Can Intel-based Macs retake the personal computer market?
Posted by Brad Wardell on 07 June 2005 - 03:12 · 73 comments & 3556 views
About the Author
Full name: Brad Wardell
Forum name: Frogboy
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Brad Wardell
Forum name: Frogboy
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
(1 reply)
#1 Posted by roxics on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:20
- Only if they are priced right. I was in a Best Buy not long ago and heard a sales guys say to another person. Nobody wants to buy a PC over $500 anymore. In reponse to why they don't sell Alienware tehre anymore.
Well I can believe this. PC's nowadays can all pretty much do the same thing no matter what he speed. If Apple can deliver a good machine in a tower case at a $400-600 price point. They should do alright.
But it would be smarter for them to learn to be more of a software company rather then a hardware company and open OSX up to al us PC users.
Last edited by 9349 on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:27 -
#1.1 Posted by nic on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:05
- You're right. If they can knock off their current price tag and still deliver quality Apple Computers, we're going to see their market share increase. Especially if Virtual PC can run Windows with near 1:1 performance, or people can just duel-boot Mac OS/Windows. Thats going to be crazy. Who'd thought we'd ever see the day?
Its all speculation at this point, but everyone seems very interesting to see what's going to happen next.
-
(3 replies)
#2 Posted by hyperactive on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:22
- apple could regain marketshare. i remember at one point though Digital offering something called winfx (or something like that) that allowed realtime running of intel coded windows apps on the alpha. look where the alpha is now.
-
#2.1 Posted by weenur on 07 Jun 2005 - 09:16
- Yeah, and performance sucked horribly. Rosetta seems to not ding performance near as much as the Win32 translator on the Alpha.
-
#2.2 Posted by aristotle-dude on 07 Jun 2005 - 17:17
- One of the main reasons for this fast performance is that, in most cases, the majority of the interface code is stored outside of the compiled executable inside .nib files. Also, any access of OS level frameworks would presumably be accessing processor native code anyway.
-
#2.3 Posted by Arcticflare on 07 Jun 2005 - 19:45
- Sorry, what? Is there a point to this? What are you guys insinuating?
-
(7 replies)
#3 Posted by neocitron on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:23
- there is no way Leopard can take on Longhorn... trust me, the development team behind Longhorn, based in stockholm sweeden are a bunch of new guys... and they're bloody brilliant.. they won't mess this one up.
Every OS X release and nobody really cares ( the general working class public i mean to say ) but all you have to do is release another windows and my 75 year old neighbor will have something to talk about with me when she waters her roses every morning.. "soo, i heard the new windows comes out next week son, are you picking that up?"
and by the way... where will all the games be on the mac? alot of us here use windows simply because of the Gaming... OS X has never focused on gaming.. they still have only OpenGL as their main API... -
#3.1 Posted by betasp on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:30
QUOTE there is no way Leopard can take on Longhorn... trust me, the development team behind Longhorn, based in stockholm sweeden are a bunch of new guys... and they're bloody brilliant.. they won't mess this one up.
Every OS X release and nobody really cares ( the general working class public i mean to say ) but all you have to do is release another windows and my 75 year old neighbor will have something to talk about with me when she waters her roses every morning.. "soo, i heard the new windows comes out next week son, are you picking that up?"
Longhorn barely competes with Tiger, and its features have been locked for release. There will be no suprises... unless you count more feature reductions. I am glad your neighbor is concerned about our OS, mine could care less. All I know is most corporations will be slow to adopt it (like XP) until they are forced through licensing changes. Yes, Longhorn will be a big deal, it will be the first OS release MS has been able to push out in years. There is a new Mac OS year 1-1/2 years. Apple has a faster development cycle. Thnk about this for a minute, Mac OS is adding a platform (x86) when MS had been reducung the supported platofrms for years. Yes Longhorn will be a big deal, but like a Panda birth, it is only a big deal because it does not happen often... not because it is REALLY that special.
QUOTE and by the way... where will all the games be on the mac? alot of us here use windows simply because of the Gaming... OS X has never focused on gaming.. they still have only OpenGL as their main API...
Macs have been shown it increase productivity, gaming does not do that. I doubt there will be any more games for OSX, which for people concerned with productivity... it is no big deal-
#3.2 Posted by neocitron on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:34
- true.. but people concerned with productivity need machines that are serviceable... cheap... and most of all have great business applications...
