[bishopdante]

And the big difference? Unless you buy a Mac, you can't have OSX. And that means no Final Cut Pro, no Logic Audio, and no iLife. That's what we call platform leverage. I think that Microsoft ****ed up with the XBox. They took all of the PowerPC manufacturing IBM can handle, and will sell the boxes at a loss. As revenge Steve Jobs is now out to get them.

[Scooterboy]

Call software vendor for support. Customer service says, ahh, just boot up Windows and run it from there. Software vendors cut Mac app development since Macs can run Windows, and it pays far more to develop Windows apps, but costs more to develop Mac apps. Windows dev has much higher return. Since Macs can run Windows, there is no longer any need to develop the Mac version.

[CaptainHaddock]

"Call software vendor for support. Customer service says, ahh, just boot up Windows and run it from there. "

Not so, my friend.

1. 95% of the people who buy computers are completely incapable of installing a second OS. These people will never use anything other than the OS X that gets installed.

2. Windows won't run without heavy fiddling or hacking, because it won't ship with drivers for Apple's proprietary hardware, and Apple won't provide them. Another barrier to use.

3. A Windows installation always over-writes an existing OS and boot partition. MS simply can't imagine that Windows might co-exist with other OSes on a single machine. Yet another reason it'll be impossible for the average user to use alongside OS X.

4. Any vendor who says "just use Windows" will quickly be replaced in the marketplace by a new product. And products designed for Mac OS X from the get-go are generally much more user-friendly than Windows ports.

[himself]

Originally Posted by Hydra

The problem I see in future dual Powermacs, or whatever they will be called, is pricing not the technology. Take a look at what intel charges for CPU's that can be put in multi-cpu currently like the Xeon. They seem to be much more expensive than top of the line dual G5's are currently. Looking at Dell's dual Xeon's I'd say they are about $1000 more than a comparable dual G5. This makes me wonder what Apple pricing is going to be in this segment even if they use some future chip from intel that replaces the Xeon.

-Jerry C.

The fact is that the G5 processors cost a lot less than the Xeons or any other comparable x86 chip out there, even with Apple's relatively lower volume purchasing for G5s. But this makes me wonder, with Intel lobbying so hard for Apple's business, would they be willing to cut them an attractive deal on their workstation-class chips that makes it competitive with the G5s (price wise)?

[Talleyman]

The single advantage of Windows over Mac is simply game playing. We're not talking about what work uses, were talking about advantages. There are numerous disadvantages, but we all know those.

If you are a gamer, have a dual boot system. Anyone else would not need to dual boot.

My 2 cents.

Originally Posted by hondo

Good point. I personally, however, would rather never boot into Windows if I can help it.

[Busemann]

I think Windows on a Mac will make it much more attractive to become a switcher as well. People will see the Mac as a much safer platform since they can just put Windows on there if they regret making the switch. The key selling points will always be OSX and the industrial design no matter what processor sits inside (compare the PowerMac or Mac mini to any other PC cabinet out there..)

[Talleyman]

Good Thoughts! If that is the lure, great! However, if people buy Macs for that reason that's good for Apple and us. They will see the advantages of MacOS X. Market share, market share, market share...oops, had a Ballmer moment.

Originally Posted by Busemann

I think it will be much more attractive to become a switcher as well. People will see the Mac as a much more viable platform since they can just put Windows on there if they regret making the switch. The key selling points will continue to be OSX and the industrial design on the HW (compare the PowerMac or Mac mini to any other PC cabinet out there..)

[MacHarbor]

I have but one question for Mr Jobs.

Mr Jobs... When MacOS X is running on Intel hardware, will I be able to build my own Mac from the ground up? Case (PC style OR an Apple sold empty case), motherboard, processor, video card, memory, hard drive, etc...

If yes, then hell yeah.

If no, eh. I can still buy Apple hardware.

Here is the Mac hardware that I own and still have (in chronological order)...

Macintosh TV
Performa 6230 (still remember the damn number off the top of my head)
Power Computing PowerBase 180
Power Computing PowerTower Pro 250
Apple Powerbook G3 (old style, not the sleek "Mission Impossiable" era model)
Apple iMac Blueberry 500MHz
Apple PowerMacintosh G4 450 (upgraded to 1.3GHz)

I have had 3 PCs. An old IBM Aptiva that has since died a sad death. A custom built Duron 600MHz, and a custom built 2.5GHz Celeron D system. My custom systems are running strong (even the Duron after 5 or 6 years). And since they were hand crafted, they are alot better to work with than brand name PC I own.

Though I get great joy out of the software end of computer usage, there is no joy in the computer world that is greater than building your own computer from the case up, powering it on and seeing that it WORKS!!!

Please Mr Jobs, please allow me to build my own Macintosh system, the way I want, how I want, and build it with my own 2 hands (not that BTO stuff online), and please let MacOS X work on it.

[rotuts]

MacHarbor:

No

cheers Steve

[rotuts]

MacHarbor

you are right that would be very cool all those little lights! tube lights! ppulsations!

but no chance

rotut

[P]

Originally Posted by himself

The fact is that the G5 processors cost a lot less than the Xeons or any other comparable x86 chip out there, even with Apple's relatively lower volume purchasing for G5s. But this makes me wonder, with Intel lobbying so hard for Apple's business, would they be willing to cut them an attractive deal on their workstation-class chips that makes it competitive with the G5s (price wise)?

While the actual G5s are cheap, they require a motherboard that is anything but, and that liquid cooling thing isn't that cheap either. The complete package of CPU-motherboard-cooling is probably cheaper if you go with Xeon. Of course, the G4s were even more expensive that the G5s. And the switch was not based mainly on problems with the Powermacs - it was based on the lack of a Powerbook G5

[hldan]

Originally Posted by Talleyman

The single advantage of Windows over Mac is simply game playing. We're not talking about what work uses, were talking about advantages. There are numerous disadvantages, but we all know those.

If you are a gamer, have a dual boot system. Anyone else would not need to dual boot.

My 2 cents.

I don't think this will be much of an issue once the PowerMacs start shipping with Intel inside. I was at Fry's electronics yesterday looking for an ATI x800 and sad to find none for my G5, however there are some x800's and 6800's but I thought they were Windows specific. Although they do have the Windows logo on the box the system requirements only say Pentium III/4. I think the developers have a tougher time building GPU's and select software that run well on PPC but once Apple goes Intel Mac users will have access to all these GPU's and software developers will see an advantage to making and shipping games at the same time that will run Mac and Windows.
For Mac users this Intel switch can only be a win win situation.

[mattsgotredhair]

To the people that say only gamers would need to run a dual boot system. I'd have to stick up for the music production people out here that would disagree. There are a few windoze only music programs out there that I would love to have if I could dual boot. Most of these aren't things that could be run effectively in VPC, and some won't run at all. Gigastudio is built completely on the windoze kernel.
So I would love to be able to deck out a single computer in my studio to run every program that I would need.
Blah. Take that.

[Eriamjh]

If windows apps run "too easily" on Macs, then there will be NO MAC APPS!

I expect running windows on a Intel Mac will be no small chore. It will not obvious to install and not likely run well without help.

[vr5150]

Why is it everyone thinks these are going to be PC's? They are going to be Apple machines with Intel Processors only. Apple hardware (logic boards).

Think about this: Apple is now offering The Developer Transition Kit for $999 to all Apple Developer Connection Select and Premier members. They cant offer these prices for G5 machines to delevopers.

If Apple offers 3.0 ghz machines for $699 they can grow their user base and take a bigger bite of the PC market. I think we will see Pro machines for the prices we are used to now but we can now benefit from PC users on lower manufacturing cost. IBM couldnt give Apple the prices to make macs cheap because they do not have the volume of production that Intel has.

All new machines will be Apple machines with INTEL processors only, thats the only change.

If Apple wanted to do something huge why not offer OS X to every pc now for a price of $249. I'd bet they would sell 2-4 million copies of OS X in the first week to PC users fed up with their operating system. Apple makes money on their operating system from hardware sales so we will never see this happening.

[hldan]

Originally Posted by mattsgotredhair

To the people that say only gamers would need to run a dual boot system. I'd have to stick up for the music production people out here that would disagree. There are a few windoze only music programs out there that I would love to have if I could dual boot. Most of these aren't things that could be run effectively in VPC, and some won't run at all. Gigastudio is built completely on the windoze kernel.
So I would love to be able to deck out a single computer in my studio to run every program that I would need.
Blah. Take that.

I don't know why this dual-boot rumor is even being entertained. This is never gonna happen for a few reasons. Think about it;
Number one, Apple is not trying to promote their machines to run Windows nor will they ever, they want the Mac OS experience in everyone's home, office etc.
Number two, if this dual-boot thing happened Microsoft would lose a ton of business from the existing PC companies like HP and Dell due to lack of sales of their WIndows computers.

Number three, Microsoft would lose business from loss of sales of the Virtual PC software which is a big business. If you have a fast Mac VIrtual PC should be all anyone needs to run basic PC software. Anyone needing to run large PC programs needs to buy a Windows PC. The same goes for Windows users that need large Mac only programs, they shouldn't be running PearPC.

Lastly, if the Intel Macs are designed to dual-boot the cost of the machine would be enormous since it's worth so much more. As Virtual PC gives the convenience of having multiple OS's, a dual-boot system gives two physical computers in one. It would not be affordable.

Let this dual-boot rumor die as it ain't gonna happen.

[rotuts]

you bet. no dual boots ever.

but maybe hardware that would have only gone on a PC might be able to go on a MacTel ie gra[hics cards if all that needed to be done by the ATI/NVIDIA was write a second driver with no hardware expence.

rotuts

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by bishopdante

And hey. I read that OS/2 crap. There's a big difference. I've been using Macs since I was 8, that's 17 years, and I'm addicted. I rely totally on my skills to earn my bread and if somebody tries to take apple away from me and give me some XP to work with I get cranky.

Why? It's because Apple stuff has soul. They're fun. They make strange noises, things flip about on the screen and bounce about. Apple's OSs have something of the Fischer Price toy about them. And that's a good thing. And there lies the attraction. A super professional tool that's as easy to use as a toy. And that isn't windows, is it.

Um, actually, I think you're thinking of Windows ME/XP.

To me, one of the nice things about OS X is that it doesn't have little animated cartoony things prancing all about your screen.

[G5man]

Originally Posted by vr5150

Why is it everyone thinks these are going to be PC's? They are going to be Apple machines with Intel Processors only. Apple hardware (logic boards).

Think about this: Apple is now offering The Developer Transition Kit for $999 to all Apple Developer Connection Select and Premier members. They cant offer these prices for G5 machines to delevopers.

If Apple offers 3.0 ghz machines for $699 they can grow their user base and take a bigger bite of the PC market. I think we will see Pro machines for the prices we are used to now but we can now benefit from PC users on lower manufacturing cost. IBM couldnt give Apple the prices to make macs cheap because they do not have the volume of production that Intel has.

All new machines will be Apple machines with INTEL processors only, thats the only change.

If Apple wanted to do something huge why not offer OS X to every pc now for a price of $249. I'd bet they would sell 2-4 million copies of OS X in the first week to PC users fed up with their operating system. Apple makes money on their operating system from hardware sales so we will never see this happening.

It is not going to be apple logic boards. It is going to be intel boards it is going to require bios and all that it is not apple it is Intel

[loki74]

... there are many implicatios of this that makes me very uneasy. BIOS was not something I missed after switching. And if the mobo is intel as well.... I hope its not as messy as what I see in those PC's... a mess of wires a ATA cables. I just installed 2 gigs of ram and a 300 gig SATA HD and it could not have been easier. Ive also done the same thing on a PC. and it was a headache. The human-machine interface intuitiveness that Apple excels in extends to the hardware they produce as well. I hope the intutitiveness of the hardware is preserved.

Also... the perfect compatability between Apple software and hardware--surely this has something to do with the fact that they have the same origin? I hope that this synergey is preserved as well.

Basically... I hope that Apple keeps a good eye on Intel while making the units....

[Catfish_Man]

Originally Posted by G5man

It is not going to be apple logic boards. It is going to be intel boards it is going to require bios and all that it is not apple it is Intel

...and your source for this is...? Apple has only announced that they aren't using OpenFirmware. EFI sounds like another good option, and nobody has any info on the motherboards. My personal guess is an Apple motherboard using Intel chipset components (among others. Intel doesn't support firewire800 at this point, for example), but that's just a guess.

[loki74]

Originally Posted by Catfish_Man

...and your source for this is...? Apple has only announced that they aren't using OpenFirmware. EFI sounds like another good option, and nobody has any info on the motherboards. My personal guess is an Apple motherboard using Intel chipset components (among others. Intel doesn't support firewire800 at this point, for example), but that's just a guess.

Your words are a gleam of hope... as long as Apple has a significant role in development, it should be just fine.

(something i read about and forgot to mention is prev. post...)
running XP/longhorny on a Mac? Thats like pissing in the fountain of youth! :barf:

[Athens]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaddock

"Call software vendor for support. Customer service says, ahh, just boot up Windows and run it from there. "

3. A Windows installation always over-writes an existing OS and boot partition. MS simply can't imagine that Windows might co-exist with other OSes on a single machine. Yet another reason it'll be impossible for the average user to use alongside OS X.

Sorry thats not true, its really easy to get Windows to co-exist with other OS's and on most linux setups Ive done and my friends, Windows was always on the second partition. At one time I had Windows 98, ME, XP and linux on the same computer.

[Madrag]

what I don't understand is how they (apple) will explain the advantage of using intel, when they use it as the baseline for the G5 comparison and they state that the G5 2.7 is 98% faster?

will the new intel macs have a different architecture altogether? or will the OS make it that fast as well in the future?

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Madrag

what I don't understand is how they (apple) will explain the advantage of using intel, when they use it as the baseline for the G5 comparison and they state that the G5 2.7 is 98% faster?

These are just some guesses:

• Apple won't be using a P4.
• Apple's comparing G5s running Mac OS X to x86s running Windows, not Mac OS X.
• Apple will be using dual-core Intel chips (at least in their pro lines), so they will continue to be able to market duals in the Power Mac.
• Apple will be using Intel chips that score better than the 970, at least in those benchmarks they show us.

That said, even if they start with a < 2 GHz Pentium D, it won't have to beat the dual 2.7 GHz G5, because it will go into the mini, eMac and iBook. The Power Macs will come later and get something better (code name 'Conroe'). I'm pretty sure Apple has got some guarantees from Intel so they won't be forced to step back. As long as the G5 performs superior, they will stick to it. When Intel has something better, they will switch the PowerMac.

More educated guesses here: http://arstechnica.com/columns/mac/mac-20050608.ars/1

[CaptainHaddock]

Originally Posted by Athens

Sorry thats not true, its really easy to get Windows to co-exist with other OS's and on most linux setups Ive done and my friends, Windows was always on the second partition. At one time I had Windows 98, ME, XP and linux on the same computer.

Hey, I've had dual-boot PCs too. I've never seen a version of Windows that didn't at least over-write the boot sector on installation. Maybe there's one I've never seen, but I doubt it. People who have multi-boots with Linux generally have to install Windows first, then Linux (which they can use to create multi-OS boot menus). You can install other Windows versions later, but you still have to manually configure the bootloader. It's definitely not "easy" in the way using a Mac is easy.

There's no version of Windows available now or in the near future that will say "I see you have OS X installed! Would you like me to install Windows as a secondary option without screwing up the main partition?".

[Madrag]

thanks for the insight and the link SImon, let's see what happens...

[TheMosco]

Originally Posted by Scooterboy

I wonder if SJ didn't paint Apple into a box. Maybe PowerMacs should remain G5. Dual G5 is an awesome setup. How about a pro Quad G5 PowerMac? 4 64 bit 2.7 or more GHz processors each with their own 1.35 GHz or faster FSB. That would rock! Nothing x86 can touch a G5 for FSB bandwidth. The G5 is made for media production. Who cares if a P4 can run Doom3 at higher framerates? Dual core Pentiums or HT cannot compare to 2 or more real processors each on their own 1/2 processor speed FSB.

That would also take a window fan to cool....

[Scooterboy]

Liquid cooled 'natch.

[doucy2]

dual processor for apple laptops
mca uses should benifit from that
i know i will

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by Kristoff

Yah, just what everyone needs, a new crappy hardware setup to run an old crappy OS.

Sad day, sad day.

For me, this is the beginning of the end for Apple as a hardware company.

I predict they will sell ipods and software (especially OS X) in the future and people will be buying their hardware from Dell and the like..

Too bad.. really.

[UnixMac]

Anyway, what ever happened to 64 bit? What are we going to use Itaniums in the Mac?

[Catfish_Man]

Originally Posted by UnixMac

Anyway, what ever happened to 64 bit? What are we going to use Itaniums in the Mac?

As has been mentioned all over the place, Intel supports x86-64, and Itanium has nothing to do with x86.

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by Catfish_Man

As has been mentioned all over the place, Intel supports x86-64, and Itanium has nothing to do with x86.

Well ex-****ing-cuse me for asking! I don't always have time to read "all over the place" before I ask a simple question!

[Catfish_Man]

Originally Posted by UnixMac

Well ex-****ing-cuse me for asking! I don't always have time to read "all over the place" before I ask a simple question!

Considering the fact that you started one of those threads ( http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...t=intel+64+bit ), and the question was adequately answered there

Originally Posted by FurionStormrage

Intel's latest 500 series and the entire 600 series chips are the current "low end" 64-bit chip ... There's no real barrier of entry to 64-bit computing in x86-land.

I'd say my response was perfectly justified. Sorry if I offended you.

[UnixMac]

If you look at that thread tha I started, the last post I made was back on 6/6.... And I have no subscription to it, so I lost track of it when I got busy earning money. At the rate things move here, that thread was long gone by today, when I finally had the time to check in on what is "new" at Macnn. Unlike some here, I don't have the time always to devote to this and other sites. So I might on occasion ask the indulgence of members to repeat themselves for me.

Anyway, this whole Intel think has me a bit ticked off, which doesn't help my temper.

[timmerk]

Originally Posted by UnixMac

Anyway, this whole Intel think has me a bit ticked off, which doesn't help my temper.

Let me quote a song:

Settle down, settle down my boy.

(from "Settle Down My Boy" by Men at Work)

[bishopdante]

Yonah, dual 2.7 Pentium M type thingy will be out in early January. Apple Expo San Francisco Keynote is booked for Mr. Jobs. G4 Powerbook is getting very, very old.

Keep your eyes peeled, and this may be the only time you can get upset about receiving an Apple Powerbook for Christmas.

Visit the Apple site on January 9th, at least to see the new Asteroid sound card.

[hangtown]

I don't understand what the big deal is. A cpu is a cpu. When the mac went from the 68k architechture to the PPC, did it stop being a mac? Did it suddenly become something else? It's a cpu, not a soul.

You guys are freaking out over nothing. If anything you are now going to have cpus from a company that understands manufacturing processes and is able to deliver in volume. Intel doesn't operate as a foundry for others, and they don't have to have others manufacture their designs, they manufacture everything they sell and always will.

Some people need to quit being such fanboys of anything that's current apple and open their eyes.

[Catfish_Man]

Originally Posted by bishopdante

Yonah, dual 2.7 Pentium M type thingy will be out in early January. Apple Expo San Francisco Keynote is booked for Mr. Jobs. G4 Powerbook is getting very, very old.

Keep your eyes peeled, and this may be the only time you can get upset about receiving an Apple Powerbook for Christmas.

Visit the Apple site on January 9th, at least to see the new Asteroid sound card.

Actually the initial release top speed will be 2.26, iirc. I wouldn't be particularly surprised to see its more desktop-oriented successor up at 2.7+ though (second half of '06).