Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Apple announces transition to Intel chips

Apple announces transition to Intel chips (Page 3)
Thread Tools
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:30 PM
 
[QUOTE=Millennium]Not that much harder. I've actually been following Linux development for a while, and you might be surprised what they've come up with. True, they haven't yet figured out that the menubar belongs at the top of the screen, but they're not that far off.[quote]

It's that much harder IMHO. I once thought linux would make a dent in the desktop market, but it's clear it's not happening. I'm not saying it never will, but it's just not anywhere near the "average user" realm.

Linux has major consistency issues. People on the Mac bitch when colors don't match... Linux has consistency issues from the ground up.


Actually, I think it's the Mac that will be destroyed in this. Windows has made enough usability gains in the past few years that the Apple premium isn't worth it on the basis of usability alone. As long as they had a superior hardware architecture it could cover the difference, but that is gone now.
What has changed? The CPU has changed and nothing else. Intel chips aren't going to make a Mac junk. Most users are using CPUs much slower than our x86 counterparts. Not everyone is using a dual 2.7GHz system. Many are zipping along in the 1-1.5 GHz zone (if that). If Apple can stay away from how M$ handles upgrades, we should be fine.


Since the introduction of the PowerPC chip, the only time Apple hasn't had the advantage is during the late G4 era, when the raw clockrate of Intel finally caught up in raw speed, and even then the PowerPC architecture was still better by leaps and bounds in every other aspect.
That's not correct. Very few times has PPC been shown to be a clear leader in real world applications (and Intel/AMD generally catch up in a month and surpass). As a Mac user, I've never felt like PPC was a clear winner. I love the idea of RISC... LOVE the idea... but haven't seen any clear indications that it's winning. Intel seems to adapt like the borg. You don't go a few month without hearing of some upgrade.


And they won't do that. This is Apple we're talking about. The price points on their "pro" machines haven't changed in ten years. Their whole business model is based around it.
I agree, the pro end systems will not change, but I think we will see more of the Pro end stuff coming over to the Mac. DDR2, PCI Express, etc. All things that Apple could buy off the shelf with a CPU shift. I think Apple will still make GREAT computers... just with Intel CPUs.

I guess I don't see the big deal. As long as I don't notice any major slowdowns or issues, I'm going to stick with them.


I have had a long time to consider what I would do if Apple did this. It is not a decision I am making lightly.
I guess I'm a little more optomistic.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by Krypton
Jobs let slip on CNBC that there will be new PowerPC products during the transition period. You will likely still see new G5s by the end of this year etc.
He's saying that defensively. The company knows it has just torpedoed the sales of the entire Mac line. No one who has any semblance of a clue will buy a Mac now, and that will dramatically harm Apple's revenue and its stock price.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by Millennium
What need has IBM not met?
1) Low heat G5s for Powerbooks;
2) 3 GHz G5s;
3) Dual core G5s.

I will bet that IBM told Apple they would not be getting either. 50 million processors for consoles trump 2 million for Apple.
     
Severed Hand of Skywalker
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The bottom of Cloud City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:35 PM
 
I ask this before but nobody had an answer. what is the heatsink like on a Pchip? The one on my dual G5 is a joke, it is like a bloody radiator and I don't even have the liquid cooled one. I swear it must weigh 5 pounds and have 4 fans.

"Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"
     
JC Denton
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by xi_hyperon
Oh, **** on a stick. Sometimes I just don't get you guys. What Athens said - it's a processor. I have yet to see anyone explain how, if the user experience is not changed, they are affected by a change in processors. The only answer so far is that x86 suxors!!!!1111111 Don't mean to be rude, but it's true. Look at the responses here.

Sometimes I think I'm a bit quick on the stick, but I actually feel pretty level-headed at the moment.
Tell me about it. Every time Apple does something that gives me pause, I come here and read the responses of my fellow Mac users. Works pretty well in calming me down.

I always thought that it was the OS that was the great differentiator between Wintel and Apple/IBM. Who knew it was the silicon?
     
osxisfun
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Internets
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett
1) Low heat G5s for Powerbooks;
2) 3 GHz G5s;
3) Dual core G5s.

I will bet that IBM told Apple they would not be getting either. 50 million processors for consoles trump 2 million for Apple.

Bingo.

You heard it from steve himself.

IBM was not going to give apple what they wanted in the future.
IBM did not give apple what they wanted in a laptop chip.
IBM did not give apple a 3 gig cpu.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:37 PM
 
I've never owned a computer with an Intel processor, and even though I love Apple, I won't start now.

