Oh My God
I am only now starting to recover. Which is pretty sad, but there you have it...
Apple announced today that they are going to transition to Intel (ie PC) chips in their computers. They are starting to bring out PC based computers next year, fully transitioning to them by 2007 (when, incidently, the next version of Mac OS X will be released IN DIRECT COMPETITION with Longhorn, M$s next version of windows)
I simply don't understand. They say it's because they
I've hated the x86 architecture for so long that finding it is the final, eventual winner is depressing - there is now no competing architecture for PCs.
If they are feeling like taking M$ on (seems a little silly) I guess they will be able to run windows programs very easily within MacOSX now - why use windows when you can use Mac OS X and still run all your old software!
Unfortunately the opposite is true too AND the MacOSX user experience is simply not that compelling. (get rid of the damn doc and fix user window management)
Apple announced today that they are going to transition to Intel (ie PC) chips in their computers. They are starting to bring out PC based computers next year, fully transitioning to them by 2007 (when, incidently, the next version of Mac OS X will be released IN DIRECT COMPETITION with Longhorn, M$s next version of windows)
I simply don't understand. They say it's because they
- aren't getting the speed ramp up from IBM they wanted
- the IBM chips run too hot
- Intel has a complementary 'roadmap' to Apple's, whatever that means.
- Apple are a hardware company. How will they maintain their hardware sales if people can run their software on any PC
-> yes people like their industrial design - is that enough?
-> maybe Mac OS X will be crippled or not work on standard PCs - Many developers (esp hold overs from the original Mac OS) will have to work very hard to get their programs running on another platform. They won't like this. They will charge money for the new version (with no extra features). Consumers won't like that
- Why Intel? AMD have faster, cheaper chips. Surely they are a better partner? (The only exception here is with portable devices - and the Powerbook has been floundering the most of all apple's products)
- Why tell people now? I have two friends who were thinking of getting Macs, and now won't. They'll either get one next year or, if they are compelled enough, buy a copy of the OS for their current machines (or steal one - the more likely situation)
-> This reeks of an 'Amstrad' like collapse where a wonderful product is announced for a year away, everyone stops buying the current product, the company goes bust before releasing the new one! - In the same vein - IBM will not spend any money upgrading their chips from now on - so we won't actually get any compelling new hardware before next year anyway
- Why are all teh game consoles changing to IBM chips if they are bad? XBox, Playstation 3 and Nintendo Revolution are all using variants of the PowerPC design - so it can't be all bad, can it?
I've hated the x86 architecture for so long that finding it is the final, eventual winner is depressing - there is now no competing architecture for PCs.
If they are feeling like taking M$ on (seems a little silly) I guess they will be able to run windows programs very easily within MacOSX now - why use windows when you can use Mac OS X and still run all your old software!
Unfortunately the opposite is true too AND the MacOSX user experience is simply not that compelling. (get rid of the damn doc and fix user window management)
2 Comments:
C'mon Tiest don't be such a nerd nerd nerdity nerd :)
Check out Cringely for some interesting discussions of Apple and Intel... http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050609.html
Mia just told me you had a blog so I couldn't help checking it out.
cheers
L
I think that now Steve Jobs has been reincarnated, Aple is less about hardware and more about leisure/entertainment. So go for the bucks.
here's one from economics that explains why political parties are identical in all but name:
an ice-cream van pulls up at a beach (which is evenly populated by beachgoers). he pulls up in the middle so everyone has the same relative distance to walk (and to discourage competitors from taking the other side of the beach)
another ice cream van turns up. where should they park to get the most customers? right next to the first one - at least they'll get to share the entrie beach, and not just some 'niche' segment....
that's all. when apple make an OS that will run on my Intel PC, and they burrow (back) into the education system, and they give I.T. students a free copy like M$ did, I will run OSX. :-)
Post a Comment
<< Home