Big Blue & Apple Computer

Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by Mr. MacPhisto, Feb 14, 2003.

  1. Mr. MacPhisto macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2003
    #1
    I've found it funny for a while now that it seems that IBM will be powering the Mac in the future. 20 years ago, IBM introduced the PC in an attempt to take over the market and knock Apple out of the lead. They did manage to knock Apple out, but they never managed to dominate the market as they had hoped to do. IBM wanted to originally follow Apple and design the whole system on their own, but they ran out of time and had to get other people to make parts - Intel for chips, teac for floppy drives, MS for an OS. This allowed for clones because of IBM's rush to get the PC to market, concerned that Apple would be too strong and too established if they had waited for a year to put the PC out.

    Now, Apple and IBM may be developing plans to work together. IBM is a very innovative company, as is Apple, and is larger than anybody else in the industry. They're not a big player on the consumer side anymore - but their corporate end is huge.

    My question is, besides the new 970 and the IBM G3s (one of which is residing in my iBook), is there any possiblity of other chips being manufactured to suit low-end needs once the high-end goes to the 970. Or will everything be moved over by this time next year? I have a feeling that Apple would like to cut-ties with Motorola because of what they've done in the recent past - and Moto just introduced a new G4 for "embedded" apps - meaning they are not designed for a Mac with loadable software.

    Another interesting thing is Apple production. Will IBM cease construction of PCs - at least those sold to the public - and start building Macs and putting marketing $$$ behind Apple? Basically, will IBM help manufacture Apple's own computers and help them infiltrate more of the market. I've been suspicious of this for a couple months now as well. Why would this be a benefit? Because Macs would likely work better with the servers IBM is selling to companies. I also have a suspicion that the X-Serve was introduced to work with IBM stock and prepare for this partnership. Some friends I've talked to over at IBM (used to work for them) seem to indicate that they've heard about talks between IBM and Apple - so many something big will happen.
     
  2. ftaok macrumors 601

    ftaok

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    Location:
    East Coast
    #2
    Re: Big Blue & Apple Computer

    This isn't entirely true. One of the main reasons that IBM separated the PC from the OS was because of what happened in the 50's and 60's. Back in the mainframe days, IBM built the mainframes and the software. The government was close to declaring this a monopoly. When the PC revolution was obvious, IBM decided that they shouldn't test fate and got MS to develop the OS for them. The rest is history.

    I don't think that Apple will cut ties with Moto. I think they'll keep the G4 around for the iMacs and laptops. And speaking of the "embedded" G4s. When the 1ghz 7455's were intro'd, Moto referred to them as embedded chips as well. Apple had asked Moto to keep quiet until Apple released the PowerMac about a month later. We will definately see the 7457's in Macs. They are pin compatible with the 7455's.
     
  3. nuckinfutz macrumors 603

    nuckinfutz

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2002
    Location:
    Middle Earth
    #3
    Apple will keep using the G4 processors while they remain financially viable.

    However a 90 Nanometer 970 is going to eat into the potential sales of the midrange to high end G4s.

    IBM has been there to bail out Apple on more than just this time. The original PPC 601 was a purely IBM design. I'm fed up with Motorola. Apple and IBM can make a nice duo and the 970 is only the start. Rumors are already surfacing about the Power5 and how it will scale from Desktops to Big Iron.

    Mac users don't fully realize how different Macs will be in just 3-4 years.
     
  4. sparkleytone macrumors 68020

    sparkleytone

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2001
    Location:
    Greensboro, NC
    #4
    The new ones, I assure you, mostly do. This is one of the reasons I switched. The hardware inferiority is more perceived than actual, in an everyday computing sense. The OS is YEARS beyond what other companies are even planning. When combined with future hardware, the 'sluggish' OS X will be recognized for the (r)evolution it started. Hopefully :)
     
  5. ELYXR macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2002
    Location:
    Seattle
    #5
    I couldn't agree with you more. I just switched my whole design business over to Apple Computers after holding out for a long time. OSX is simple, efficient, stable and puts you in the drivers seat. Windows XP is sooooo bloated with unneeded garbage... and Luna??? I mean please! Aqua is so revolutionary it's scary! :eek:

    I really appreciate how Mac OSX bridges the gap between Linux and Windows... really giving you in the best of both worlds. Microsoft Office + a rock-solid Unix operating system with a gorgeous user interface... it's brilliant!!!
     

Share This Page