When my Dual 1.42 gets long in the tooth, I'll be building a dual (or more) Opteron Linux box.

Oh well, it's been fun Apple, loved you ever since my IIe over 25 years ago. It's now time to part ways and move on.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by Judge_Fire
Virtual PC on x86 should be fun.

MS surely would love to sell more copies of Windows to Mac users, now that it (in theory) runs much better.

J
screw virtual pc, wine will get ported over and run Windows only software full speed like on linux with out windows installed. This will be great to get into the business community, apps like Simply Accounting that are Windows only will be able to work on future macs.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
MindFad
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:43 PM
 
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by osxisfun
Bingo.

You heard it from steve himself.

IBM was not going to give apple what they wanted in the future.
IBM did not give apple what they wanted in a laptop chip.
IBM did not give apple a 3 gig cpu.
And, looking at the Intel roadmap (which Intel has hit much more reliably than IBM/Moto) by next year we could have dual-core, 64-bit Powerbooks with real front side busses.
     
TheJoshu
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Brooklyn, New York, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:46 PM
 
They introduced the name "Power Mac" alongside the PowerPC chips - so I hope whatever comes next also has a new name, to assist in discerning the difference and feeling the power of Intel! ...
     
Randman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:47 PM
 
iMac.

This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
     
osxisfun
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Internets
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett
And, looking at the Intel roadmap (which Intel has hit much more reliably than IBM/Moto) by next year we could have dual-core, 64-bit Powerbooks with real front side busses.

BINGO!

and small world, i just posted in another thread that for the first time we (and purchasers) have a roadmap for future hw. I am not talking about the next two years only. from now on every intel announcement directly affects us.


I for one welcome my new yonah-monah-centrino dual core powerbook i will be purchasing next summer!
     
xi_hyperon
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Behind the dryer, looking for a matching sock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by MindFad
Hey! This is serious bidness!

     
xi_hyperon
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Behind the dryer, looking for a matching sock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by TheJoshu
They introduced the name "Power Mac" alongside the PowerPC chips - so I hope whatever comes next also has a new name, to assist in discerning the difference and feeling the power of Intel! ...
Intellitosh™
     
osxisfun
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Internets
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by TheJoshu
They introduced the name "Power Mac" alongside the PowerPC chips - so I hope whatever comes next also has a new name, to assist in discerning the difference and feeling the power of Intel! ...

maybe xStations? i kinda like that one.
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by xi_hyperon
Intellitosh™
Pentiac!
     
MindFad
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by xi_hyperon
Hey! This is serious bidness!

That should be the tagline for the Lounge, I swear.
     
Eriamjh
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: BFE
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:54 PM
 
The hardware doesn't even exist, and the Mac users are leaving in droves. What a pathetic bunch you all are. Don't you understand the playing field will be level? You would rather use something as unpolished as Linux instead of OSX? Don't you know Linux runs on the same Intel hardware?

The CPUs don't mean crap. We have all been complaining about clock speed since the G4 debuted in 1999 at 400MHz, then dropped to 350MHz! Seven years later, Windows and Apple users will all be running on the same 4 to 5 GHz Pentium (fill in the blank)s and it'll all be about the OS, JUST AS WE HAVE ALWAYS SAID IT WAS!

No more will we see GHz increases on PCs while we sit on the side. Don't you think Intel may have given Apple a special slice of the CPU pie like "exclusivity" for X weeks before they let Dell or Gateway build with them?

Steve Jobs is not stupid. He has seen the writing on the wall for 5 years with OSX. He finally pulled the trigger to kill the wounded horse that the PowerPC truly is: a slow and disappointing CPU that NEVER lived up to the promises of Apple, Jobs, Motorola, or IBM.

And I doubt there will be a stupid "Intel Inside" logo. It'll probably have a big "Powered by OSX" logo along with the Apple symbol. You'll know you're not running Windows before you even touch the keyboard.

Wake up and smell the CPU, folks. This is the ONLY way the Mac will survive.
( Last edited by Eriamjh; Jun 6, 2005 at 05:15 PM. )

I'm a bird. I am the 1% (of pets).
     
misc
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by MacNStein
I've never owned a computer with an Intel processor, and even though I love Apple, I won't start now.

When my Dual 1.42 gets long in the tooth, I'll be building a dual (or more) Opteron Linux box.

Oh well, it's been fun Apple, loved you ever since my IIe over 25 years ago. It's now time to part ways and move on.
Have fun with your beige box.

