cb911 said:
But you're using Macs with even CRAPPIER G4's and G5's, so what do you care if Macs get faster, cheaper chips in enough quantity to ship products when they are SUPPOSED to ship?!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Really switching to Intel!!??
- Thread starter dodonutter
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But you're using Macs with even CRAPPIER G4's and G5's, so what do you care if Macs get faster, cheaper chips in enough quantity to ship products when they are SUPPOSED to ship?!
dicklacara said:
Guys, be sued for what? A poor business decision? Perhaps his decision was that the personal relationship between executives at Apple and IBM were so bad that a split was inevitable. Perhaps Jobs was making a bluf to IBM and IBM called his bluf. Jobs then decides not to crawl back to IBM 60% for business reasons and 40% for pride.
Anyway, even if Jobs made this decision because he just hates an exec at IBM, he couldn't be sued successfully. He would just claim (and, likely, believe) that he was truly making a business decision. And that is probably partially correct (he is moving his business to one of the largest corporations in the world, after all).
Noo--oooo-oo!!
QUALITY QUALITY QUALITY, actually CONTROL over quality. I love my crap-homebuild PC for what it is, but its not a reliable tool for me like my Mac. If OSX goes x86, at least hopefully Apple will still be the only ones or one of the very few actually building the systems. If not, wouldn't that mean TONS of new drivers, compatibility issues, ect, wearing out the developement team? Wouldn't this neccessitate a (at least a temporary) cut back on quality control, given Apple would no longer have total control over hardware. Bad news for people who are happy to shell out and sacrifice speed and universal compatibility for exactly what Apple offers; quality and fantastic niche compatibility.
This may actually accellerate my new mac purchase, I want one of the last few top-quality all-Apple machines!!
QUALITY QUALITY QUALITY, actually CONTROL over quality. I love my crap-homebuild PC for what it is, but its not a reliable tool for me like my Mac. If OSX goes x86, at least hopefully Apple will still be the only ones or one of the very few actually building the systems. If not, wouldn't that mean TONS of new drivers, compatibility issues, ect, wearing out the developement team? Wouldn't this neccessitate a (at least a temporary) cut back on quality control, given Apple would no longer have total control over hardware. Bad news for people who are happy to shell out and sacrifice speed and universal compatibility for exactly what Apple offers; quality and fantastic niche compatibility.
This may actually accellerate my new mac purchase, I want one of the last few top-quality all-Apple machines!!
I agree, it would be great but it's far fetched... But it's an interesting thought!jiggie2g said:
Now that C-Net and WSJ have sent us to the Twilight Zone, there's always one more possibility out there... And the real story may be a path none of us has even thought of.
Could you not do that?loib said:
Maybe this is why we're not seeing Apple going crazy with advertising for Tiger just yet.
I can see the commercials now.
I can see the commercials now.
OS X Tiger
Mac + PC
Mac + PC
Apple is going to have a hard time convincing people that their hardware is still worth the higher price, if they use x86 architecture.
Are you really going to pay $500+ more for an Apple PowerMac with equivalent x86 specs to a cheaper Dell just to run Mac OS X?
PowerMac/Intel Dual-Core Processor 3.2Ghz/Mac OS X - $2499
Dell Dimension/Intel Dual-Core Processor 3.2Ghz/Windows Longhorn - $1699
The Mac faithful *might* be willing, but average consumers are not going to see it that way.
The PowerPC still remains a selling point when purchasing an Apple Computer. Despite the performance war, you are still purchasing something *different* than what is offered by other PC manufacturers.
An x86-based architecture will be very difficult for Apple to market, unless they offer something not available to other PC manufacturers that can undercut Apple in price.
Are you really going to pay $500+ more for an Apple PowerMac with equivalent x86 specs to a cheaper Dell just to run Mac OS X?
PowerMac/Intel Dual-Core Processor 3.2Ghz/Mac OS X - $2499
Dell Dimension/Intel Dual-Core Processor 3.2Ghz/Windows Longhorn - $1699
The Mac faithful *might* be willing, but average consumers are not going to see it that way.
