i know this has been argued to death but despite reading quite a few articles i am still confused. keen amateur here so sorry for my ignorance when apple shifted away from PPC i had it in my mind that one of the key reasons was that the chips were getting too hot to put into a nice slim laptop. Though everything i have read suggests that the RISC PPC was much more power efficient than the increasingly bloated and amended CISC architecture of the x86. Also, Pentiums around this time were famed for being hot. Also, why are ARM's RISC based processors so much more suite to mobile efficiency than say, PPC. You would have thought the the much more mature PPC could have been the basis of a great mobile line. Basically, where did PPC go wrong. I have heard of many advantages of the architecture, such as quantity of registers, simplicity, but in the end it lost the war. thanks.