or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by delreyjones

 I sure hope you're wrong about that 
I agree with you.  It seems to me that you really have to be able to "think different" to appreciate this deal.  Apple did it first, some of these analysts came along 2nd, and eventually there might even be a consensus amongst the AI commenters.  OK OK, maybe it was the drugs talking about that last one, but two out of three aint bad!   
Maybe you're right.  As a proud AAPL owner myself, I'm pleased that Apple wants the business of old people and the business of young people.  Is that OK with you?
You have seen the video of Steve and Dr. Dre chatting, right?  I see a lot of mutual respect and a deep understanding of issues outside Jobs' main field:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaxZ8XsN0xo
Definitely agree.  At the high end, does Apple have a compelling reason to say 'no' to high-performance Intel chips and Windows compatibility? I don't think so.  But at the low end, does Apple have a compelling reason to say 'no' to reduced power consumption, more affordable CPUs, and complete ownership of the architecture?  I don't think so.   Critics say that it's challenging for Apple to manage two CPU architectures in its Mac line?  That sounds like defeatism to me.  I...
 Thanks, great link!  It's hard to argue with Mr. Gassee in this case.
 I think you're mistaken.  Third party developers don't write a ton of assembly language, so staying current with Apple's architecture is not going to hurt them too badly.  What you're hearing is the teeth grinding of a big company.  A big company that makes very expensive x86 chips that might not be so popular in the future.   
You seemed so sure of yourself and knowledgeable that I wasn't inclined to question you.  Nevertheless, I went over to store.apple.com just to check some details, and they say that all the iMacs and MacBook Air and MacBook Pro use the i5.  Am I missing something here?  It looks like one of Mac Minis uses an i7, and the Mac Pro uses something else (presumably even more powerful).   So if I combine what you say with what the Apple store says, the current ARM chips are almost...
And why would Apple have to move its entire Mac line to ARM?  Is it possible that some more economical Macs would be ARM-only, thereby maintaining excellent profit margins and battery life?  And possibly higher end Macs might have ARMs and Intel chips, thereby running IOS, OSX and Windows software?   A "complete mess"?  Is that possibly just a bit of hyperbole?  The original Mac OS ran simultaneously on Motorola and PPC for a while.  OSX ran on PPC and Intel.  And since...
The writers at AI do their best.  Most of them didn't get job offers from the NY Times ;=)
New Posts  All Forums: