Some people are saying that Apple's switch to Intel is admitting defeat, but that really isn't the case. Apple was never competing with Intel, IBM and Motorola were. So really, it is IBM that has lost, not Apple. Apple's competitor is M$ and this move must really have Bill Gates' panties up in a bunch. This will make Apple's portable line in particular even more competitive with machines running Windows, and the only direction Apple's marketshare is going to go now is up. I'm not saying I'm entirely happy with the switch, but it is no doubt the best move for Apple if they want to continue to increase market share.
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.
The real loser here is Microsoft
- Thread starter jamdr
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah these are the first signs that Apple really is a "software" company and it will phase out computer hardware eventually
Hoef said:
I sure as hell hope not! Half of the reason I buy macs is because of their design! I would be disgusted if new macs shipped in beige pc boxes.
As much as I like to think about Bill Gates getting the power-wedgie he richly deserves, I don't think this move on Apple's part is going to do it -- unless the new Mactel computers sell huge and cut into Microsoft's market share. Microsoft is always going to have more influence over at Intel and so are the big PC OEMs. Apple might be the darlings at Intel now (look what followed me home -- can I keep it?), but just wait a year or so. Apple will be fighting for attention at Intel just like they fought for attention at IBM -- a lot, with little success.
killuminati said:
PCs dont have to be shipped in beige boxes either. You can really mod PCs up with some kick ass boxes. Just hope the stabiltiy of macs arent compromised.
I have to give credit to Apple of course, but the PC case market has largely become diversified in the last 7-10 years. From ultra ugly 486 truly "beige" cases, to the clean designs of early Coolermaster and Lian Li boxes.
However, if you have been paying attention at all, casemakers have caved in and started producing "riced" up cases in the last 2 years. Lian Li's G5 imitation for one is a huge black eye. Thermaltake's blatant copy of Coolermasters superior design. And of course, the plainly outright ugly trash from various white box OEMs. AMD or Intel alike, they think people will buy trash.
Unfortunately, there are enough 10-15 year olds who would pester their parents to buy them a bright red, metallic looking kludge that calls itself a case.
However, if you have been paying attention at all, casemakers have caved in and started producing "riced" up cases in the last 2 years. Lian Li's G5 imitation for one is a huge black eye. Thermaltake's blatant copy of Coolermasters superior design. And of course, the plainly outright ugly trash from various white box OEMs. AMD or Intel alike, they think people will buy trash.
Unfortunately, there are enough 10-15 year olds who would pester their parents to buy them a bright red, metallic looking kludge that calls itself a case.
Maxiseller said:What are you on about? Most of Apple's revenue comes from Hardware...
I'd thought it came from ipods and not computer hardware
The switch to Intel could simultaneously help and hurt Microsoft.
It will hurt Microsoft every time a customer switches to the Mac from the Wintel world now that the processor speed can no longer be used as an excuse.
It will hurt Microsoft every time a new customer falls in love with OS X and begins to convince other people they should switch off Windows too.
It will hurt Microsoft every time the "super PC geeks" and "Intel lovers" who already hate Windows and run Linux or Unix instead decide they can at least give Apple a serious look now that Intel Inside is an Apple reality.
It will help Microsoft every time someone mistakenly assumes (as many here and other places already have) that if both Apple and PC vendors use Intel chips, there really is no reason to buy the "more expensive" Apple product. (Though most Mac users already know that is not true, as a PC running OS X will NEVER be the same as a Macintosh running OS X.)
It will help Microsoft if the next version of Virtual PC runs Windows on the Intel-based Macs at nearly full speed of the equivalent PC-only hardware. (There will of course be SOME overhead running under OS X that wouldn't exist on a stand-alone Windows machine, but it will blow away today's Virtual PC performance.)
Whether it be the Intel-based Virtual PC described above, or WINE, or an Apple-built "Windows compatibility environment" through the Transitive/Rosetta technology, running Windows on your Mac at nearly full speed WILL generate some sales of Microsoft Windows which is all Bill Gates wants. He couldn't care less if Windows is running on a Dell or a Mac...he makes the same money selling to either market. It makes no sense for him to be against Windows running on the Mac. It's OS X on any ol' Intel PC that he fears.
I guess time will tell...
It will hurt Microsoft every time a customer switches to the Mac from the Wintel world now that the processor speed can no longer be used as an excuse.
It will hurt Microsoft every time a new customer falls in love with OS X and begins to convince other people they should switch off Windows too.