Apple did not fire all it's staff, they just changed who makes the processor.

"And after we are through, ten years in making it to be the most of glorious debuts."
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:58 PM
 
Universal Binary PDFRosetta is a translation process that runs a PowerPC binary on an Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor—it allows applications to run as nonnative binaries. Many, but not all, applications can run translated. Applications that run translated will never run as fast as they run as a native binary because the translation process itself incurs a processing cost. How compatible your application is with Rosetta depends on the type of application it is. Applications that have a lot of user interaction and low computational needs, such as a word processor, are quite compatible. Those that have a moderate amount of user interaction and some high computational needs or that use OpenGL are, in most cases, also quite compatible. Those that have intense computing needs aren’t compatible. This includes applications that need to repeatedly compute fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), that compute complex models for 3-D modelling, or compute ray tracing. To the user, Rosetta is transparent. Unlike Classic, when the user launches an application, there aren’t any visual cues to indicate that the application is translated. The user may perceive that the application is slow to start up or that the performance is slower than it is on a Macintosh using a PowerPC microprocessor. The user can discover whether an application has only a PowerPC binary by looking at the Finder information for the application. (See “Determining Whether a Binary is Universal” (page 18).) The purpose of this appendix is to discuss the sorts of applications that can run translated, describe how Rosetta works, point out special considerations for translated applications, and provide troubleshooting information if your application won’t run translated but you think that it should. What Can Be Translated? Rosetta is designed to translate currently shipping applications that run on a PowerPC with a G3 processor and that are built for Mac OS X. Rosetta does not run the following: ■ Applications built for Mac OS 8 or 9 ■ Code written specifically for AltiVec ■ Code that inserts preferences in the System Preferences pane ■ Applications that require a G4 or G5 processor ■ Applications that depend on one or more kernel extensions ■ Kernel extensions ■ Bundled Java applications or Java applications with JNI libraries that can’t be translated
No G4 or G5 optimized binaries. Sux0rs.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
BasketofPuppies
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Chicago
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by Millennium
Since 1999? Surely you jest. There was a dark time in the G4 era, and another now, but these are hardly insurmountable.
The entire G4 era was a dark time. Motorola's PowerPC MPC 7400 was stuck at 450 MHz for six months and when its clock speed finally did increase, it wasn't anywhere near the rate Intel and AMD's processors did. Steve Jobs could show all the rigged demonstrations he wanted to "prove" the G4 was faster than Pentium systems with significantly higher clock speeds, but it didn't change the fact real world performance with Pentium and Athlon systems continued to increase over PowerPC systems.

Not to mention it took Motorola more than a year to make an MPC 7400 suitable for portables.
IBM itself has committed to this meaningless but magical 3.0GHz number much sooner than Apple's planned switch.
Which was supposed to be available last year.
What need has IBM not met?
Both clock speed and real world performance have not increased at nearly the rate of Intel and AMD's processors, multi-core processors still aren't available, and low power PowerPC 970 processors for portables are not available two years after the desktop version was introduced. The same problems Motorola and Freescale had.
( Last edited by BasketofPuppies; Jun 6, 2005 at 05:24 PM. )
inscrutable impenetrable impregnable inconceivable
     
legacyb4
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Vancouver
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:02 PM
 
While the performance implications for Virtual PC are pretty clear (given how fast VPC is on a Windows machine), it's interesting to see what level of support M$ will give VPC on the new hardware. After all, for them a license of the OS is a license of the OS, regardless of the hardware and if Apple choosing more compliant hardware makes Mac users able to use VPC more effectively, both parties win the end.

Then again, if somehow XonIntel somehow provides software makers a way to more easily provide software for Mac users and not have to use a Windows box period, Mr. Gates won't be too happy...
Macbook (Black) C2D/250GB/3GB | G5/1.6 250GBx2/2.0GB
Free Mobile Ringtone & Games Uploader | Flickr | Twitter
     
Severed Hand of Skywalker
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The bottom of Cloud City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:02 PM
 
Apparently photoshop took forever to launch under Rosetta in today demo. Yippie.

"Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"
     
klinux
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by MacNStein
I've never owned a computer with an Intel processor, and even though I love Apple, I won't start now.
Why, did Intel eat your baby?

Watch the Apple fanaticism turn to Apple-IBM fanaticism! (Me grabs a bucket of popcorn.)
One iMac, iBook, one iPod, way too many PCs.
     
