Originally Posted by devguy
Why's that? I know that rumors said Apple would be using Llano chips in their MacBook Air, but due to a poor GlobalFoundries process, they canned the idea and continued with Intel. Now, with Ivy Bridge graphics appearing to perform pretty well, they'll likely can all discrete graphics on most of their entry level products. But why does that warrant a GPU manufacturer switch for their other products? I don't recall nVidia and Apple being on the best terms after their mobile g92 chips caused quite a lot of warranty stir, which is a big part of why they went AMD exclusive in the first place...?
Wasn't all because of GF. The problem was, Apple is CPU centric still. They wanted to dump high end CPUs in their low end machines like everyone else is doing. APU tech, while good on graphics, wasn't there yet. Plus it would have called into question more of their pricing schemes since APUs are rocking the budget segments.
The company that spent so long debunking the Mhz is everything myth is now the same company that couldn't figure out how to sell a Mac that relies more on GPU strength than CPU.
Intel just won out this time because of CPU performance alone.
I imagine Apple will continue with Intel for at least another gen. Then we'll see if Mac people do the same thing they did years ago and complain Apple into getting decent graphics. If AMD had given Trinity tech instead of Llano, I imagine Apple might have used AMD.
I'll still hope for it. But more and more Apple is selling me out of ever buying another Mac. For the Mac apps I still use, I figure I just gotta find similar software on PC side. When I finally do...so long Apple.