It will hurt Microsoft every time the "super PC geeks" and "Intel lovers" who already hate Windows and run Linux or Unix instead decide they can at least give Apple a serious look now that Intel Inside is an Apple reality.
It will help Microsoft every time someone mistakenly assumes (as many here and other places already have) that if both Apple and PC vendors use Intel chips, there really is no reason to buy the "more expensive" Apple product. (Though most Mac users already know that is not true, as a PC running OS X will NEVER be the same as a Macintosh running OS X.)
It will help Microsoft if the next version of Virtual PC runs Windows on the Intel-based Macs at nearly full speed of the equivalent PC-only hardware. (There will of course be SOME overhead running under OS X that wouldn't exist on a stand-alone Windows machine, but it will blow away today's Virtual PC performance.)
Whether it be the Intel-based Virtual PC described above, or WINE, or an Apple-built "Windows compatibility environment" through the Transitive/Rosetta technology, running Windows on your Mac at nearly full speed WILL generate some sales of Microsoft Windows which is all Bill Gates wants. He couldn't care less if Windows is running on a Dell or a Mac...he makes the same money selling to either market. It makes no sense for him to be against Windows running on the Mac. It's OS X on any ol' Intel PC that he fears.
I guess time will tell...
Hoef said:
How do you figure? Mac software will still only run a Mac. And the only company that makes Macs is Apple. And one of the most compelling reasons to buy a Mac is generally better stability and functionality due to Apple's control of both the hardware and the software.
Apple making a big step to improve their future hardware (attempting to avoid another G4 type stagnation, IMO) doesn't really strike me as the actions of a company that is trying to get out of the hardware business.
Lethal
Ensoniq said:
Possibly, assuming OSX performs well on Intel hardware compared to Windows. Microsoft has a poor history, but also a huge head-start.
Ensoniq said:
I haven't run into many "Intel lovers," but I do know quite a few who love to home brew their PCs, and the inability to do so on the Mac platform is one of the reasons they despise the Mac. Since OSX is still not going to run on generic PC hardware (save some clever hack), no change here.
Ensoniq said:
Not sure what you mean here exactly. The Mac will still be the Mac and Windows will still be windows.
Ensoniq said:
Most likely, the Mactels will be able to dual-boot Windows, so it's probably the end of the line for VirtualPC and any performance penalty for running Windows on Mac hardware. WINE presents some interesting possibilities if it can enable native Windows software to run in OSX in the same way it allows native Windows software to run on Linux.
LethalWolfe said:
Ohh so in the future we could potentially run windows on a mac but not mac OS on a PC.
IJ Reilly said:
Microsoft announced that they will be making an Intel (universal) version of Virtual PC. However, it'll probably be up to Microsoft's usual standard and still be really slow
And I think the opposite, that Apple is getting back into the innovation business.Hoef said:
Motorola/IBM have sucked an inordinate amount of time and cash out of Apple, that could have been used for the next big thing.
This is also good news for MicroSoft, since an "innovative company" is going to be playing in their sandbox and whipping the race slugs (Dell, Gateway, etc.) into adopting the more feature filled chipsets rotting in the bins.
Dells R&D budget dwarfs Apple's but they don't have Steve Jobs telling them where they should be heading, Steve is the one and only reason Apple was able to shave so many dollars out of that R&D budget.
Plus, Apple spanking MS on the innovation front won't last too long either. Bill is probably going to sit up and take notice.
Those two battling is basically good news for everyone...
DOnt be a crack baby. intel in mac will come out the same time as what OS from Micro$oft.....
when longhorn falls on its face faster then ME people will be looking for a OS that does everything they need and they can stand to work with.
this picks up where linux fell short. Mac OSX on intel is Bill Gates worst dream.
and wait till HP comes calling for the OS, first Ipod next the OS.
its all falling into place,the demise of MS.
when longhorn falls on its face faster then ME people will be looking for a OS that does everything they need and they can stand to work with.
this picks up where linux fell short. Mac OSX on intel is Bill Gates worst dream.
and wait till HP comes calling for the OS, first Ipod next the OS.
its all falling into place,the demise of MS.
Hoef said:
You do a great job of stating the known but a not so great job of elaborating on your POV.
Again, how is Apple making a dramatic move to improve their future hardware a sign they are moving AWAY from being a hardware company? If Apple licensed OS X to other computer manufacturers you'd have a point. But they aren't.
Lethal
Hoef said:
Just like Apple is becoming a music company so it's going to phase out iPods eventually.