Apple goes Intel

Nephilim · Post by **Nephilim** » Mon Jun 06, 2005 1:47 pm

It's official.

Steve Jobs announced at the WWDC today that Apple is switching to Intel processors.

Now, I haven't been able to find out any specifics yet (and believe me, I'm trying) so I don't know if you will be able to just pick up a copy of OSX next year and slap it onto any ol' PC you have laying around, or if there will be specific hardware involved, but according to what I have read so far, Apple is planning to ship x86 based Macs as early as within the next 2 years.

linky linky

Bigun · Post by **Bigun** » Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:34 pm

Someone just posted that in my IRC room. It will be funny to see their HCL. :lol:

This is a good and a bad thing:

Good: Windows will *FINNALLY* have some decent competition... payback's a bitch... isn't it the most fetid evil in the known universe?

(NOTE: It changes Microsuck to what is posted right after "isn't it", nice word exchange)

Bad: Intel will get all of Mac's business (I hate Intel in case you didn't know)

elasticwings · Post by **elasticwings** » Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:45 pm

Personally, I think they should have gone with the Cell processor.

Bigun · Post by **Bigun** » Mon Jun 06, 2005 2:46 pm

elasticwings wrote:Personally, I think they should have gone with the Cell processor.

Well, this is a computer... not a console.... I think the point of going to x86 in the first place is to standardize and compete with Microsuck.

Nephilim · Post by **Nephilim** » Mon Jun 06, 2005 3:09 pm

elasticwings wrote:Personally, I think they should have gone with the Cell processor.

It would have been cool, but the trade-offs wouldn't be worth it. It would take Apple a loooong time to become viable again because there wouldn't be any compatible hardware or software out for quite some time.

KL · Post by KL » Tue Jun 07, 2005 7:56 am

The next version of Windows has too much crap in it anyway, like that "Digital Rights Management" bs. I'd pay good money to be able to run OSX.

Nephilim · Post by **Nephilim** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 8:32 am

KL wrote:The next version of Windows has too much crap in it anyway, like that "Digital Rights Management" bs. I'd pay good money to be able to run OSX.

Well, from what I've heard, they've already started taking orders for Devs systems with a P4 D proc and OSX and they'll offer a wintel compatible version of OSX next year.

Bigun · Post by **Bigun** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:44 am

Do you think they will offer an AMD compatable OSX?

Nephilim · Post by **Nephilim** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:26 pm

I don't know, because now I'm hearing that they most likely won't offer a generic-pc compatible OSX. Which, while saddening, makes sense, since Apple makes a lot of their revenue from hardware sales.

Bigun · Post by **Bigun** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:33 pm

Nephilim wrote:I don't know, because now I'm hearing that they most likely won't offer a generic-pc compatible OSX. Which, while saddening, makes sense, since Apple makes a lot of their revenue from hardware sales.

While that may be true, they have a chance to take on the Behemoth that is Microsuck. I know too many people what would back them up on this and too many tech's that would switch their users over to Mac OSX. Maybe after enough requests... they might.

karmakaze · Post by **karmakaze** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 8:45 pm

Bigun wrote:
Nephilim wrote:I don't know, because now I'm hearing that they most likely won't offer a generic-pc compatible OSX. Which, while saddening, makes sense, since Apple makes a lot of their revenue from hardware sales.

While that may be true, they have a chance to take on the Behemoth that is Microsuck. I know too many people what would back them up on this and too many tech's that would switch their users over to Mac OSX. Maybe after enough requests... they might.

you do realize that bill gates owns most of macintosh right?

Bigun · Post by **Bigun** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 9:22 pm

karmakaze wrote:
Bigun wrote:
Nephilim wrote:I don't know, because now I'm hearing that they most likely won't offer a generic-pc compatible OSX. Which, while saddening, makes sense, since Apple makes a lot of their revenue from hardware sales.

While that may be true, they have a chance to take on the Behemoth that is Microsuck. I know too many people what would back them up on this and too many tech's that would switch their users over to Mac OSX. Maybe after enough requests... they might.

you do realize that bill gates owns most of macintosh right?

