[quote]Originally posted by Cable:
<strong>Well at least consider the possibility that OSX could be ported to the X86 platform. But Apple wouldn't do it for several reasons:
#1 It would take sales away from the PowerMacs.
#2 MacX86 systems would not be able to run PowerPC or 68K code. Even if the PowerPC code was emulated, it would be dog-slow.
#3 The Mac would lose the advantages of the PowerPC based Macs. As in lower power consumption, RISC based processing, etc.
#4 Apple would have to redesign the PC, maybe make a new ROM, improve Plug-N-Play (aka Plug-N-Pray), and remove some of the legacy devices (Serial, Parallel, ISA, PS/2 keyboard and mouse) and stick with USB and Firewire instead. Etc.
#5 Apple would have to find a way to run OSX only on Apple brand X86 Macs, not Dells and Compaqs and Gateways. Otherwise why bother making a X86 machine when you lose sales to those who can make them cheaper and sloppier? It is the Fast Food problem.
#6 It would tick off Mac Users who already bought the PowerPC based Macs. What is in it for them if a X86 Mac comes out?
#7 Microsoft would have Apple under its thumb more, to license Windows to Apple to run as a dual-boot on the X86 Mac machines. Who really wants to run Windows on a Mac anyway?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Some thoughts on your points:
1. If Apple's x86 machines sold well, this would not be important.
2. Apple would most likely go with x86-64. By the time they released their machines the Hammer would clock around 3GHz. I am not a high level programmer but I think Apple programmers would be able to get the Hammer to emulate a PowerPC at 10% to 20% of its clock speed, meaning it would be able to emulate a 300MHz to 600MHz PPC. This would be enough for basic PowerPC emulation.
3. x86 can be low power, like Via's C3 or the Speedstep P4 or Mobile Athlon. Low-power consumption is not pursued like it is with the PowerPC because x86 is not focused on integrated platforms like the PowerPC really is. Also, the fact that the PowerPC is RISC based is not a virtue in and of itself, and can not be claimed as a benefit without a deeper explanation.
4. I will address the ROM issue in point 5, but the old idea that plug and play does not work on PCs is flat out fud. I have never had a USB device, a PCI card, or a Parallel port printer fail to be recognized and installed easily in all the years I have had PCs. As I have stated many times, I have both Macs and PCs yet I appreciate the way Windows will inform you a new device has been installed and will attempt to locate drivers for it. Even better, if your device was made in 2001 or before, the drivers will most likely be included in XP. About the removal of legacy ports, this has already been done to some extent on most PCs. I do not think you can get any new PC or motherboard that has ISA slots, and for total legacy removal, check out Abits new AT7 Max series.
5. Instead of using a PCs standard bios, Apple could continue to use Open Firmware. This would enable them to build machines that would continue to have nice features such as OS level bootable drive selection, key commands at startup such as CD boot, Firewire disk mode, etc. Also, this would prevent any average user from being able to boot OS X on their standard PC.
" target="_blank">Open Firmware Info</a>
6. New and faster Macs.
7. Dual boot is a dumb idea, just get 2 computers.