-
#3.3 Posted by panacea on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:55
QUOTE
Longhorn barely competes with Tiger, and its features have been locked for release. There will be no suprises... unless you count more feature reductions
now where did you hear that. NOTHING IS LOCKED. it has not have reached beta yet.
go have a look the the longhorn roadmap you <<removed>>.
Last edited by 36818 on 07 Jun 2005 - 14:07-
#3.4 Posted by leojei on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:06
QUOTE Yes Longhorn will be a big deal, but like a Panda birth, it is only a big deal because it does not happen often... not because it is REALLY that special.
I just hope he read some articles here showing how small Tiger is. Even though Apple advertise Tiger as a upgrade with over 100 new things, if I'm correct, the real focus is the Spotlight that Apple can't even get it right. When I was a kid I learnt there's a AND, OR, and NOT in this world, since when Apple think it's a good idea to take out one of them?
I rather wait a 5 year and see a OS with a complete set of new (advertised) features instead of counting a small UI change in iMail as one of the new things there~ (btw, the toolbar icons are ugly)
To me, XP is good enough for a stable OS, but in terms of Networking, Graphics, and Storage-related, XP still lacks about it. And I think that's where Longhorn fits in.-
#3.5 Posted by betasp on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:20
QUOTE Even though Apple advertise Tiger as a upgrade with over 100 new things, if I'm correct, the real focus is the Spotlight that Apple can't even get it right. When I was a kid I learnt there's a AND, OR, and NOT in this world, since when Apple think it's a good idea to take out one of them?
Actually, you can do advanced arguements in Spotlight.
QUOTE By default, Spotlight will do a Boolean AND on all your search terms. If you type the search phrase “tracking number” (without the quotes) the actual search in Boolean notation will be: “tracking AND number”, searching for both terms to be present in the same document (or file name, or metadata chunk --I will refer to documents hereafter only, implicitly also referring to metadata or names). A search for a literal string should be performed by enclosing your search phrase in double quotes. This will return fewer results as Spotlight will now only search for the literal sentence “tracking number”.
Also...QUOTE While Apple provides an interface to do searches, it has some limitations. If you need to use more customized searches, you can do so either in the Terminal, or in a search window using Raw requests criteria (do a Finder Find, click Other, then Raw Query from the pop-up). The key commands are mdls, which allows you to list the metadata of a file, and mdfind, which actually performs searches. See the man pages for both commands to get more details. The interesting part is that mdfind actually supports logical operators (and, or, not, etc...), which can help to create advanced requests. -
#3.6 Posted by DrunkenMaster on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:47
- It doesn't matter how "bloody brilliant" the Swedish programming team is: Microsoft is organized into hundreds of managers that supervise these "bloody brillant" programmers. If the manager doesn't like what he/she sees, they get rid of the feature. Add to that the problem of Dell and HP (etc.) wanting this/that and if you don't want to add it in, the manager will make the programmer do it.
@ neocitron
Serviceable hardware is important, I agree. Cheap is relative though because if you spend $200 vs $220 for a montor vs $100 there will be little difference in the $20 extra. IMO, the software makes the difference. Apple doesn't have much in the big business apps, as many legacy ones also exist on Windows. I'd prefer serviceable (not necessarily cheaper hardware) and great software and pay a bit of a premium for it. The extra cost of the hardware can often easily be recovered with software in time spent doing work. -
#3.7 Posted by aristotle-dude on 07 Jun 2005 - 17:34
- Tiger was about more than Spotlight and Dashboard. Yes, there are some issues with Spotlight that will affect power users.
Tiger's kernel was completely rewritten from the ground up. Previous kernels had major locking issues and were effectively single threaded.
Tiger's kernel is now multithreaded. That is a major change. Core data is also a huge change under the surface. It's like ADO on steroids.
-
#4 Posted by buzlink on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:28
- Yes and No
Now the they can get the price to performance ratio in better balance.
Now they need to make a kick ass system that people can afford.
We will see.
I would of gone with AMD.
Oh well....
Kinda sad actually...
-
#5 Posted by bangbang023 on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:29
- They will have a huge potential if they can maintain the "chic" image they have now. It's going to come down to that. Nerds are one thing, but the general consumer is harder to win over.
-
#6 Posted by MGS3-SS on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:30
- I hope Apple takes over the market, its for the better.
-
#7 Posted by R_a_V_e_N on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:31
- In any case, this new development means we (at least me) can run Windows Longhorn and Mac OS X "Leopard" simultaneously!