Randman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:04 PM
 
Don't forget that this could mean iFlicks. Downloadable movies.

This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
     
Jan Van Boghout
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac
No G4 or G5 optimized binaries. Sux0rs.
Only for apps that aren't converted to Universal Binaries. In the UB system you can optimize just fine, separately for PPC and Intel. Why is everyone being so dramatic?
     
sideus
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker
Apparently photoshop took forever to launch under Rosetta in today demo. Yippie.
Great.
     
typoon
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: The Tollbooth Capital of the US
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:09 PM
 
I also think in a way this was Steve's way of saying he's sorry to the customer he wasn't able to deliver us the goods, a 3GHz Processor Mac. HE told us by this time we'd have a 3GHz G5 and hopefully more. IBM couldn't deliver and Jobs felt he needed to do what was best for the company. One thing is for sure Apple WILL now deliver us a 3+GHz Processor Mac.

I'll buy a Mac because I LOVE the OS. Partially because of the Processor. We've all been waiting for a 3+GHz Mac and now that Apple can FINALLY deliver it People are all up in arms about it. I don't care either way which processor they are going to use as long as they can still deliver a GREAT Product.

Am I an Apple "fanboy?" Maybe but I have grown up with a Mac, seen it change and even if Apple stopped selling computers I'd still by the OS if they still made it.

I'd actually be interested in hearing what Developers have to say about this.
( Last edited by typoon; Jun 6, 2005 at 05:16 PM. )
"Evil is Powerless If the Good are Unafraid." -Ronald Reagan

Apple and Intel, the dawning of a NEW era.
     
OwlBoy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Madison, WI
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:10 PM
 
keynote video will be here:

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc05/

not that other link.

-Owl
     
AlbertWu
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: boulder, co
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:14 PM
 
I moved to windows long ago because the Mac OS didn't have what I needed. It's sad to see Apple ditching the only viable part of their architecture. Fix your OS and I'll be back.
Ad Astra Per Aspera - Semper Exploro
     
Cadaver
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: ~/
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:18 PM
 
While I suppose I could live with an Intel processor in my machine, its the software transition that's going to suck. This is going to piss off a lot of developers. I can see many wanting to jump ship.... They spend a lot of time/money developing for a small Mac market, now they'll have to do more work to get decent performance out of the new Mactel machines (Rosetta I suspect will be somewhere in between WINE on Linux and VPC on the Mac in terms of performance).

I fear this will fracture yet again the Mac market into smaller and smaller components. Too small for developers to bother with. Especially with low-level hardware drivers, printers, scanners, etc. And you were pissed when Epson quit supporting your printer with the change from OS9 to OS X...!

And what about things like graphics cards - will we still need Mac-specific versions of the hardware (think ATI's retail Mac Edition offerings; some have hardware-specific changes to support the Mac)?? I guess we'll see how it plays out over the next 12-18 months.


Either way, that new dual-core Athlon64 WinXP box I was thinking about building is looking pretty good right about now.
     
d0ubled0wn
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Michigan, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by NYCFarmboy
I agree with the switch though, IBM has just totally dropped the ball on the Power PC.. after Steve Jobs promised a 3 gig dual G5, I had decided to wait until that is available... so I waited and waited. Now I will wait on the IntelMac™

My G4 dual 1.42 will handle everything until then...quite nicely.
That's an important point. I would have upgraded sooner had faster processors been available. I don't know what's in store for PowerBooks but I certainly hope it will be much better than the current crop of G4 'books.
     
Randman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cadaver
Either way, that new dual-core Athlon64 WinXP box I was thinking about building is looking pretty good right about now.
You're right. Windows XP beats Tiger any day of the week. Woo-hoo.

This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
     
osxisfun
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Internets
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by d0ubled0wn
That's an important point. I would have upgraded sooner had faster processors been available. I don't know what's in store for PowerBooks but I certainly hope it will be much better than the current crop of G4 'books.

monah - yonah dual core centrinos.

intel's roadmap for laptop kicks the **** out of our non exisant laptop g5.

its going to be a good thing. i think the laptop scenario played more than its fare share in the descision to switch.
     
Randman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by osxisfun
Monah Yonah dual-core Centrinos.

Intel's plan for laptops kicks the **** out of Apple's non-existent laptop G5 with IBM.

