Will you buy a Mac AFTER they switch to Intel processors?

Will you buy a Mac after they switch to Intel processors?

  • Yes - Mac - Dual boot Tiger/Leopard and Windows XP/Longhorn

    Votes: 69 30.8%
  • Yes - Mac - OS X only

    Votes: 138 61.6%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 15 6.7%
  • No - PC

    Votes: 2 0.9%

  • Total voters
    224

GodBless

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jan 22, 2005
1,005
0
Also what are the deciding factors? Did you only stay with Apple for PPC, are you a mad developer who doesn't like all the headaches Apple has caused with the many transitions that make your applications unusable until you update them, are you going to be happy to dual boot windows or will you be happy to have a processor with a faster clock speed? Tell me what you think.

(This poll is not to get confused with MacRumors' "Will you buy a Mac BEFORE they switch to Intel processors?" poll.)
 

GodBless

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jan 22, 2005
1,005
0
Definitely option 1.

How can you find a better way to prove that OS X runs faster and smoother than Windows without tests being on the same system?
 

feakbeak

macrumors 6502a
Oct 16, 2003
925
1
Michigan
I just bought a Mac mini a few months ago, my first Mac. I've used them before quite a bit in college though, so I wasn't a complete newb. By the time I will need/want to replace my Mac mini the dust should be settling from the transition to x86 and I'll buy one then.

i like Windows and OS X, so I really don't care too much about the configurations. I'd be willing to run OS X on non-Apple hardware if allowed or if it could be easily hacked and didn't have too many driver issues. I'd also be willing to buy Apple hardware if I liked the design, performance and cost of the machine. I'm not a cheap Wintel fanboy, but I am reasonable. I have my Mac mini out in my living area with an LCD because it looks nice there. The loud beige box is in the bedroom with the monsterous CRT... it doens't look pretty, so I hide it away. Still, I'd be willing to run either OS on either machine and/or dual-boot one or more of them. The more options the better, IMO.
 

GodBless

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jan 22, 2005
1,005
0
mad jew said:
Option 2.

Isn't Option 1 unsupported?
No, I read an AppleInsider article that quoted Schiller for saying "That doesn't preclude someone from running [Windows] on a Mac. They probably will," and other articles claim that the test 3.6 G4 Intel developer transition rental machines that Apple gave out at WWDC run XP fine.
 

GodBless

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jan 22, 2005
1,005
0
Capt Underpants said:
I will always have a mac laptop and a PC desktop. For me, it is the best combination :)
Why not get a mac desktop that can dual boot OS X and Windows?
 

mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Apr 3, 2004
32,194
6
Adelaide, Australia
GodBless said:
No, I read an AppleInsider article that quoted Schiller for saying "That doesn't preclude someone from running [Windows] on a Mac. They probably will," and other articles claim that the test 3.6 G4 Intel developer transition rental machines that Apple gave out at WWDC run XP fine.

I'm not saying it's unfeasible, but I'm pretty sure neither Apple nor Microsoft will help you if any problems arise, let alone condone it.
 

Cooknn

macrumors 68020
Aug 23, 2003
2,111
0
Fort Myers, FL
2. But when depends on what they offer with the PPC before the Intel rollout. I'm partial to the PowerPC. If it hit's the magic number, I'm going to have a hard time not pulling the trigger :eek:
 

Westside guy

macrumors 603
Oct 15, 2003
5,381
2,202
The soggy side of the Pacific NW
I wlll buy an Intel Mac - heck, at this point I won't be buying another Mac for sure until they've switched over. :D

Dual-booting is annoying. I used to do it back when I was primarilly using Linux as my desktop OS. However Windows is nice for games - I still borrow my wife's PC sometimes to play Moonbase Commander ;) - so if VMware or Virtual PC runs well, then I'll have a virtual disk.

Heck, that's one advantage of going to the x86 processor right there - just maybe VMware will produce an OS X version. My experience with it is a couple years out of date now, but I'd much rather use VMware than Virtual PC.
 

HiRez

macrumors 603
Jan 6, 2004
5,805
1,697
Western US
GodBless said:
Will you buy a Mac AFTER they switch to Intel processors?:

4. No - PC
I don't like the #4 option. It implies someone would not buy a Mac simply because it happens to use Intel CPUs instead of IBM. If you can't even tell what's inside, why do you care? No one realized Steve was running a Mac with Intel Inside™ until he told them he was. OS X should be just the same, plus with a lot less waiting on chip backorders and the possibility of being able to buy off-the-shelf PC GPU cards instead of waiting for and paying extra for Mac special editions, I don't see why anyone would mind.
 

GodBless

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jan 22, 2005
1,005
0
Westside guy said:
I wlll buy an Intel Mac - heck, at this point I won't be buying another Mac for sure until they've switched over. :D

Dual-booting is annoying. I used to do it back when I was primarilly using Linux as my desktop OS. However Windows is nice for games - I still borrow my wife's PC sometimes to play Moonbase Commander ;) - so if VMware or Virtual PC runs well, then I'll have a virtual disk.

