipset, wifi chip).

Since OSX is not 100% 64-bit yet, it really doesn't matter if Intel is still 32-bit.

Its that simple.

FWIW, the MBP overheats because it doesn't have any air intake vents on the bottom or left/right sides of the chassis to keep the GPU cool. No clue why they don't put vents on the bottom, I guess it messes up their aesthetics. The x1600 probably uses more power and generates more heat than the CPU.

Apple didn't go with AMD because AMD can't offer the same capacity as Intel.

One of the big problems Apple had with IBM and Motorola was that Apple could never give them exact numbers for the number of chips they'd need so a lot of times IBM and Motorola wouldn't manufacture enough and when it looked like the supplies would run out Apple would have to wait for manufacturing to get back into full production which would cause delays in shipping systems.

AMD has always had this problem and they don't even have the huge computer makers like Dell constantly needing their chips. Apple would be needing at least 1.5 to 2 million chips a year and AMD just can't offer that as well as keep up with all it's other commitments.

Intel, on the other hand, has the capacity to supply every major computer maker as well as retail stores, etc, and rarely has supply problems.

Plus, aside from that, you can bet your ass that Intel offered Apple a majorly sweet deal to use them over AMD. Intel knows that, unlike Microsoft, Apple will take advantage of every feature that can be crammed into the new chips, so Apple is actually a better user of Intel chips than any normal PC company. And you know Intel gave Apple access to it's roadmap far in advance to help them decide. Intel is really turning itself around with the Pentium M based chips.

No, Intel has much better library support than AMD. That's the main reason: Intel's resources.

Apple went with Intel because they provided all of the resources that AMD could not, Intel can provide the CPU, Chipsets, manufacturing capacity the technical, developer support and design know-how that Apple needs all under one company. If Apple were to go with AMD, they would have had to deal with seperate suppliers and do most of the developement work themselves.

I am guessing this is why the MacBook Pro uses EFI instead of BIOS to bootup, and there is Firewire 400 instead of 800, and Express Card instead of PC Card, what I am trying to say is that Intel provided Apple with all of the help they needed to bring the MacBook Pro to market as quickly as they did.

Intel can provide the chips that Apple needs to make the laptops, AMD has had the same problem that Motorola has, that is yield per waffers. AMD would not have been able to supply them with all of the chips that they need, and keep all of their other customers happy.

Thank you Shadow and xx3 for saying the exact same thing I just said.

xx3, however, adds more information to the subject—unlike shadow—and it's information I didn't even think about. Intel not only provides the CPUs but, unlike AMD, also provides a complete solution as well as the ability to keep supply up with demand.

I just wish the complete Intel solution didn't extend to putting shitty integrated graphics into the Minis—and I'm going to assume the Intel iBooks as well.

By the way, the just-released 17" MBP has both Firewire 400 and 800.

different business models for intel and AMD. intel likes to run its entire platform and sometimes grudgingly gives out licenses for its chipsets and such. AMD on the other hand does development when they have to, to launch a new CPU for instance, but invites 3rd party chipset and motherboard makers to join at will. one would think that the openly competitive model would produce a better mobile solution, but as it sits, intel's centrino platform has ha dlower power and better performance at the same time. pound for pound the turion is very competitive in performance w/ the Pentium Ms, but it loses in the overall platform's power consumption, and when it comes to making notebooks which are now over 50% of computers sold,that's a big selling point to lose out on.

that, and pretty much everything else that's been said.

I noticed that apple uses atheros wifi. not the intel 2905( I dont know the core duo wifi number lol) or above wifi card

the only bad thing is that the processor in the macbook is permanently affixed to the motherboard meaning no upgrading to merom for those who already have a macbook...

Apple still uses their Airport wireless. I don't know if it's still a card or if it's part of the motherboard now though.

I'm surprised Apple didn't just get the whole centrino package and keep calling it Airport.

also, those claims for core duo's overheating are false. only when windows is laoded onto the machines does it get hot. ask any of the macbook pro owners on the forum. im not a mac fan personally, but i respect them for their looks and uniqueness. aw still pwns them

Ok ... I'll give u another problem to ressolve ... I'm addicted to apple's products .... I mean - I love them .... I have never been that much materialistic but I cant help it .... I love them - they are soooo coool and Mac OS X is soooo awsome. Plz help me .....owww and Steve Jobs is far times better public speaker than Bill gates and I love watch the new events from apple .... Its so much fun..... plz dont tell me its to late to get treatemnet

Ouch. The 3915 wifi card is significantly cooler and less power hungry than the older 2200 or 2915 or the Atheros. The Atheros is a good card though.

I wonder if Intel did not have OSX drivers ready in time?

Marketing

APPLE choose Intel over AMD for a simple reason: MARKETING. Of course all of the other reasons you guys are posting are valid, but in the end is a matter of MARKETING. INTEL is much better positioned in the market than AMD. In the imaginary colective of most people and not only in America, Intel is better, faster and more reliable. This characteristics are very much what identifies Apple. On the other hand AMD is seen as middle class processors + cheap. Of course this is a misconception of AMD which makes excellent processors and have a good niche in the market. Another thing is that AMD is not fully supported by big companies like DELL, HP, GATEWAY, etc. SO again people will preffer a well known and recognized chips developer: INTEL. Remember IBM+MOTOROLA are huge emporiums Apple couldn't tell their customers they were going to switch to a "smaller" company.

20" iMac Duo Core 2.0
2 Gigs of RAM
256 ATI X1600

Very true...

I could be wrong but when I installed windows (boot camp) the drivers for the wifi was for the atheros 5006x, I was checking if it was the 2xxx or the newer 3xxx or any intel centrino wifi but it loads up atheros 5006x, weird.

I am guessing that all of the WIFI cards used on the Intel CoreDuo and Solo laptops use the same reference design, different companies manufacture different cards, but if they use common specified components, follow the IEEE standards and built around the same card design.

Ex. MSI, Intel, Atheros, ASUS, Nova Tech and others all make similar cards, but they are really the same WIFI cards in design, they just look a little different.

As for the naming of the cards, any company can slap a nice sounding name on a piece of hardware, just as long as they don't violate any trademarks or copyrights.

atheros cards are better quality cards. i say this from experience of using everything from prism2 to intel 2200.