Apple, Intel and PC Manufacturers

[SPUY767]

Sorry, it's not 2% anymore (never been, for that matter)...it's getting back to 6% and increasing...only some 4 companies in the world have more market share than that...Apple has already the best desktops in the world...the new Intel portables will be just the cherry on the cake.

I keep telling folks, the laptops are no slouch. Sure, right off the shelf, the dell may be faster, but give it 6 months. The computer in my office, the one I am writing this article on, is less than 6 months old, it has a 3 Ghz Proc and 512 of ram, and already, it runs slower than my friend's Mac Mini, and the powerbook is faster than the Mac Mini to begin with. It's the classical tortiose and hare paradigm. The Wintel machine may zip out of the gate, but shortly thereafter, unless meticulously cared for, in a manner that less that 5% of windows users do, it runs out of breath and slows to a crawl until windows is re-installed. The mac will keep running flawlessly for years with little or no maintenance aside from basic updates, most of which are done automatically.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Where it comes to Apple's relationship with Intel, I don't think market share matters much, if at all. Intel supplies hardware to dozens of PC manufacturers, many of them much smaller than Apple. Do any of the PC makers, small or large, actually get preferential treatment from Intel? Not really. I think we need to get our collective heads out of the AIM alliance days. They are over. Apple now buys their processors from the big chip factory. That part of Apple's future is out of their hands now.

 

[AidenShaw]

Yeah true. Am I right in thinking that the Pentium D is actually 2 seperate dies as opposed to a "dual core" die? Also the FSB gets shared between dies, so you have an 800MHz FSB effectively cut down to 400MHz etc.

Just like the 4 cores on the quad PowerMac essentially cut the 533 MHz memory to 133 MHz....

All MP systems have resource contention, and get less than 100% scaling with the additional processors.

Some extremely expensive systems with cross-bar switched memory can deliver full bandwidth to all processors.

All the reasonably priced systems (PPC970/AMD/Intel) do "over-commit" some resources, and you can find benchmarks (and real applications) that demonstrate this.

It usually boils down to a price-performance issue - if the system costs 30% more and is 60% faster, then it's a win. If it's 95% faster, but costs 120% more, that's most likely a lose.

 

[gnasher729]

Are we forgetting that Apple's market share is still around 4%? I hardly think that Apple has that kind of power with Intel yet.

You are using the wrong numbers. 4% market share of the whole computer market means 7% of Intel's market or 10% of AMD's. But consider that all the PowerMacs use dual-core processors and that Apple could easily sell them with dual dual-core processors, and the processor market share is more like 8 or 9 percent. And that's if Apple stays where it is, which is unlikely with 35% annual growth.

 

[IJ Reilly]

...assuming market share matters to Intel, which it doesn't. Intel sells processors to anybody who puts the ol' long green on the barrel-head.

Not sure I get why anybody worries about this at all. Apple will get what Intel has to sell -- no more, no less.

 

[maya]

...assuming market share matters to Intel, which it doesn't. Intel sells processors to anybody who puts the ol' long green on the barrel-head.

Not sure I get why anybody worries about this at all. Apple will get what Intel has to sell -- no more, no less.

Actually Apple has nothing to worry about, as if Intel does not live up to they deal, Apple will move onto AMD without informing Intel. Like they did with IBM.

Apple is sleeping in everyones bed.

 

[MacQuest]

<semantics>
But Apple is a PC manufacturer... ( [P]ersonal [C]omputer ).
</semantics>

<screw semantics> You know what I meant. Winblows based PC's. I shudder at the thought of Macs not being differentiated from those [P]iece o' [C]raps. </screw semantics>

 

[MacQuest]

My bet is Apple got the first batch for free

I hope they pass the savings on to us.

 

[maya]

I hope they pass the savings on to us.

Me too, I would take one free iBook or Mac Mini please.

 

[MacQuest]

Totally agree - but Apple couldn't pressure Intel into price reductions and receiving new processors first or add processor features that would benefit apple ( more than others ) - that kind of thing.

I think that the rules may not have been broken, but they may have been severely bent in order to accomodate the expedited unveiling of actual hardware in this relationship.

This is a HUGE win for Intel, especially in light of Sony, Nintendo, and even micrapsoft agreeing to all dump x86 processors on their gaming consoles to move to PowerPC. Do you remember what a big deal IBM made out of that in that leaked internal memo?

This is considered a vindication on Intels behalf, and they're gonna milk this architectural switch and the buzz around it for all it's worth.

 

[EricNau]

PC manufacturers are getting scared! - I love it.

 

[MacQuest]

You mean like AMD's current dual core offerings which kick the crap out of Intel's dual core chips from a performance perspective?

Yes, AMD's offerings are better at this point but they hardly "kick the crap out of Intel's dual core chips from a performance perspective".

He said "significantly" better meaning an undeniable superiority. <sarcasm>As in 51% compared to 48% of the vote = MANDATE! </sarcasm>

 

[Stella]

2006 will be an interesting journey for Apple...

 

[MacQuest]

Apple...can move over to AMD...

ENOUGH with this Apple to AMD BS already! Don't you guys remember that in January of '03 IBM gave AMD the use of their big fabrication plant in East Fishkill in order to start producing more x86 processors to compete with Intel?

Yes, I would have preferred Apple to use AMD, but at the same time I believe that the reason that Apple didn't even approach them was because the word that they were looking to move away from IBM would have undoubtedly leaked from AMD to IBM much sooner than a few hours before the announcement, which is how it happened.

Do you really think that IBM is gonna sit on it's big blue behind and let AMD start producing processors for the client they just lost, and not raise hell over it, or at least, since this is business, make AMD pay out the nose for it since it's using IBM's fabrication plant?