The PowerPC still remains a selling point when purchasing an Apple Computer. Despite the performance war, you are still purchasing something *different* than what is offered by other PC manufacturers.
An x86-based architecture will be very difficult for Apple to market, unless they offer something not available to other PC manufacturers that can undercut Apple in price.
I'm no engineer and no very little about the ins and outs of computer architecture (so please don't flame me - too much!), but would it be possible for Apple to use both a PPC chip and an X86 chip together in their models? The idea being that the PPC runs OSX and existing Mac apps, while the X86 takes care of Windows apps - somehow without the need for Windows... This is probably fantasy and completely out of the question, but just thought I'd ask.
Public statements that have a negative on Apple sales and affect the value of a shareholder's investment... for 1! Irresponsible dissipation of Apple's Assets... for 2!Beck446 said:
Class Action 101!
doowrehs said:
That should work (although I don't know too much more about it than you do) but the downside is if Macs can run Windows apps there will be even less reason for anyone to develop Mac-specific apps. And if all that's left is Windows apps running on the x86, the PPC seems a little redundent.
Mr Maui said:Thanks for the advice ... I will try to figure our how to do that. Is there an easier way than opening two browser windows and copying from multiple posts, then pasting into one to respond to more than one post in a single response? I'm always open to making everyone's life easier ... including my own.
I usually just start off by cutting+pasting the post(s) I want to quote, then reply to the final one. I'll reply to it, then use
tags to quote the rest that I want to mention. Just keeps thing a little neater. But yes, there are times when I quote a couple in a row as well.
This was actually done about 10 years ago. We had OrangeMicro boards for the people in accounting to run an accounting app in a company where everyone had macs on their desktop. They worked OK. There wasn't a great deal of integration between the two platforms and it was fairly expensive. We finally just bought cheap PC's and KVM switches rather than continue to buy the proprietary, expensive boards. In this age of blade servers, the add-in board might be cheaper to produce, but it would still likely be more cost-effective to buy a $300 Dell.doowrehs said:
Is Steve a LIAR???
Read this...
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/new...1_N23218517_RTRIDST_0_TECH-APPLE-INTEL-DC.XML
Apple always has a lot of projects in the works and could be evaluating Intel chips for use in future products, Bajarin said, adding that when Apple co-founder and chief executive Steve Jobs was asked Sunday night at a Wall Street Journal technology conference whether Apple would use Intel chips, "Jobs basically said no."
"He said, 'We've had talks with Intel' and that's about it," Bajarin said.
So we can all now assume Steve is a LIAR!!!!!!!
Read this...
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/new...1_N23218517_RTRIDST_0_TECH-APPLE-INTEL-DC.XML
Apple always has a lot of projects in the works and could be evaluating Intel chips for use in future products, Bajarin said, adding that when Apple co-founder and chief executive Steve Jobs was asked Sunday night at a Wall Street Journal technology conference whether Apple would use Intel chips, "Jobs basically said no."
"He said, 'We've had talks with Intel' and that's about it," Bajarin said.
So we can all now assume Steve is a LIAR!!!!!!!
Were IBM processors shipping back when Steve jobs announced that Apple was switching from Motorola? I don't recall that being the case. I believe the announcement said they would be using IBM for their next generation chips, but that Motorola would also continue to be used during the transition. Moto is still used to this date.dicklacara said:
Mac sales did not stop in the aforementioned Motorola to IBM scenario, what makes you think they would stop this time?
SJ has been working diligently to stop any such leaks from making it out of Apple inner circles with lawsuits (i.e. Think Secret), though I concur that it would be tough to keep it under wraps, thus this possible leak of information.
