If intel macs fail, licensing will not be the future

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by furryrabidbunny, Jun 6, 2005.

  1. furryrabidbunny macrumors 6502

    furryrabidbunny

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Location:
    Mesa, AZ
    #1
    Dual booting Apple PCs will be. If the Intel moves fails, and we don't see an large boost in Market share, do you think apple would openly support and run ads about how you can dual boot into windows and mac (maybe even linux) to drive sales. Maybe in five years, we will see a migration assistant bringning over your whole windows os to your new apple computer?
     
  2. MOFS macrumors 65816

    MOFS

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    Durham, UK
    #2
    It all depends on IF it fails. I can't see why it would. I mean

    1) It would be easier to port x86 software to Macs (similar hardware et all). Games, specific software (CAD etc) will all be easily ported to Macs

    2) Business users would find it easier to migrate since they could still use the same hardware (assuming Apple don't implement some random code which would mean OS X would have to run on Apple-built computers).

    3) The computers WlLL be cheaper. Think about it. Dell produce more computers than Apple I believe on their own, so the cost per chip ratio will be cheaper for Apple to buy, hence the cost of the computers will go down. Similarly, standard PC graphic cards will be more easily used (so we won't have to wait aeons for the latest card to be slower than most PCs. :eek:

    With all these I can't see how Apple could fail. With a reasonable marketing campaign, Apple could easily gain 10% market share. If it comes to dual-booting PCs being an option, then the Apple computers that we know and love will be on death's door...
     
  3. MontyZ macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    #3
    Based on the Keynote, it doesn't appear OSX will run on anything but Apple-branded computers even after the Intel switch.
     
  4. admanimal macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    #4
    Switching to x86 generally does not make porting Windows apps to OS X any easier. The main difficulty lies with the fact that Windows and OS X use entirely different programming interfaces, and have different design conventions regarding the user interface, preferences, etc. which all must be reworked if a piece of software is being ported. This is all completely independent of the CPU.
     
  5. MOFS macrumors 65816

    MOFS

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    Durham, UK
    #5
    But wouln't some of the coding for the CPU and the graphics card be quite similar on both systems? I admit I'm no expert.
     
  6. furryrabidbunny thread starter macrumors 6502

    furryrabidbunny

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Location:
    Mesa, AZ
    #6
    i honestly don't think this will fail... i was just throwing out a what if. Also, I am not talking about running windows apps in Mac OS. Apps would look horrible and would probably run poor. I am talking about a built in option when you install mac os to have multiple partions (in an easy mac way, i know this is possible now) to run your migrated windows os.
     
  7. MontyZ macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    #7
    Not really. They are still two different OS/coding platforms. The only similarity is the processor chip. That's all.
     
  8. yellow Moderator emeritus

    yellow

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #8
    I've got to dispute this one, because we still won't have DirectX for Mac OS X. Games will still be a pain in the ass to port (re-written for OpenGL?).
     

Share This Page