-
(6 replies)
#8 Posted by XxiNickxX on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:36
QUOTE In any case, this new development means we (at least me) can run Windows Longhorn and Mac OS X "Leopard" simultaneously!
Negative. OS X will only run on Apple hardware (they'll still use their own custom mobos / open firmware) Good luck emulating with no device drivers!-
#8.1 Posted by joseph- on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:39
- Except he's talking about the fact that the Senior VP of Apple stated that it will be possible to run Windows on an Intel-based Mac, and that Apple will do nothing to stop that. Unless of course, you know more about that than the Senior VP of Apple.
You're thinking about it backwards. You buy an Apple, run OS X 90% of the time, then boot into a stripped-down, gutted version of XP/Longhorn (whatever) to run those games that are sorely lacking from OS X. Doesn't sound that bad, does it? Especially if you believe the rumors that Longhorn will have a more modular install routine. Just install the bare essentials to get a game platform up and running, and what more would you need?
Last edited by 103119 on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:44 -
#8.2 Posted by DirtyLarry on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:53
- Being an Apple user now for the past 8 years (posting this from my powerbook is I lay in bed in-fact), and a Windows user for the past 3 years or so, if I will indeed be able one day in the not so distant future to run both OS's on one machine, I would be happier than a pig in poop.
I was not all that thrilled personally about this announcement, and I admit I have not kept up on it the way I really probably should have been since it directly effects me, but now that I hear more about it, and things are put this way, again, I have the potential to be happier than a pig in poop. -
#8.3 Posted by R_a_V_e_N on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:22
QUOTE
Apple also confirmed that they would not stop customers from running Windows on the Intel-based Mac, although the Mac OS will not run on another PC.
“We will not sell or support Windows, but we are not doing anything in the hardware that would preclude someone from using it,” said Moody.
http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/06/06/intelappleanalysts/index.php
It is indeed possible to run the both OS's at the same time-
#8.4 Posted by rogerroger on 07 Jun 2005 - 06:10
- hahah LOL, you said "poop"
-
#8.5 Posted by mr_da3m0n on 07 Jun 2005 - 12:20
- I agree with Joseph. Actually, that's what I do with Linux right now, I run it 99.9% of the time and boot that other hard drive to fire up a stripped down, gutted down, GPO locked down version of Windows XP to play games when I feel like doing so once in a blue moon.
Indeed many people would be happier than a pig in poop. -
#8.6 Posted by Arcticflare on 07 Jun 2005 - 20:09
- I would be one of them. Consider a tripple boot system: OSX/Win/Lin. Heaven. If it doesn't happen in a mainstream way, then I know for sure programmers like the ones who created Pear PC (the project that had it's code stolen by that rat who calls his theft "CherryOS"
) will make it happen.
-
(8 replies)
#9 Posted by neocitron on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:41
- i honestly hope apple does NOT take over the market...
i would like to wait and see how Longhorn does before everyone puts it down... i have been an OS X Mac user for 2 years and i have a general appreciation for both platforms, and i now see that Apple is essentially a well oiled marketing machine... but i don't care for that in the end.. i want what i want to work, well... and i also want to play, on my PC...
Windows works for me... the GUI is much less torturing than that of OS X.
Windows has established such a stronghold on the PC industry... i firmly believe that Apple WILL gain much market share before and slightly after Longhorn's release... but once Longhorn does make it to many installed XP users... Apple will be in big trouble.
There is no more incentive for me to purchase a mac... the hardware is essentially the same as the PC... OS X in my eyes is not my type of Operating system. and i don't mean that because of the game.
By the way, those of you who think that Intel is going to make a special Proc for Apple think again... Apple is NOT a large customer for Intel, now on the other hand, Dell is a massive Intel customer, do you see Dell asking for special high performance exclusive processors from Intel? maybe, but does Intel deliver that to them? hell no, intel wants mass profit out of Dell, their main customer.. and Dell doesn't mind kissing their arse as long as they don't pay as much as they would with AMD. -
#9.1 Posted by leojei on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:51
- I don't think the market in "take over the market" implies the OS market. Rather, I think it's talking about the hardware part since it was comparing prices with comps from Dell and HP.
It doesn't really matter who takes over the PC OEM market, since we all can build our own comps~ And if I guess it right, a Mac based on x86 architecture implies the native ability to run Windows on a Mac hardware, that's gonna be something ppl are looking for, not to mention of the price-drop. -
#9.2 Posted by joseph- on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:54
- Great, good for you. You don't like OS X. But did you slip and bump your head and miss the news today completely? OS X is running -right now- and during WWDC on a 3.2ghz P4. Not some special chip, and no one ever said Intel would do that to begin with.