Heck, that's one advantage of going to the x86 processor right there - just maybe VMware will produce an OS X version. My experience with it is a couple years out of date now, but I'd much rather use VMware than Virtual PC.
Something like wine (which is currently only made for Linux (well there's Darwine for OS X but that's another story)) for OS X would be nice too.
 

katie ta achoo

macrumors G3
May 2, 2005
9,170
2
Number Two definitely.
I like Apple for the OS.

Why would I desecrate something as fabulous as a Mac with Windows? :p
 

tech4all

macrumors 68040
Jun 13, 2004
3,399
489
NorCal
GodBless said:
1. Yes - Mac - Dual boot Tiger/Leopard and Windows XP/Longhorn
2. Yes - Mac - OS X only
3. Undecided
4. No - PC
Definitely #2, provided OS X is just as secure (if not more) that it is now.


Question: If someone did run Windows with an Intel-based Mac, could a (Windows) virus infect the whole computer?
 

ravenvii

macrumors 604
Mar 17, 2004
7,583
489
Melenkurion Skyweir
I think leaving the Mac platform just because it's no longer PPC is retarded. It's just a CPU. Who gives a **** which CPU it is, as long as it's fast?

I got a Mac mini a few months ago too. I planned for it to last 1.5-2 years. And that happens to fall perfectly into the transition period. Hurray me, my next Mac shall be a lightning-fast Mac! Which just so happens to have an Intel CPU in it.
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
GodBless said:
Will you buy a Mac AFTER they switch to Intel processors?:

1. Yes - Mac - Dual boot Tiger/Leopard and Windows XP/Longhorn
2. Yes - Mac - OS X only
3. Undecided
4. No - PC

Also what are the deciding factors? Did you only stay with Apple for PPC, are you a mad developer who doesn't like all the headaches Apple has caused with the many transitions that make your applications unusable until you update them, are you going to be happy to dual boot windows or will you be happy to have a processor with a faster clock speed? Tell me what you think.

(This poll is not to get confused with MacRumors' "Will you buy a Mac BEFORE they switch to Intel processors?" pole.)
1 - Yes. Who switches for the processor? I care about the operating system. While I prefer PowerPC, I will buy the Intel Macs. Not the first generation ones, as they won't be fully supported by developers, but I eventually will.

If WINE runs Windows apps just as well as Windows itself, then count me on for #2. Otherwise I'll go with #1.

Windows for games and all my old software. Mac for everything else. I can finally throw my PC away.
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
tech4all said:
Definitely #2, provided OS X is just as secure (if not more) that it is now.


Question: If someone did run Windows with an Intel-based Mac, could a (Windows) virus infect the whole computer?
It would affect the Windows install. Not the Mac.

Viruses are just software, you know.

Unless you get a virus that formats your hard drive (very rare), there's no way it would affect Mac OS X. Just like getting a Windows virus doesn't affect my Linux partition (I have a dual boot).
 

barneygumble

macrumors 6502a
Apr 18, 2005
726
0
i have decided to hold of until they release one! and then i will only use mac OS X on it, i will be keep my other box for gaming becasue it has all the goodies on it and will not be connected to the internet
 

GFLPraxis

macrumors 604
Mar 17, 2004
7,091
404
katie ta achoo said:
Number Two definitely.
I like Apple for the OS.

Why would I desecrate something as fabulous as a Mac with Windows? :p
Simple reason why I would.

Right now I have to have a PC and a Mac.

Now I can toast the PC (muwahaha! Burn, baby, burn!) and use my Mac for EVERYTHING.
 

Dr. Dastardly

macrumors 65816
Jun 26, 2004
1,317
0
I live in a giant bucket!
tech4all said:
Definitely #2, provided OS X is just as secure (if not more) that it is now.


Question: If someone did run Windows with an Intel-based Mac, could a (Windows) virus infect the whole computer?
I dont think so, it will just affect the windows side. For example I could send a windows virus to you on your Mac but it wont be able to do anything because everything is different on the Mac. File extensions, Program folders, everything. So I doubt anyone will have to worry if they put Windows and OSX on the same system.

Oh yeah and #1, Have to use Windows for work. :(
At least I dont have to worry about finding a way to hide that stupid PC tower anymore. :p
 

Xtremehkr

macrumors 68000
Jul 4, 2004
1,897
0
Option 2.

I am hoping to get about 5 years out of my current iMac though. Though only reason I replaced my old one sooner than I intended was because of the size of the monitor. The old iMacs had a puny 14.1" and it was driving me nuts.

Ok. Aside from that, I think it is going to benefit Apple because it will open up options that were not available before. More hardware options and more software options will help the company in the long run. Or for as long as Intel outperform PPC and are the best option to go with.