If I were IBM, I'd make it so monetarily unworthwile for Apple and AMD to work together that they wouldn't even think about it, and just urge AMD to make better processors than Intel to sell to everyone BUT Apple.

That said, I still wish Apple would use AMD.

Maybe it'll just take a some time for this to happen, but there would be huge drama around an Apple/AMD partnership at this time. And given the IBM/AMD collaborative fabrication effort, I would say that amount of time would be longer than any of us would like.

 

[MacQuest]

MacRumors Maturity Level for today: Yellow (Moderate levels of stupid comments based on pretty much nothing.)

Okay, let me put this simply so as to not make your head hurt so much by the process of thought.

Major distinguishing feature switch [hardware] suddenly puts competition's product offerings inline with your own product offerings.

Problem? I think so. Too much to process? Take an Advil.

 

[mdavey]

There apparently is a division setup for Apple at Intel.

Yes, and for every other strategic Intel customer. This isn't something that is unique to Apple or indeed to Intel. It is just good business.

 

[MacQuest]

Intel has already started to align its marketing-speak with Apple. Apple is the first major player to tout Intel's 'performance per watt.'

"Performance per watt" is the new "Megahertz Myth".

 

[MacQuest]

Apple has learned over the years that their strength is in software and industrial design.

Actually, innovative design overall. Their industrial design products would be, for one, the PowerMac which is a great example of industrial design.

The designs that have caught the consumers eye [iMac, mac mini, iPod, etc.] are hardly industrial. Innovative? Yes.

 

[MacQuest]

PC manufacturers are getting scared! - I love it.

Hehehe...they should be! They've all cut eachother's throats price-wise, and now they have a superior OS that they can't use, invading their coveted hardware territory that they all use.

The playing field will be level now in terms of hardware, leaving everything else to be the distinguishing factors... as in OS and design.

THEY'RE DEAD!

 

[MacQuest]

Maybe Apple and Intel can time it so Merom can be released in a new PowerBook at Apple expo Paris (Sept 12-16, 2006).

Personally I fully expect them to launch Merom for back to school sales. Which might mean Aug-Sept launch.

That's a pretty aggressive response of yours to "animefan_1" who also gives a September timeline. Although it has been shown that Apple will release, or as is too often the case, announce a product "when it is ready" as opposed to having to time it with special events.

Also, a high end processor like Merom would make sense in a Powerbook as "animefan_1" is hoping for, but I just don't see Apple rushing to put those processors into their consumer offerings to make a "back to school" deadline. Yes, I know that Powerbooks are sold to students a well, but I don't see that as a major factor for Apple putting a high end processor into it's products before it's ready.

Of course, if Apple consolidates it's consumer and professional lines [I kind of wish they would] into a single "notebook" line, then getting Merom into the line asap would be a priority.

I've said it before, I think that they may be doing just that and even dropping the "Power" moniker from their Pro line.

 

[egsaxy]

At around 5% market share, Apple is a drop in the ocean, Apple may be 4th largest PC manufacturer, but their market share is still low. I very much doubt Apple could 'bully' Intel.

Sorry if this is covered elsewhere in the board but, at 5 percent market share of all computers isn't that a big deal considering the other 95 percent is made up of several manufacturers. How big is dell's piece of the pie. Can't be too much more than 10 percent (if that high) How big of Intel's business will Apple be, prolly not much right now, but in the next 10 years. Huge. The other question is are we talking operating system market share, number of boxes in people's homes/offices/etc, or dollar amount? Each one of those three computer industry pies will look different with Apple's slice being different sized each time. Any way you look at it though Apple slice will be getting bigger and dell's, gateway's, and Tobshibas will shrink. Eventually we'll have an east meets west battle between Sony and Apple. But that day is years away.

my 2 cents

 

[steve_hill4]

Perhaps Apple will bully up the supply of the high end chips like they did when they grabed all the micro drives and high end flash memory for the iPods. Remember, companies like Dell only have a major marketshare because a large percentage of their PCs are low end stuff. Intel wants a high end player. Mac owners don't want Celerons powering their Macs and everyone knows it.

I think you hit the nail on the head there. Apple's share is growing again and Intel know it. Do you honestly think Dull would be anywhere near the major player it is if it sold the same quality machines Apple do? I doubt it. They rely on a small number of high end systems and the majority of low end systems, (with mid range making up the numbers). If Apple decided to broaden their range and target low end users, sure Mac Os would stick at about 10-15% share, but Apple would be alongside Dell as the largest hardware manufacturers. I have said since day one of the official announcement that Intel know this and want to keep Apple onside. They have had too much negative publicity of late and hanging onto that halo effect might do the chip manufacturer some good. They will want to keep Apple onside.

 

[MacQuest]

With MS using PPC chips for the XBox it wouldn't surprise me any at all if MS was doing the same thing with the PPC that Apple did with the Intel chip as far as porting to a different CPU..

That would still require all of the hardware manufacturers to switch to IBM and PowerPC. Not likely.

Remember, m$ only went to PowerPC because otherwise they would have gotten their butts kicked by Sony PS3 and Nintendo Revolution that were going PowerPC.

No, I see this as Apple invading the winblows market on their own hardware turf and leveling that playing field, so that the real differences between the OS's and design can take center stage.

 

[MacQuest]

Hopefully we'll see a Mac revolution in the next 2 years.

Yup. This Intel switch is a good pre-emptive strike on the winBlows lemmings.

D-Day is the first day when Leopard and XP SP3... I mean, Vista... are both available.

 

[MacQuest]

This is a dumb article...

ANYTHING written by Rob Enderle is gonna be. He's a Mac pundit and a winDohs Luser.