Mac ... as a subset of Intel PC family.

Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by delton05, Aug 5, 2005.

  1. delton05 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2003
    Location:
    at arm's length
    #1
    I've been shocked by people on other forums and PC friends referring to the Intel (Mactel) machines as: the Intel Apple, and the Intel Mac ... like the Intel PC and AMD PC. I guess its consistant, but still we might have to get used to being referred to as just another type of Intel PC...

    I know the name Mactel has people for and against ... however, even friends who have PCs refer to the Intel Mac, as well, the Intel Mac

    They seem to think of the Apple Mac as the power PC based, soon to be obsolete variety.

    I wonder if Apple's marketing, when the new Intel Macs come out, will be enough to reassert the Apple Mac name....I doubt it

    I think Apple won't tolerate this and be forced to abandon the Mac name! Maybe it will be time to commit the Mac to history? What do you think?
     
  2. liketom macrumors 601

    liketom

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2004
    Location:
    Lincoln,UK
    #2
    not too sure that it maters - Mactel , intel mac mac intel whatever

    it will still be a Powermac or Powerbook but just with a intel chip in it
     
  3. stoid macrumors 601

    stoid

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    #3
    Well it is definitely still a Mac because it runs Mac OS X!
     
  4. delton05 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2003
    Location:
    at arm's length
    #4
    Yeah, but it seems to me that the Intel name is surplanting the place of the Apple name! Thats not good!
     
  5. liketom macrumors 601

    liketom

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2004
    Location:
    Lincoln,UK
    #5
    i think it will be like the powermacs now IBM G5 CPU

    Powermac was not called a IBM now was it ?
     
  6. delton05 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2003
    Location:
    at arm's length
    #6
    Thats what I was thinking too, however this seems a much bigger deal ... and as I say, it seems the PC world see it as an Intel Mac
     
  7. delton05 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2003
    Location:
    at arm's length
    #7
    Just doing some quick google searches:

    "Intel Mac" ...8,740,000 pages

    "Mactel" ... 213,000 pages

    "Apple Intel Mac" ... 4,440,00 pages
     
  8. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #8
    It's just "Mac", as it has been since 1984.

    We call it an "IBM-Mac" or "Big Blue Mac" when the G5 was announced, did we?

    How about "Freescale Mac" for the current G4 machines?

    The hardware is still packaged by Apple, and the OS is written by Apple, so in my book it's still just Mac.

    I never liked the pundits who have a habit of inventing catchphrases and buzzwords for everything.
     
  9. pubwvj macrumors 68000

    pubwvj

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2004
    Location:
    Mountains of Vermont
    #9
    This is a total non-issue. They are Apple Macs based on the Intel processor just like they've been Apple Macs based on the PowerPC processor. Big deal.
     
  10. MisterMe macrumors G4

    MisterMe

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    USA
    #10
    There is no commercial Macintoshes based on Intel processors. The Intel name cannot possibly supplant the Apple name. Look: within the Macintosh community, there are two major unofficial nicknames for the forthcoming Intel-based Macs. They are Mactel and Macintel. These nicknames serve the purpose of distinguishing the Intel-based Macs from the PPC-based Macs in discussions about our favorite platform. What some Intel fanboy calls them is of no consequence.
     
  11. delton05 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2003
    Location:
    at arm's length
    #11
    ... not yet, so what's your point?

    .

    .. already is ... Apple 's branding is doing the ultimate switch, from powerPC to X86 ... unbelievably, considering all the arguments I've had putting down X86 to PCers.

    These names, to my mind, just dillute the Mac name and heritage ... I really believe we will have (and need) a brand new name, with no Mac in it ... and why, not? If we can accept having to become Intel fanboys, ourselves, a name change should help accept that


    What the other 98% think does affect me everyday ... because they are calling it the "Intel Mac" NOT Apple Mac, or Macintel ...they know the difference, alright, and they're rubbing it in!

    Look, apart from the operating system, the Macintel will be using basically all PC technology... I get that all the time ... USB, PCI,PCI-E, DDR, DVI, and now x86...and multibutton mouse!

    I also get hassled about how SJ finally debunked the megahertz myth he preached about, himself! ... by using Intel!

    The way things are going, I would not be surprised if OSX ultimately just becomes a Vista front end to vista, because of economies ... after all the changes, I now believe anything and everything is possible.

    It doesn't matter about what Mac users think, we just have to grin and bare the ultimate switch...and learn to love Intel!
     
  12. greatdevourer macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    #12
    People did the exact same thing about the PPC move. "ah, it isn't a Mac anymore, as it doesn't have a 680x0"
     
  13. delton05 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2003
    Location:
    at arm's length
    #13
    Yeah, but the BIG difference is that X86 has always been the opposition (now it's not) and Apple's choice of CPU/architecture has always been "better" and we've been told we think different.

    Now we're a bunch of apologists in a state of denial where we say to each other, get over it .... great!

    Oh, and now we got a me too mouse, 20 years late, because SJ has always said Macs don't need one, and a lot of people, including me, believed him.

    I'm afraid I don't hold SJ in the esteem I once did. I'd rather b different, but he's the same as all the other computer gurus ... barf...

    Don't bother telling me ... I think I'm finally, getting over it ... yah!, isn't X86 great!!!!
     
  14. $MacUser$ macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2005
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #14
    I really dont care so much what the Macintels are branded as. As long as Apple produces stylish machines with a powerful OS that works seemlessly with the hardware then who cares? I think all this macintel BS is propagated by nerds like us who flock to macrumors and similar sights. The rest of the consumer population, who makes up the bulk of mac sales, could give a hoot about steve lying and Mac not being faithful to its ethos. Consistenty throughout Apple's history they have strayed from their rock solid claims. Case in point, the '84 Super Bowl commercial we are all very familiar with...Big Brother was supposed to represent IBM, the hammer woman Apple. Eight years later they formed the AIM alliance that is still, to one degree or other, in effect today. if anything, the Intel switch is history repeating itself. Apple tells its customers what they want to hear in the moment. In the end, they're a business like any other, scewed ethics and all.
     
  15. TMA macrumors 6502a

    TMA

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    Location:
    England
    #15
    I find it really interesting seeing peoples responses to this new transition stage we are about to enter. Some see it with great negativity, as if the processors itself is the core to all Apple computers. Others see it as some sort of evolution.

    I personally don't think it will be that big a deal. There's no reason to hold out on mac purchases until Intel based macs are out. In 3-5 years time everyone who uses macs now will just upgrade to the new machines when their needs dictate. That's all there is to it really.
     

Share This Page