Steve's "obligation" to shareholders is to keep them happy by making them lots and lots of money. He is successfully doing that. Shareholders (real ones) don't care what methods he uses to make them money. He can't be sued or go to prison for not informing shareholders in advance that he is changing the direction of the company to continue to make them money. His track record speaks for itself. He brought Apple back from the dead and has made a lot of investors a lot of money with his judgement and decision-making. I, as a loyal Apple customer and Mac user, hated the fact that he spent so much time and money growing the iPod and iTunes markets and seemed to have lost sight of the market that made his company, but as an investor in Apple stock, his judgement in these areas has made me plenty, and I'll continue to trust his judgement with Apple until he shows he can no longer handle the job. Just my opinion.
dicklacara said:
To win what? The OS wars? Right now Apple is like a flea on Microsoft's back. Mac is far less then 5%. I rememeber the 20% days. Then the 10% then the 8%.
Apple needs to do somehting AWESOME.
I have thought for a long time that we are at a computing crossroads. All it takes is for one really great OS to overthrow MS. The problem is of course several fold. A mature OS. Something that is not user abusive (linux and Winsucks). Apple is the one company that could really put a dent in MS.
This is very possiable... look at firefox
I hope that Steve Jobs REALLY sees the light. There was a rumor a few months ago (on this site) that 4 PC vendors where asking Jobs for OS X on their Machines. HP and Sony would be 2 of them considering their tie to Apple. If Apple switches to x86, it means that ALL apps released for OS X after the switch will be ready for an Apple, HP, Sony or whatever brand-OS X computer! Hey, if you put a PowerBook next to an HP notebook, you'd still want the PowerBook, but you'd get a faster computer, a computer with many more applications and games than today, and since the competition will be more intense, lower prices.
MS reputation has NEVER been lower, Apple's (and especially OS X's) and never been HIGHER. Tiger was voted 3rd best PC product of the year by PC World magazine out of the top 100 (Firefox was #1, google #2). Everyone with a PC aound me keep asking me questions about Tiger because every PC magazine gave it astounding reviews. There has NEVER been a better time for Apple to strike back and regain it's market share.
If done properly, this plan could easily bring OS X from it's current 4% market share to 20%. The benefit sto us all will be tremendous.
Wait till you see a 2.8GHz P4 Mac mini at $400 or 3.2 GHz P4 Powerbook @ $1,200, then try to complain.
MS reputation has NEVER been lower, Apple's (and especially OS X's) and never been HIGHER. Tiger was voted 3rd best PC product of the year by PC World magazine out of the top 100 (Firefox was #1, google #2). Everyone with a PC aound me keep asking me questions about Tiger because every PC magazine gave it astounding reviews. There has NEVER been a better time for Apple to strike back and regain it's market share.
If done properly, this plan could easily bring OS X from it's current 4% market share to 20%. The benefit sto us all will be tremendous.
Wait till you see a 2.8GHz P4 Mac mini at $400 or 3.2 GHz P4 Powerbook @ $1,200, then try to complain.
Some of you folks act as this is the end of the world. Who cares if Tiger runs on an IBM chipset or an Intel chipset?
As long as it is still stable and performs to the standards that were set before the switch, who really gives a rats a$$? The bottom line is that Apple makes the best operating system and the sleekest hardware out there, and as long as it still operates the same running on Intel chips, I don't care.
Some of you really need to chill out...
As long as it is still stable and performs to the standards that were set before the switch, who really gives a rats a$$? The bottom line is that Apple makes the best operating system and the sleekest hardware out there, and as long as it still operates the same running on Intel chips, I don't care.
Some of you really need to chill out...
Hour by hour I'm becoming more and more aware that this Apple-Intel thing is most likely going down. It's a weird feeling. Many pros, many cons; just don't know what to make of all this.
Another thing that's really being drilled into my head is the fact that this news leak has to be intentional. No way the timing is coincidence. In which case, who knows how long Apple and Intel have really been in bed together. Is Apple that dumb that they would announce this shift without being able to say, "here! here's a piece of Apple-Intel goodness for you guys to look at."
Another thing that's really being drilled into my head is the fact that this news leak has to be intentional. No way the timing is coincidence. In which case, who knows how long Apple and Intel have really been in bed together. Is Apple that dumb that they would announce this shift without being able to say, "here! here's a piece of Apple-Intel goodness for you guys to look at."