I know this might be a stretch for you, but a lot of people out there in the real world don't like building their own systems. You think Dell made their fortune just by being lucky? And most people don't understand the difference between PowerPC and Pentium. All they see is numbers. Now, if Apple can put out a product with outstanding support, in a package that is more innovative and physically appealing than the average run-of-the-mill Gateway box, and with hardware statistics that a normal user can compare and understand, and at a compelling price...what is the problem?
Oh, wait...you're upset because they shifted processors from a stagnant architecture that was unable to make good on the promises from two years ago, and now you don't think your mac is special because one of the four components that made a Mac different from any other garden variety PC, now changed. Good logic there. They still have the case, the OS, and the motherboard design. Not to mention the cooling schemes of the G5, which were semi-revolutionary at the time. EVERYTHING ELSE WAS, IS, AND WILL BE EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE DELL THAT I'M USING TO POST THIS. -
#9.3 Posted by leojei on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:57
QUOTE And most people don't understand the difference between PowerPC and Pentium. All they see is numbers.
I totally agree, but I think you get neo's comment wrong. I think he's talking about OSX, not the Apple's hardware.
QUOTE Apple is NOT a large customer for Intel
And the reason why Apple is not a large customer for Intel is...? I don't think Intel's investment sight is so short-range. Just because of Apple's PC market share is small doesn't mean it's gonna be the same next year. I think Intel is making a deal cuz they see Apple's change as a potential of success. With Apple's hardware design they can surely make a fortune if the price is right.-
#9.4 Posted by neocitron on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:03
- [deleted in favor of new post]
Last edited by 87250 on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:36 -
#9.5 Posted by leojei on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:14
QUOTE the average customer does not know anything about hardware and still percieves macs as 'crap' which in fact they are not..
I agree, but instead of thinking things like "average ppl think Macs suck", let's think about how many ppl recognize what is OSX. I'm sure most ppl who use comps nowadays at least know what's Windows (I said most of it).
The second thing is that there aren't any place for Apple to fit into the PC market. For those who like OSX but use Windows, they don't get a Mac cuz they're freaky expensive. For those who like Apple's comps but get Dell's or HP's or build their own, they don't like OSX. If only Apple's hardware is based on x86, if only OSX can run on x86 architecture, at least thest two types of ppl will consider buying Apple's PC or buy a copy of OSX, which either one can be significantly increase Apple's revenue.
QUOTE please don't be so rude in your replies... are all Americans like that?
I hope you can take this back. Though I don't like rude ppl here, I certainly don't like discriminations~-
#9.6 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:24
- Not just discrimination, an asinine assumption.
-
#9.7 Posted by aristotle-dude on 07 Jun 2005 - 17:54
- I hope we will end up with a situation with a 30%,30%30% split between OS X, windows and linux. That would be a "healthy" situation which would drive innovation through healthy competition.
I have no doubt that most consumers want as low a price as possible. But I also have no doubt that consumers also want the best value for their money.
If Apple is able to deliver tangible/intangible value to the consumer at the right price point, people will buy macs even if they are a little more than most other brands in the category.
There are some people like you who prefer windows and that fine. I'm sure that makes Bill Gates and Balmer all warm and fuzzy inside.
Why do some people buy Sony instead of other Wintel brands? Superior quality or at least a perception of such. Maybe they buy Sony because of the Synergy of their products working together.
Now you will have Sony and Apple competing in the same space with different software.
-
#10 Posted by leojei on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:48
- I like Mac's hardware rather than software (ie: Mac OSX). The only 2 things that kept me from buying Macs are 1. they're expensive and 2. it can't run Windows without using VM.
Now Apple is moving to Intel platform, to me it's a very attractive move since I can get a Mac at a lower price and get Windows running (probably).
-
(2 replies)
#11 Posted by AminoSC on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:49
- betasp wrote:
"Longhorn barely competes with Tiger, and its features have been locked for release. There will be no suprises... unless you count more feature reductions. I am glad your neighbor is concerned about our OS, mine could care less. All I know is most corporations will be slow to adopt it (like XP) until they are forced through licensing changes. Yes, Longhorn will be a big deal, it will be the first OS release MS has been able to push out in years. There is a new Mac OS year 1-1/2 years. Apple has a faster development cycle. Thnk about this for a minute, Mac OS is adding a platform (x86) when MS had been reducung the supported platofrms for years. Yes Longhorn will be a big deal, but like a Panda birth, it is only a big deal because it does not happen often... not because it is REALLY that special."