I don't care about him getting richer. He couldn't give away that much money before he dies. I want him to loose his flagship called "Windows".

junkie christ · Post by **junkie christ** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:09 pm

im not biased to any platform, its all exciting to me.i really wanna see how this will change things for the mac.im finally getting to the point where i like macs, but then again i think all the different OS and hardware setups are like the factioning of religion, noones nailed it.its all pro-con.
as for apple? my opinions of them are changing monthly anymore... but i personally dig the stabilty for music and video.. or art.
apple has made a string of bold moves that paid off in the last 5 years or so.
i think after the customer base has a higher base knoweldge of computers apple will split alot of m1rcosofts control. linux will stay for the g33kc0r3, and personally.. so long as all the servers im logging into are running linux? im happy that way.
god bless linux geeks, i hate using it but i cant live without linux servers....

i wonder if this will decrease the effiency any. i mean it seems like they were building a stronger hardware setup than the PC anyway if you look at the linear progression of the statistics.

karmakaze wrote:you do realize that bill gates owns most of macintosh right?

id bet money that he doesnt know because id bet money that most dont...and id bet money that people that get lost in their hardware specs, personal inclinations, and performance charts and forget that the bottom line about half the people who use a computer are computer illerate and MS products are more common, therefore they can ask for help easier, they see it on tv, ect ect...they feel more comfortable with it. if such a large percentage of users are afraid of computers and barely use Windows, good luck getting them to go mac or linux.
noone will ever take on MS, they will just burn themselves out over time as the user market of newer generations have a higher knoweldge base of how computers work and how to use different software packages and OS
this is why when you look at top selling software over the years its shit like windows, office, and then shit like orgeon trail and the sims (games with low learning curves... der.).but what do i know. i just reserached different related topics to this in college for a major non-profit ethics organization for a few years.... and the reason i was picked was because i wasnt (exact quote) "one of those goddamned purist who think that theres a company that needs to die on either side of the fence... people like that miss the forest for the trees and need a hobby". i tend to agree with the man with the wall of doctorates, we still talk because of this type of shit. as a side note, i think they havent made an OS that does a suitable job at handling everything yet, its all strength and weakness. furthermore, diss m1crosoft to a point, without windows the spread and onset of technology wouldnt be what it is today.
/rant. sorry. just felt like exploding. everything has a place until the so called "perfect system" is designed, and i bet the purist will hate it when its made depending on who made it.
which is stupid.
oh yea, and its not that i like MS, i dont really dislike them but i dont really like them.. i dont really care.
its a tool.
all of this shit? tools.
use em all i say.

Bigun · Post by **Bigun** » Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:08 am

I can't count the number of computers infected with 'muck' and 'viruses' on Windows machines and I've had in my shop that I had to reformat because cleaning all the spyware out would have taken longer and would have had to charge the customer triple of what it would cost if I had just formatted. If Mac comes out with OSX for PC, I would recommend a copy for every PC user I support (after I try it out first of course). Given this will hurt my business in the long run, it will be better for computer-kind.

And yes, I know there are viruses for Mac's... just not near as many.

Nephilim · Post by **Nephilim** » Wed Jun 08, 2005 8:55 am

karmakaze wrote:you do realize that bill gates owns most of macintosh right?

I think you mean own's most of Apple, not Macintosh.

Either way, I don't think he does anymore. He use to own a lot but he didn't own a controlling interest. I think the major shareholders have been slowly buying Gates out of Apple. If that weren't the case, then Jobs wouldn't be lambasting Longhorn as much as he is....especially at the last shareholder's meeting.

Post by **Bone** » Sat Jun 11, 2005 9:29 am

Nephilim wrote:
karmakaze wrote:you do realize that bill gates owns most of macintosh right?

I think you mean own's most of Apple, not Macintosh.

Either way, I don't think he does anymore. He use to own a lot but he didn't own a controlling interest. I think the major shareholders have been slowly buying Gates out of Apple. If that weren't the case, then Jobs wouldn't be lambasting Longhorn as much as he is....especially at the last shareholder's meeting.

Microsuck doesn't anymore. They bought a chunk of stock they were required to hold for 3 years as part of a payoff for use of quicktime. It was far cry from a controling intrest and but a small part of their pay off to Apple. Vader can give you the WHOLE story on that one.

Now what I have to wonder, I have heard that several of the game consols are getting ready to switch to Power PC chips, as Apple gets ready to go to Intel.... go figure *shrug*