It's going to be a good thing. I think the laptop scenario played more than its fair share in the decision to switch.
(though I had to edit it for clarity )

This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
     
Severed Hand of Skywalker
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The bottom of Cloud City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:30 PM
 
Personally I don't care if Apple used wind up rubber bands or hamsters in a wheel in the computers as long as it was FAST and runs the Mac OS in the end.

"Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"
     
mac freak
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Highland Park, IL / Santa Monica, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by AlbertWu
I moved to windows long ago because the Mac OS didn't have what I needed. It's sad to see Apple ditching the only viable part of their architecture. Fix your OS and I'll be back.
Warning! Warning!
Flamebait at 12 o'clock, captain!
Be happy.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by klinux
Why, did Intel eat your baby?

Watch the Apple fanaticism turn to Apple-IBM fanaticism! (Me grabs a bucket of popcorn.)
I don't agree with their business practices, I feel the same way about them as I do MS and I'll buy neither company's products.

I'm not so much of an Apple fanboy that I'll suddenly make a hero out of a thug.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by misc
Have fun with your beige box.

Apple did not fire all it's staff, they just changed who makes the processor.
I sure will. Thanks.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
iDaver
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by typoon
One thing is for sure Apple WILL now deliver us a 3+GHz Processor Mac.
Um, don't you mean in 2007? Meanwhile there will be no significant upgrades to the high end since PPC 970 development will surely end immediately.

Late 2005/early 2006 = "The Year of Sales Slumps and Price Drops"

New ad slogan for late 2006: "Think Same"

     
klinux
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: LA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by Millennium
It's mostly the hardware. OSX is very good, but not good enough to justify the premium by itself.
You are kidding me right? I switched from Windows to Mac because of the software (OS X 10.1) and I can tell many in academics and commercial did so as well not becase of the hardware.

I think the only thing the PC world does not have now, technical spec-wise, are the super-hight front side bus speed and the mostly RISC architecture of PPC. As if somehow the difference betwee 0.8 Ghz for PC vs the 1.35 Ghz FSB in a dual 2.7 Ghz PM makes the world of difference to you?

The PC world has long had DDR RAM way before Apple. Firewire 400 is becoming more popular on PC motherboards thanks to Apple and FW800 is available in PCI card for $50. PC's superdrive (16x DL) is ahead of Apple's. Graphics was well. BT 2.0 is rare on PC but MIMO products have been available on the shelves for a while. IMO, on the hardware front, PC is as competitive as Mac if not slightly ahead.

Apple's strength is in its software and user interface/design.

I actually am looking forward to this - beside the superior OS Apple will hopefully bring much needed aesthetics to the PC world.
One iMac, iBook, one iPod, way too many PCs.
     
osxisfun
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Internets
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by Randman
(though I had to edit it for clarity )

and then throw some wimax in that mofo for good measure!
     
Severed Hand of Skywalker
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: The bottom of Cloud City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by MacNStein
I sure will. Thanks.
So when you leaving? At the end of your next post hopefully?

"Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cadaver
I fear this will fracture yet again the Mac market into smaller and smaller components. Too small for developers to bother with. Especially with low-level hardware drivers, printers, scanners, etc. And you were pissed when Epson quit supporting your printer with the change from OS9 to OS X...!

And what about things like graphics cards - will we still need Mac-specific versions of the hardware (think ATI's retail Mac Edition offerings; some have hardware-specific changes to support the Mac)?? I guess we'll see how it plays out over the next 12-18 months.
It will definitely fracture the Mac market. Individuals, schools and companies will be divesting themselves of their Macs and developers will have to choose how much they wish to support this new bifurcated monster platform. Device driver support will be particularly ugly. I can just imagine the terrific quality of the resultant code, on both the Mac side and the Mactel side.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
andreas_g4
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: adequate, thanks.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by klinux
I actually am looking forward to this - beside the superior OS Apple will hopefully bring much needed aesthetics to the PC world.
Apple isn't entering the PC world... They're using a CPU from Intel.
     
osxisfun
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Internets
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by Randman
(though I had to edit it for clarity )

i do stink in the spelling dept. But i make up for it in exclamation marks!!
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker
So when you leaving? At the end of your next post hopefully?
Do we have to buy Apptel Intmac hardware to be allowed to post here ?

-t
     
osxpinot
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:40 PM
 
I wonder if there will be a yellowbox for windows. If so, Mac developers should be shitting in their pants...talk about leveling the playing field.
     
mdc
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NY²
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker
Personally I don't care if Apple used wind up rubber bands or hamsters in a wheel in the computers as long as it was FAST and runs the Mac OS in the end.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:56 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,