My dear, dear dumb one....
You have no idea what longhorn will do since it's not even in beta yet. And nothing is LOCKED.
-
#11.1 Posted by leojei on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:59
- next time use the Quote UI here to quote, and reply within the thread of the original post.
Though I agree with your view~ -
#11.2 Posted by betasp on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:03
- From the Winsupersite
QUOTE "It gets worse. Apple's Mac OS X, recently upgrade to version 10.4 ("Tiger," see my review) is more than "good enough." In many ways, OS X is simply better than Windows, especially for experienced computer users, and Tiger rubs Microsoft's nose in the embarrassment of shipping a key Longhorn feature--instant desktop search--a full year ahead of the software giant. That's right folks. We already knew that Microsoft was facing smaller, nimbler competitors. But those competitors are now starting to outperform Microsoft in the feature department too. It's time for Redmond to stop pretending Linux and OS X don't exist.
Anyway, Longhorn build 5048 is pretty boring. That it's boring by design doesn't make me much happier. I do know that the company will add back major new functionality in time for Beta 1 (currently scheduled for June 30, 2005, but you know how those release dates have a way of slipping) and then again for Beta 2 (a nebulous release that Microsoft will not commit a date to). But sitting here in early May 2005, surveying the state of Longhorn, it's not pretty. Longhorn build 5048 is a disappointment. Here's what I found out about this build during a busy week of testing." .
But you're correct, there is no feature lock. MS is choosing not to release features all the time. We are less than one month from Beta 1, what do you think will be added. Do you think WinFS will come beck... or wait, they will decide to actually use .net. Or maybe they will add (or take away) the sidebar (again). The "roadmap" as you say, is full of dead ends.
Of course this is from March 2004...
QUOTE The successor to Windows XP, originally scheduled for release late this year, will now only be available in beta version during 2004 - with Microsoft unwilling to commit to a commercial rollout date.
In 2001, Microsoft spoke about releasing Longhorn in late 2004, but then said it was likely to delay the release until the second half of 2005, according to Gartner.
But at Microsoft's developer conference in October 2003, the implication was that Longhorn would be more likely to ship in 2006, the analyst said. The delay may be longer, with Longhorn not shipping until 2007, it predicted.
BTW. Please watch the personal attacks, you do not want to chalenge my education, IQ, income level or job title
Last edited by 36080 on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:27
-
(2 replies)
#12 Posted by SkaterAustin on 07 Jun 2005 - 03:56
- Well this whole apple switching to intel has got me happy.. It works out for everyone really does! All x86 developers that make software for both mac and pc can finally rejoice now that all they gotta do is code for x86 only few changes need to be done to make the app work between windows and the mac. Video and Image editors alike can finally build a cheap system of there own install os x possibly and have a good way to get things done.
Now on to the note about longhorn, gonna agree with AminoSc. Longhorn is still alpha, tho may now be internal build. Most things are currently locked in builds until beta 2 when ms starts testing it outs final components in the os and also a few internal builds to fix issues in beta 2 before rc (manufacter test versions). Lepoard or os x 10.5 is gonna have to pull something udderly amazing to make me wanna really jump for joy because really tiger did nothing for me, they added widgets and spotlight that really catch my eye. -
#12.1 Posted by Endoscient on 07 Jun 2005 - 13:41
- not really. do you only need to make a few changed to MS Office for windows to make it work on a x86 version of linux? i don't think so. the APIs are very different between Mac OSX and Windows, the only reason a few chagnes are needed between mac x86 and mac PPC, is because only the processor is changing
-
#12.2 Posted by markjensen on 07 Jun 2005 - 15:14
QUOTE do you only need to make a few changed to MS Office for windows to make it work on a x86 version of linux?
