[Maccare]

I feel like I have been betrayed by Apple and your marketing (PR) dept...... I switched to the MAC 1 year ago from Windows XP (IBM pc)..... I felt a strong sense of communty with other MAC users.... I recently (2 mounth ago) bought two e-Macs for my parents and mother-in-law... I was tired of fixing the bugs (Spyware) with their Windows XP machines...... They find the transtion from Windows to OS X painless...... I was proud for 2 months or so.... Until my father called yesterday asking about the Apple and Intel deal...

I was on the defence trying to explain why Apple did this to their current users..... I have been employed with IBM for the last 5 years and have to say IBM is very fair and care for their customer basic (IBM is not one to act on an impulse)..... I know at times IBM is slow to make decisions, and they lost many opportunities...

I don't work with the division that works directly with Apple, making the "G5"s but heard that Steve Jobs is a real SOB to work with....... Maybe Steve Jobs needs learn the basic fundamentals of BUSINESS practices..... Last Friday Apple's people were in the Armonk offices (IBM) but did not think Apple was pulling the plug on the "G5" chip...... I think the bigger picture is Apple will be a software company in a few years..... The computer hardware industry is very cut throat, its very hard to stay competitive..... IBM it self sold the right to the ThinkPad and Compaq and HP merged... Think about it!! They would stand to make billions on their operating system.....

I feel less special as a Mac user.... Its a sad time for Apple Users.......

[mitchell_pgh]

1) Perhaps you should feel betrayed by IBM, not Apple. Sure it's easy to say "Steve got pissed" but look at the facts. Here we are a few years after the intro of the G5 without a portable option. None of us know what's going on behind the doors of IBM/Intel/Apple, but I see this as a long term solution for something that would eventually need to be addressed. If Intel doesn't pan out, it's trivial for Apple to jump to AMD or whoever is hot that month.

2) The PPC to Intel switch should be nearly seamless for your parents and 90% of the Mac community. I'm assuming that your parents will need a new computer in 4-5 years. By then... EVERYTHING will be designed for OS X x86.

3) Steve is a SOB, but he also isn't an idiot. They kept an x86 version of OS X for a reason.

4) The PC industry is a cut throat business, but Apple has been doing it since the beginning (IBM sold out because they weren't making money... Apple is still making money). NO BUSINESS is going to kill off a profit center... PERIOD. So don't go buying a Dell expecting Apple to be offering $129 versions of OS X for any POS PC.

5) The "Magic" of the Mac is the merger of hardware AND software. While I am nervous about the Intel Inside factor, I'm sure Apple will continue their tradition of making VERY high quality systems.

I've been with Apple for almost 20 years and while I feel a little nervous (like when we jumped from 68k to PPC, OS 9 to OS X...) this doesn't compare to when I finally found out that Copland was abandoned. That is the only time I ever considered jumped ship.

This is more of a blip on the radar and people are making it out to be something it isn't. If anything, it will flush all the classic apps that need to either update or disappear.

[AKcrab]

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh

If anything, it will flush all the classic apps that need to either update or disappear.

"We are here today to mourn the passing of Mac OS 9," Jobs said. "He is no doubt looking down on us today with that same smile he showed us every time he booted up." S. Jobs, May 2002

[ghporter]

I can't say enough about how a Mac will still be a Mac, regardless of what's under the hood. Come on! The Apple folks aren't suicidal! They want to stay in business, so they are certainly not going to abandon the computing philosophy that has sustained the company for so many years.

Macs are different because of Mac OS-whatever version or flavor it happens to be. The biggest problem with moving forward with the PPC architecture seems to have been that the chip producers couldn't/wouldn't produce enough of them that were cool enough and power efficient enough to satisfy our demands for new computers. If Ford can't get enough starters from their supplier, they can go to Delco (originally a GM subsidiary) and get perfectly adequate starters. Nobody will say "this is no longer a Ford because it has a Delco part it it!" While computer architecture is not quite that simple, the argument is the same; changing the details of how the OS is executed doesn't change the OS.

[MallyMal]

Originally Posted by Maccare

I feel like I have been betrayed by Apple and your marketing (PR) dept......

See, this is your problem right here. Why do you feel betrayed by a company big-upping their products? That's what marketing is. You know Apple is corporation right? You can only be angry at yourself for believing the hype. You followed blindly thinking that you were "Thinking Different."

But why all the drama? You like your Mac before now right? You still have the same hardware and software, right? So, what's the issue? The only thing that is going to change is the chip.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Maccare

I don't work with the division that works directly with Apple, making the "G5"s but heard that Steve Jobs is a real SOB to work with....... Maybe Steve Jobs needs learn the basic fundamentals of BUSINESS practices.....

Like, say, dropping a supplier that is completely incapable of living up to any of its obligations?

[Zimphire]

I felt special because of the OS. Not the Hardware.

While the insides of a Mac was a site to see, it never had state of the art bleeding edge hardware. in the past 10 years.

This gives Apple the chance to run on the same hardware as everyone else. Therefore no complaints about speed issues compared to other venders.

Let the OS wars begin.

Again.

[:XI:]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Like, say, dropping a supplier that is completely incapable of living up to any of its obligations?

And no, I don't feel less 'special'. What kind of a question is that anyway?

[boots]

People who feel "special" because of the computer they use are riding the short bus.

[Mister Elf]

Originally Posted by Zimphire

While the insides of a Mac was a site to see, it never had state of the art bleeding edge hardware. in the past 10 years.

It still should be nice inside...on shipping machines, won't they be making their own mobos?

[Superchicken]

I feel a bit less special... now when someone asks me if they should buy a centrino or a G4 what do I say? Get the PC the G4 won't be around in a while anyway? At the same time I understand the choice and am a wee bit excited... but either way my PowerBook is still special... I don't know if my future Intel based Macs will still feel special... that remains to be seen.

[AKcrab]

Originally Posted by Superchicken

now when someone asks me if they should buy a centrino or a G4 what do I say?

wtf? You say "Do you want to run Mac OS X, or Windows XP?"

[Kerrigan]

The G4 wasn't such a bad chip in its time, but I can't wait for a Powerbook with a Centrino.

[Cory Bauer]

The processors inside our Macs haven't made them special for many, many years. Ever since we passed 300Mhz, the question has been, "do our Macs keep up with the competition?" Now, we'll no longer have that bug in the back of our heads telling us that our $3,000 computer runs Photoshop half the speed of a $1,500 PC. We can just sit back, relax, and enjoy OS X. We're no longer trying to keep up on performance, we'll always be at the same level from here on out.

[Zimphire]

Originally Posted by Cory Bauer

Now, we'll no longer have that bug in the back of our heads telling us that our $3,000 computer runs Photoshop half the speed of a $1,500 PC.

Never had that bug.

We are talking milliseconds here.

[Ghoser777]

Perhaps this will help:

[Maccare]

Frankly Apple as a software will not charge $129.00 for their operating system.... I am sure the prices will be in the area as Mircosoft price point......

Think about it.... People think there will be a "special Intel chipset" or "special Mac approved motherboard" No way will this happen...... Apple can't control both the hardware and software in a open architecture....

Any one remember IBM tried to reclaim the PC market with PS/2 and OS2 in the 80's....... Didn't work!!! I guess the saying history always repeats itself......

I don't think Steve Jobs is a idiot.... Loyalty is not Steve Jobs best quality.... Three major changes to Apple in less than ten years...... Major Corporations and individuals spend a lot of money on third party applications (Adobe, Mircosoft Office, Apple Apps, Etc.) Plus training personal.... I guess that is the only good thing I can say positive Mircosoft.....

Why would anyone be mad or upset with IBM? Apple knew the capabilities of the G5..... Apple left Motorola aka "Freescale Semiconductor" behind, moving on to IBM knowing the heat and power issues... If IBM was at fault for not coming thru with a 3Mhz G5 or G5 for the powerbook line... You don't think Apple would sue??

Another chapter in the history of Personal Computers...... I don't think Apple will be same Company it is today.... Apple will no longer be a hardware company..... Jobs see the future in software......

[meelk]

Originally Posted by Maccare

I don't think Apple will be same Company it is today.... Apple will no longer be a hardware company..... Jobs see the future in software......

I've been saying this for awhile. Itll probably take 5 to 7 years, but Apple is moving out of hardware, the writing is on the wall.

[Spliffdaddy]

Steve Jobs would have been a bigger idiot if he stuck with IBM. Apple has a long history of 'delayed availability' of its products.

[JC Denton]

Originally Posted by Maccare

Why would anyone be mad or upset with IBM? Apple knew the capabilities of the G5..... Apple left Motorola aka "Freescale Semiconductor" behind, moving on to IBM knowing the heat and power issues... If IBM was at fault for not coming thru with a 3Mhz G5 or G5 for the powerbook line... You don't think Apple would sue??

Lawsuits. Yeah, okay. I'm sorry, but I can't get my work done on a PowerBook running on lawsuits, let alone a mobile G5 that doesn't exist. Just because they subpoenaed Think Secret doesn't mean you can run an entire computer company that way.

[khufuu]

Originally Posted by Maccare

No way will this happen...... Apple can't control both the hardware and software in a open architecture....

I didn't anyone said anything about open architecture. They said they're switching to Intel processors.

It could very well be possible that not much else will change.

[Maccare]

Originally Posted by khufuu

I didn't anyone said anything about open architecture. They said they're switching to Intel processors.

It could very well be possible that not much else will change.

What do you think Apple's developer kit includes a "special Intel motherboard"?

The bottom line is Intel chips equals open architecture.....

[khufuu]

Originally Posted by Maccare

What do you think Apple's developer kit includes a "special Intel motherboard"?

The bottom line is Intel chips equals open architecture.....

No. It doesn't. Just because Apple hasn't yet created their own with an Intel chip on it doesn't mean they won't. This could very well be a stop-gap measure to get developers moving on things now.

One doesn't imply the other.

Just because you put a Ferrari engine into a VW doesn't mean you're driving a Ferrari.

[Maccare]

Originally Posted by khufuu

No. It doesn't. Just because Apple hasn't yet created their own with an Intel chip on it doesn't mean they won't. This could very well be a stop-gap measure to get developers moving on things now.

One doesn't imply the other.

Just because you put a Ferrari engine into a VW doesn't mean you're driving a Ferrari.

So your car analogy to me means the shell of the computer is what makes it different? Ok maybe the style and the price but the fact is the car is still a car.... Intel is not going to spend millions of dollars in R&D for 3% to 4% of market share for a closed architecture...... If anything Intel wants Apple's OS to be open.....

Lets say Apple changes the BIOS chip of the so called"MAC" Intel computer to only accepted OS X....... You don't think it will be hacked or reversed engineered......

I am sure everyone knows the history of a company called Compaq....... Compaq reversed engineered
and clone the IBM PC in 1982..... I don't think Steve Jobs or Apple will allow history to repeat itself again....

That is why I think it is a sad time for Mac users..... Not because I believe the hype or drama of the think different marketing campaign.....

In the future we will choose a Dell or HP with OSX or Windows.... OSX will be available to ANY INTEL PC....

[maxintosh]

Originally Posted by Maccare

Lets say Apple changes the BIOS chip of the so called"MAC" Intel computer to only accepted OS X....... You don't think it will be hacked or reversed engineered......

First of all, if anything, OS X will only boot up on Apple machines, but Schiller admitted it will probably be straightforward to install windows on a Mac machine.

But so what if someone figures out a way to get OS X to run on a PC? A few dozen geeks install OS X on their PCs? Do you really see average consumers hacking their BIOS to force OS X to boot? Heck 99% of the home users I know have no idea what a BIOS is and would run away screaming if someone told them they would have to "hack or reverse engineer" their PC.

Apple will not allow OS X to be licensed to PCs for the forseeable future, and will probably protect their own BIOS by patent or copyright law, preventing cloning from happening. Besides, consumers don't want to install their own OSes; they take the computer out of the box and struggle with plugging the thing in right. The Average Joe doesn't even know what an Intel is except by name, so as long as Apple continues to offer great solutions that "just work," they will remain a strong player in the market.

[khufuu]

Originally Posted by Maccare

So your car analogy to me means the shell of the computer is what makes it different? Ok maybe the style and the price but the fact is the car is still a car.... Intel is not going to spend millions of dollars in R&D for 3% to 4% of market share for a closed architecture...... If anything Intel wants Apple's OS to be open.....

Lets say Apple changes the BIOS chip of the so called"MAC" Intel computer to only accepted OS X....... You don't think it will be hacked or reversed engineered......

I am sure everyone knows the history of a company called Compaq....... Compaq reversed engineered
and clone the IBM PC in 1982..... I don't think Steve Jobs or Apple will allow history to repeat itself again....

That is why I think it is a sad time for Mac users..... Not because I believe the hype or drama of the think different marketing campaign.....

In the future we will choose a Dell or HP with OSX or Windows.... OSX will be available to ANY INTEL PC....

Don't know much about car huh?

Intel won't be spending development time on new processors for the Apple market. What are you talking about!!?? Intel won't care if Apple has a closed architecture or not. They'll just produce the same old chips they have been all along.

IBM made their first PCs with off the shelf product. They made it open by choice. This doesn't mean that Apple will. They can still do almost whatever they want.

[TheJoshu]

I stopped feeling special when the SoHo boutique opened and suddenly everyone had a Mac and an iPod. And to think, all those years I tried to convert people...

[Maccare]

Originally Posted by maxintosh

First of all, if anything, OS X will only boot up on Apple machines, but Schiller admitted it will probably be straightforward to install windows on a Mac machine.

But so what if someone figures out a way to get OS X to run on a PC? A few dozen geeks install OS X on their PCs? Do you really see average consumers hacking their BIOS to force OS X to boot? Heck 99% of the home users I know have no idea what a BIOS is and would run away screaming if someone told them they would have to "hack or reverse engineer" their PC.

Apple will not allow OS X to be licensed to PCs for the forseeable future, and will probably protect their own BIOS by patent or copyright law, preventing cloning from happening. Besides, consumers don't want to install their own OSes; they take the computer out of the box and struggle with plugging the thing in right. The Average Joe doesn't even know what an Intel is except by name, so as long as Apple continues to offer great solutions that "just work," they will remain a strong player in the market.

Khufuu, Can explain to me what it is that I don't understand cars?..... I know the first IBM PC was parts of the shelf... BUT the BIOS chip was IBMs.....

I guess you don't know much about the history of PCs....

[Zimphire]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23769

[joltguy]

Originally Posted by boots

People who feel "special" because of the computer they use are riding the short bus.

Hilarious.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Maccare

Why would anyone be mad or upset with IBM? Apple knew the capabilities of the G5..... Apple left Motorola aka "Freescale Semiconductor" behind, moving on to IBM knowing the heat and power issues... If IBM was at fault for not coming thru with a 3Mhz G5 or G5 for the powerbook line... You don't think Apple would sue?

No, I don't, because that would be stupid and pointless.

And of course it's IBM's fault. It was IBM's responsibility to make the chips, and they didn't, just like they didn't have a sufficient supply of G5s to roll out the iMac G5 on schedule. Who else's fault would it be that they didn't get made besides the company responsible for making them? Do you think Apple asked IBM, "Hey would you please consistently make a liar out of us every time we promise even a mediocre technical achievement like putting a G5 chip in an iMac?"

Originally Posted by Maccare

Lets say Apple changes the BIOS chip of the so called"MAC" Intel computer to only accepted OS X....... You don't think it will be hacked or reversed engineered......

I am sure everyone knows the history of a company called Compaq....... Compaq reversed engineered
and clone the IBM PC in 1982..... I don't think Steve Jobs or Apple will allow history to repeat itself again....

You're absolutely right. Fortunately for Apple, the last two and a half decades have brought about major changes in the law that would make reverse-engineering Apple's BIOS blatantly illegal. For the most prominent example, read up on the DMCA.

Originally Posted by Maccare

In the future we will choose a Dell or HP with OSX or Windows.... OSX will be available to ANY INTEL PC....

Okay, Maccare, you have made your totally unsubstantiated point. Thank you for your input. Apple has specifically said you are wrong, but feel free to continue pulling theories out of thin air.

[Randman]

BTW, it's Mac not MAC.

Honestly, as soon as the Intels are out, you'll be able to take it next to the PPC model and it'll be difficult if not impossible to discern which is which, because both will be using OSX.

[Maccare]

Hey Chuck,

Even if you believe Apple is not "planing" on allowing other Intel PC run Apple's OS...... How is Apple going to protect itself from hackers or Moders from running Apple OS on a Dell or HP?

[Chuckit]

I'm not an Apple exec, and thus I can't detail Apple's secret plans for its upcoming product line.

However, I can tell tell you that, in my estimation, Apple really doesn't need to do that much to protect itself from a tiny fraction of the overall computer market that probably wouldn't be buying Apple hardware anyway.

[JC Denton]

Originally Posted by TheJoshu

I stopped feeling special when the SoHo boutique opened and suddenly everyone had a Mac and an iPod. And to think, all those years I tried to convert people...

I think this sort of attitude is behind some of the emotional attachment that some are feeling with the switch to Intel. Some like to revel in their minority status, since no one likes being thought of as a conformist, and going with an alternative CPU architecture might be part of what made that feeling possible. I myself used to feel that way (heck, Apple loved to take advantage of that mindset, what with "1984" and "Lemmings"), but I decided a while back that it's pointless to worry about this sort of thing. If I woke up tomorrow and Mac OS X magically had a 95% market share, I wouldn't switch to Windows or Linux, and the Mac wouldn't lose any of its luster for me. I'd like to think that Apple would still be motivated to continue making the Macintosh platform the best user experience available, and that's why I'm a Mac user. Not because I like being part of an exclusive club.

I'm an Apple and Nintendo enthusiast, plus a die-hard White Sox fan living on the North Side. Trust me, I know what it means to go against the majority.

[Randman]

The funny thing is that this has happened before, in a big way. Just without the Internet. And without Jobs at the helm. Does anyone remember Apple's 1984 commercial? Big Brother = Big Blue =IBM.

[lngtones]

Originally Posted by meelk

I've been saying this for awhile. Itll probably take 5 to 7 years, but Apple is moving out of hardware, the writing is on the wall.

Does it hurt to be a moron? The largest percentage of revenue for Apple is from the computers they sell. If they moved to software only? Who would sell their software? No one selling Windows that's for sure.

This just doesn't make any sense. I love the Mac, but Mac users as a group are turning out to be very ignorant about how computers work.

[Maccare]

Originally Posted by lngtones

Does it hurt to be a moron? The largest percentage of revenue for Apple is from the computers they sell. If they moved to software only? Who would sell their software? No one selling Windows that's for sure.

This just doesn't make any sense. I love the Mac, but Mac users as a group are turning out to be very ignorant about how computers work.

Ingtones, How can you say "Mac users as a group are turning out to be very ignorant"

First off hmm, are you a Mac User? if so I guess that makes you ignorant?

Second... Everything Mac Users has been told for over 20 years turn out not to be true...

Third..... I am sure alot of Mac users spend a premium for their computer(s)

Have a little respect for others...... Have a wonderful Day!

[Randman]

20 years?
20 years ago, we heard about how IBM was evil and everything that Apple wasn't. To say otherwise is an ignorant statement. Don't let the current transition make you forget Apple's history.

[:XI:]

This thread is special.

[Randman]

Originally Posted by :XI:

This thread is special.

[joltguy]

Originally Posted by lngtones

Mac users as a group are turning out to be very ignorant about how computers work.

You're so right about that, because most of the Mac users around here (yourself included) think that that the baggage-laden x86 chip is a wonderful replacement for the PowerPC. Ignorance, indeed.

Actually, if anything's ignorant about this thread its the derogatory references to children in special education. Grow up.

[starman]

Originally Posted by joltguy

You're so right about that, because most of the Mac users around here (yourself included) think that that the baggage-laden x86 chip is a wonderful replacement for the PowerPC. Ignorance, indeed.

Actually, if anything's ignorant about this thread its the derogatory references to children in special education. Grow up.

As bad as the x86 chips are, the G5s aren't being updated fast enough, nor modified to work in laptops. Seriously, it was the only decision Steve could make. How much longer do you think it could be before Powerbook sales slumped because of the lack of a G5? Steve promised a 3.0 GHz G5 two years ago.

I'm not jumping for joy over this, but in order to move ahead, it's the ONLY decision Steve could make.

Mike

[Zimphire]

Originally Posted by Randman

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by joltguy

You're so right about that, because most of the Mac users around here (yourself included) think that that the baggage-laden x86 chip is a wonderful replacement for the PowerPC. Ignorance, indeed.

I understand that x86 is the architectural equivalent of a skanky old lady with herpes wearing a leather catsuit and trying to pick up frat boys at a bar. However, as much as I would like my 1.5 GHz PowerBook and 2 GHz G5 to remain top-of-the-line for the next 20 years, the Mac needs to progress, and that was just not happening with IBM and, as Apple said, wasn't even in the cards for IBM's foreseeable future. The case was the same for Motorola, the other major PowerPC company, and Apple switched to IBM in hopes that it would be different. Apple has shown that it wants to stick with PowerPC, but it can't do it alone. So, yes, the PowerPC is technically much better, but in practice, a chip that will never move forward is a bad choice, even compared to x86.

[joltguy]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

I understand that x86 is the architectural equivalent of a skanky old lady with herpes wearing a leather catsuit and trying to pick up frat boys at a bar. However, as much as I would like my 1.5 GHz PowerBook and 2 GHz G5 to remain top-of-the-line for the next 20 years, the Mac needs to progress, and that was just not happening with IBM and, as Apple said, wasn't even in the cards for IBM's foreseeable future. The case was the same for Motorola, the other major PowerPC company, and Apple switched to IBM in hopes that it would be different. Apple has shown that it wants to stick with PowerPC, but it can't do it alone. So, yes, the PowerPC is technically much better, but in practice, a chip that will never move forward is a bad choice, even compared to x86.

I understand what you're saying. What it boils down to is that things were just taking too long to happen with IBM as the chip supplier. However, "never" is an overstatement. Great things will happen with the Power architecture. When they do, we'll be stuck on the sidelines now with the rest of the PC industry. I guess the main disappointment for me is that although we will get upgraded Macs on a more frequent basis, the Mac hardware of the future will only ever be as fast as the Dell hardware or the HP hardware or the Sony hardware. We'll be just as good, never better. The possibility of being better than the rest was the edge that Apple had courtesy of the PowerPC. Now that edge and its glorious possibilities have been sacrificed, all in the name of impatience. In my books, that's not a good enough reason to warrant a sacrifice of this magnitude.

[AKcrab]

Originally Posted by joltguy

Great things will happen with the Power architecture. When they do, we'll be stuck on the sidelines now with the rest of the PC industry. I guess the main disappointment for me is that although we will get upgraded Macs on a more frequent basis, the Mac hardware of the future will only ever be as fast as the Dell hardware or the HP hardware or the Sony hardware. We'll be just as good, never better. The possibility of being better than the rest was the edge that Apple had courtesy of the PowerPC.

What? Universal Binaries won't run on PPC? I'm so confused.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally Posted by joltguy

I guess the main disappointment for me is that although we will get upgraded Macs on a more frequent basis, the Mac hardware of the future will only ever be as fast as the Dell hardware or the HP hardware or the Sony hardware.

Considering we are usually behind the curve (sure our top end $3K+ systems beat the $3K+ PC systems, but our $1000 systems are well behind the $1000 systems on the PC side of the fence.

Let's not even get started with portables where IBM has still not indicted that they have a mobile solution.

I'm tired of the lower end systems being left behind in the race.

[wdlove]

At this point I don't feel less special. I'm willing to give Steve Jobs a chance. It's the software that makes the Mac.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally Posted by AKcrab

What? Universal Binaries won't run on PPC? I'm so confused.

Why would Apple even make xCode with the OPTION to NOT have a PPC version?

I'm guessing that in 2-3 years, we will start seeing Mac x86 ONLY programs coming out.

This will make PPC users VERY MAD, but what they need to understand is, the ONLY reason they are being ported is because of the common CPU.