-
(2 replies)
#13 Posted by neocitron on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:16
- in fact.. the average customer does not know anything about hardware and still percieves macs as 'crap' which in fact they are not.. what i'm trying to say now is that Apple has only 2 selling points to the mass market... (maybe 3) 1. OS X they can tout (which i don't like at all).... 2. Prices are now going to be lower 3. their cases are nice....
there that's all.. can you name another good selling point? the processors are the same and may even be behind the PC market because Intel would want to ship the newest "pentium 5" to the mass PC market, their largest profit before they send them to Apple.. their smallest profit. and possibly smallest customer.
by the way, i do understand that intel's longsightedness includes Apple becoming a larger and larger customer each year with growing market share..... or will they? that is the question.. will Apple thrive with Intel hardware on X86 (forget about running windows Apps on the mac and vise versa.. really not going to happen, and if it does, OS X will be Pirated to kingdom come for windows machines)? who knows... but i know one thing that gets market share like no tomorrow... marketing strategys... Intel COULD release a new processor besides the P4 EXCLUSIVELY for the mac hardware and OS X...but they simply cannot do it.. why? because the cost of Research and Development of such a processor is going to far oughwiegh the profits of selling such a proc.... maybe in the long run IF Apple gains market share Intel could focus more on Apple's needs...
but for now, Apple is going to have to eat whatever Intel serves them... Apple is Intel's B**ch now, If Apple doesn't want the kind of processor Intel is offering them, either Apple goes to AMD... or goes crawling back to IBM... or worse... back to Motorolla to make them some processors...
Trust me, Intel, as of right now, is NOT going to make some special mac processor and use it as a marketing "switch" tool to lure windows users over... it won't happen just yet.. Apple is too SMALL a customer to intel at the moment.. now if Apple were to fund the project themselves.. the Intel might gladly make an exclusive macintosh P4 or maybe call it the "p5, only on a macintosh"... but again, does Apple have the money to fund the development of a processor? who knows...
Apple is taking too much of a risk here in my eyes...
they have hardware risks..
development of software risks
and finally, marketing risks..
no longer can they tout their superior processors... lol.... against Intel.... and we all know that AMD is king in most aspects of raw performance...
so what's Apple's selling point now?
fancy cases with PC hardware and an operating system called OS X? (OS X still hasn't grasped the mainstream audience as well as it should.. i believe it will catch on... but i firmly believe Longhon.. will.. how should i say, PWN!! it..)
i know i know... it's not ALL PC hardware... only thing that's still mac is the Motherboard and case... right?.... yea, that's just about it. not even their LCD's are claimed to be mac specific hardware anymore, being made overseas in Samsung and taiwan plants.
please don't be so rude in your replies...
i'd just like to say why OS X hasn't been doing as well as it should in my opinion... Many people are drawn to the "windows" brand name... it's good marketing.. now, what's bad marketing is releasing OS X every 1.5 years and adding new featuers.. sure it's good for those of us who know.. but those of us who don't know what OS X is are going to be confused.. it takes the "glow and godliness" out of the product.. makes it seem less significant...
Microsoft's XP marketing team did a great job in 2001 when it was released... they went out there and made a MASSIVE marketing campaign... TV ads.. Banners... Bus ads.. Shopping cart ads.. Internet ads... Radio ads... Bill Gates on Frasier ads.. every frikin thing under the sun to push XP out the door.. and it worked... XP sells like hotcakes... good marketing imho
Last edited by 87250 on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:40 -
#13.1 Posted by leojei on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:19
- please don't double-post. I saw your first exact copy of comment above.
-
#13.2 Posted by SquareSoft0 on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:51
- Also- Nice job finding a reason for deleting your flame about Americans.
-
#14 Posted by inziga on 07 Jun 2005 - 04:44
- These are definatly exciting times. I just hope that intel doesn't use a very closed boot system. They won't be using OpenFirmware on the x86 boxes, and if they use BIOS I'll eat my shoe....So what will they be using(and will it be integrated with intel's DRM)?
-
(2 replies)
#15 Posted by Bwizzel-B on 07 Jun 2005 - 05:03
- Umm, let's see. The Mac lineup never "took" the PC market- ever. How can it retake something it never had?
-
#15.2 Posted by mr_da3m0n on 07 Jun 2005 - 14:11
- WELL....
If you go back to a long time ago, when you were probably still a tiny little dude in the holy sack of doom... Apple *was* dominating. Remember the original Apple and Apple II? Especially for gamers, gamers and game programmers were saying how the PC was too ugly, slow, and hard to code for when compared to the Mac. The x86 market was not really flourishing. We're talking before Windows here.
-
(4 replies)
#16 Posted by Aaronz0rz on 07 Jun 2005 - 06:30
- i wonder what this means for AMD
i think personally AMD would be unaffected
people who buy AMD buy for budget, or for better performance (usually you get both when you go amd)
So the penny pinchers and the gamers will still go AMD
I think the one to benefit the most will be microsoft
People who want mac hardware will start running windows for compatiblity
windows on macs will become common -
#16.1 Posted by Zenith on 07 Jun 2005 - 08:10
- windows on mac? thats almost as bad as ripping the engine from an F1 and pulling the car behind a horse.
-
#16.2 Posted by raid517 on 07 Jun 2005 - 12:03
- Lol, you can't say that any more. Both the horse and the engine are the same now.
You may need to look for some new arguments I'm afraid.
GJ -
#16.3 Posted by aristotle-dude on 07 Jun 2005 - 18:36
- Ok, it's like taking a Lamborgini engine and slapping it into a yugo with a yugo gearbox and decorating the car with a shag carpetting.
-
#16.4 Posted by raid517 on 07 Jun 2005 - 21:18
- And that is exactly what Apple have done. Or at least that is what they have done from many hard core Mac head's perspective.
They have taken the Lamborgini engine out (as in the PPC processor) and slapped in a Skoda engine instead.
Lol... Well that is only true if you don't like Intel machines I guess. In reality Intel machines are often pretty brutally fast.
Wouldn't it be neat though if the only thing it took to run OS X was a bios flash?
GJ
Last edited by 13486 on 08 Jun 2005 - 01:40
-
#17 Posted by a_witko on 07 Jun 2005 - 07:10
- cheap apple pc's? yum.
-
#18 Posted by Zenith on 07 Jun 2005 - 07:43
- there are benefits to the CPU switch but i still feel uneasy...
Last edited by 80251 on 07 Jun 2005 - 08:14
-
(2 replies)
#19 Posted by Chicane-UK on 07 Jun 2005 - 07:58
- This still feels somewhat wrong. One of the main points of going for an Apple was the sheer crunching power of the G5 processors.. in fact wasn't that the very reason why people used to suggest Macs were a superior alternative to Wintel PC's?
I know that IBM let Apple down with the G5's though.. many promises were not met, and it left Apple looking very silly promising its customers one thing and delivering something entirely different. But I can't help but feel that switching to the exact same line of processors found in 70% or so (not sure what the AMD/Intel CPU balance is outside of the geek world!) of the home computers out there, is not going to help Apple.. I worry that they may regret this.
And one of the many reasons for wanting a Mac was that it was something different.. but.. now its just going to be a locked BIOS, and lack of device drivers that is going to make Windows not work on a bit of Mac hardware - not the fact that its an entirely different architecure.
As I think I might have said in another post somewhere on this.. this is only going to work if Apple are going to seriously cut prices and make some very attractive offers on its mass market machines - if they fail to do this, and continue to charge the premium that they do, they will die because I think with this switch to Intel they have completely alienated their hardcore fan base - the people who continued to buy their machines through thick and thin. If the hardcore are put off, and their prices remain high then they will suffer! -
#19.1 Posted by raid517 on 07 Jun 2005 - 12:11
- The bottom line I guess is that Intel actually HAD a road map... whereas IBM had a kind of, 'when we can get round to it and when we have time' approach to the whole deal. I don't think Apple were really a big enough customer for them to invest the time and money in RnD that apple wanted. So instead of Apple having their own road map and asking IBM to make it happen for them, Apple simply chose to follow someone else's existing road map.
If it works - and particularly if they do opt to use standard parts (you never know with Apple, they could come up with some weird triagular X86 motherboard or something) it could serve to substantially cut costs - which will impact on their bottom line.
If I was in Job's position right now - given Apple's market share of the PC world - I would certainly be looking for ways to boost my profits - even if this meant cutting costs in the hardware design department.
But like I said, Mr Jobs is Mr Jobs... Who knows what the hell he will do?
Through the years Apple have always had had great design, coupled with virtually zero business sense.
GJ
Last edited by 13486 on 07 Jun 2005 - 16:20 -
#19.2 Posted by Chicane-UK on 07 Jun 2005 - 15:37
- Wow.. its nice to be replied to on Neowin in a 'general discussion' type sense rather than being randomly flamed, which is what always seems to happen when I comment on front page articles. Thanks!!
-
(1 reply)
#20 Posted by pickleman on 07 Jun 2005 - 10:24
- No matter what Apple does, they will still be more expensive than any other machines on the market. THAT's the Apple. way. Look at the ipod. It's a horribly expensive piece of hardware that imo isn't as well developed as some of the other players out there. The thing Apple has going for it is a good PR firm to hock thier items. I agree that theier market sahre will rise alittle but it won't be a devastatiing blow to any of the other players out there. Apple is too greedy and will no doubt overprice this new breed of computer.
-
#20.1 Posted by betasp on 07 Jun 2005 - 13:32
- The question won't be its initial price, it will be the Total Cost of Ownership. Right now, you can justify a Mac purchase if you run a 4-5 year upgrade cycle and you buy the correct machine. The TCO can easily be lower than a PC if Apple thwarts off spyware and virii on the New Intel Apples (Nipples, if you will).
I just hope Apple maintains its aggressive education pricing after the Nipple's are released.
-
(1 reply)
#21 Posted by iigloo on 07 Jun 2005 - 12:08
- meh.... why does people compare Tiger with longhorn? You should compare Longhorn with 10.5 ''Leopard'' as they will be released almost at the same time...
-
#21.1 Posted by betasp on 07 Jun 2005 - 13:38
- You should, but right now the only thing MS has that is even close to Tiger is Shlonghorn. Tiger is hands down superior to XP (as told PC Mag.), so in order to maintain the status quo (MS dominates Pc market) the media must compare what Apple make today to what Longhorn is going to be.
I am waiting on a feature list for Leopard... what the heck else can they do to an OS.
-
#22 Posted by lbmouse on 07 Jun 2005 - 12:36
- Did anyone else notice the front page poll?
QUOTE Apple going to Intel chips would make
Thanks Yoda.
-
(2 replies)
#23 Posted by Lasker on 07 Jun 2005 - 12:40
- do u think guys Leopard will have Intel P4 natively supported? if is true, can we will able to buy OS X and install in our windows machine???? or is just my dream
-
#23.1 Posted by betasp on 07 Jun 2005 - 13:27
- Your dream. The Intel machines Apple sells will be DRM locked in hardware to allow OSX to run. It is going to take some serious hacking to get OSX to run on anything else.
But yes, x86 will be nativly supported under Leapord.
-
(1 reply)
#24 Posted by DjmUK on 07 Jun 2005 - 14:41
- Mac OS X 10.5 "Leopard" <-- Is this the official codename for the next Mac OS?
-
#24.1 Posted by Chicane-UK on 07 Jun 2005 - 15:38
- Yes
-
#25 Posted by mgorbach on 07 Jun 2005 - 15:28
- I am sure the DRM will be bypassed quickly. With the roadblock of the powerpc core being differnet removed, i think we will first get emulation of the osx on pc (fast emulation), and then eventually someone will create a bootloader which i will happily put into my boot.ini.
Wonder if it will run on AMD machines? Hopefully ...
-
#26 Posted by VikingStorm on 07 Jun 2005 - 16:21
- (Possibly) Good for AMD? Since the manufacturers such as Dell, HP, Gateway etc. need a stronger position against a new direct PC manufacturer, would it mean they will adopt AMD chips more readily? (assuming AMD still holds some kind of technological advantage).
I also wonder if that also means it will be that much more difficult, and take longer for Linux to reach main-stream desktops.
-
#27 Posted by Devlin on 07 Jun 2005 - 17:21
- If this is the start of being able to go anywhere put togther a pc and have MAC OSX loaded on one HDD and WNXP on another. Apple computers stock would be on the uprise so fast
it would make peoples head spin, there are plenty of people that would love to have the exact capability, and then there is the choice factor, You are now giving people a real choice between which operating system is best for them,
-
#28 Posted by hotdog963al on 07 Jun 2005 - 19:57
- I hope somebody cracks it to get it working on windows PCs.
Imagine being able to replace XP with OSX
-
#29 Posted by pixlnet on 08 Jun 2005 - 05:49
- I actually don't understand why any Mac users are upset over this. Mac OS is the same and that's why you buy a Mac. They should be extremely happy. Now they have a great OS and a a great chip. Apple is not in a position to sell "cheap" computers. Faster
But secondly, it opens the door for Apple to do what they did with the iPod -- produce a better engineered product and take over a market. Can they do it? Is the personal computer market similar enough to the scenario Apple faced in the portable media market? Only time will tell. However, MacOS X "Leopard" and Longhorn will be arriving at nearly the same time. The OS Wars may be getting very interesting again.
Minimum System Requirements
233 MHz Intel Pentium class or better processor
At least 128 MB of RAM
Windows 2000 or XP
Recommended System Configuration
For viewing 640x480 standard definition (SD) H.264 video:
1.8 GHz Intel Pentium 4 or faster processor
At least 256 MB of RAM
64 MB or greater video card
Windows 2000 or XP
New features in QuickTime 7 Player for Windows
New features in QuickTime 7 Pro for Windows