or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Is the switch to Intel Jobs' worst business decision of his life?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is the switch to Intel Jobs' worst business decision of his life?

Poll Results: Is switching to Intel Jobs' worst business decision of his life?

 
  • 18% (47)
    yes
  • 81% (207)
    no
254 Total Votes  
post #1 of 125
Thread Starter 
I am in shock. At the moment, I think this is Jobs' ego at its worst. Maybe in a few weeks I'll have calmed down and think that this is a good idea.

edit: If you think it isn't his worst decision, do you think that the switch to Intel is a bad idea, but that Jobs has made some other decision in the past which is even worse?
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #2 of 125
What's the benefit to the consumer here?

We won't have any more options than we have today. Powermacintel will be locked down. You can run windows I presume but OSX will stay on Apple hardware thus you will pay a premium.

This smacks of $$$$$$$$$$$ for only Apple. My heart and gut tells me I've just been bamboozled. For 5 years Apple has told us that PowerPC demolish Pentiums and now to switch based on some vapor roadmap is supposed to appease me?

Steve is taking you for a freakin fool.

You are still going to pay a premium for Macs. You'll still get crappy video cards and chintzy hard drive sizes.


I'll continue to use Macs but the luster is off right now. OS X on Intel never made sense to me unless if gave me the ability to build my own. I don't buy prebuilt PCs so now why would I want to buy a prebuilt Macintel? KNowing of course that all the parts are one website away.

I'm saddened because the truth is this was done to benefit Apple and the sell job is getting you guys to pay a premium for the same hardware.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #3 of 125
I posted this on another forum, about what I worry about with this transition. Right now, I don't see a good outcome from this swith.

One: It's going to kill sales of their computers for the next year. Would you buy a computer who's architecture will be dead in a year? Who the CEO says is so crippled it can't continue on in the future? My guess, not many people are. At a time where Apple sales were finally starting to uptick, Apple kills them dead.

Two:No more innovative software on the Mac. It's just too easy now to recompile your windows apps to run on the Mac. And since Windows is the big money maker, that's where your development dollars will go.

OS 10.4 has some great features, but if the Apps don't support them, then what's the point? Unless Apple makes it, Mac software has also just been killed.

Three: Head to head comparison. Now it will be even harder for Apple to make a sale when people compare it to windows. If the hardware is the same, and the software is the same, then price becomes the only differentiator. Microsoft can afford to take a loss, Apple can't. Microsoft (and Dell, for that matter) can price Mac right out of the market.

Four: How much money does Intel take in from Dell? How much from Microsoft? If either of those two start hurting due to Apple, how much pressure do you think they can put on Intel? Apple will never get as good of pricing, they will never have a say in the design.
post #4 of 125
I can see Apple trying to woo a switcher in 2007.


Apple-"Come over to Mac OS Leopard and get all these new whizzbang features!!" .

Switcher- "Great and I have a P4 3.8Ghz computer! How much is Leopard I want to install it today"

Apple- "uh sorry...Leopard won't run on your computer but we have a shiny new P4 4.2Ghz for you!"

Switcher- "but...they are the same platform. Why should I buy a new computer to run your OS on the same hardware?"

Apple- "Hey I gotta eat man"

Switcher- "Wow a $400 premium you must be eating filet mignon"


This stinks folks.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #5 of 125
I see no problems, for the end user it will be almost totally transparent.. Now, you say jobs bamboozled you.. no, I say IBM/Motorola bamboozled apple.. where are all these great new g5's from ibm, the low power ones, the dual core ones, the 3ghz ones? where is your powerbook g5? Apple/jobs basically decided, "ya know what, we keep getting screwed, we can transition for minimal pain because of the design of osx, so lets do it"

this may cause some more work for developers, but in the end, this is what apple has to do, either that or stay with ibm and get left behind.
post #6 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by The General
I see no problems, for the end user it will be almost totally transparent.. Now, you say jobs bamboozled you.. no, I say IBM/Motorola bamboozled apple.. where are all these great new g5's from ibm, the low power ones, the dual core ones, the 3ghz ones? where is your powerbook g5? Apple/jobs basically decided, "ya know what, we keep getting screwed, we can transition for minimal pain because of the design of osx, so lets do it"

this may cause some more work for developers, but in the end, this is what apple has to do, either that or stay with ibm and get left behind.

Yet you seem to outline the problem right here. The switch will be unnoticeable to consumers--no real advantages except faster clock-speed on portables. And yet it's a burden on the already shrinking number of Mac developers.

I thought Cell, for one, showed some real promised for thinking in new ways about computing. Instead, we'll be stuck with the same basic hardware as a Dell.
post #7 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by The General
I see no problems, for the end user it will be almost totally transparent.. Now, you say jobs bamboozled you.. no, I say IBM/Motorola bamboozled apple.. where are all these great new g5's from ibm, the low power ones, the dual core ones, the 3ghz ones? where is your powerbook g5? Apple/jobs basically decided, "ya know what, we keep getting screwed, we can transition for minimal pain because of the design of osx, so lets do it"

this may cause some more work for developers, but in the end, this is what apple has to do, either that or stay with ibm and get left behind.

How did IBM bamboozle Apple by delivering 2.7Ghz PPC chips? Why must Apple insist on laptops that are a freakin inch thick? History repeats itself. Just as Steve Jobs became enamored with the shape of the Apple III despite the need for safe hardware operationg. Apple is becoming a company who's design is hampering their ability to deliver.

I'm not wholly objecting to Mac on Intel. I don't perceive it as something that will benefit current users at all other than perhaps laptop users. It'll be interesting to see how Powermacintels stack up with the Dells HPs and Lenovo units when they are competing like for like in hardware.

Apple is a chintzy company. Any cost saving will not be passed down to users. It'll go to Steve's next lear jet. How are we sales people supposed to tell someone that OS X has to run on locked down X86 hardware with a straight face and that they should pay $500 more for the benefit of running OSX? The tough sell hasn't happened yet folks but it's coming.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #8 of 125
Steve and Apple made quite a few little mistakes (which most of us supported just not to be like PC users) in order to get to this big one. We're at this point because of marketshare and an intolerence to adopt any practices from the wintel world to gain marketshare. There aren't enough of us for IBM or freescale to devote the amount of resources needed to give us competitive chips.
post #9 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by BenRoethig
Steve and Apple made quite a few little mistakes (which most of us supported just not to be like PC users) in order to get to this big one. We're at this point because of marketshare and an intolerence to adopt any practices from the wintel world to gain marketshare. There aren't enough of us for IBM or freescale to devote the amount of resources needed to give us competitive chips.


That's Apple's fault not ours. Had they made themselves indispensable to more people they would have had better number. Powermacintel addresses very little. The Dual Boot features will be nice for those who take the Mac /PC plunge and want one device. However I doubt that it will bring switchers in droves because no one wants to have to trash their current hardware and it's going to be a bitter pill to swallow knowing that Leopard runs on Intel but only Apple sanctioned Intel hardware. I'd tell Apple to f*** off and go by Longhorn.

For all intents and purposes the dream over folks. Apple has done what they can to ensure a meager survival. They've basically killed off their resellers in lie of their own stores coupled with store.apple.com and now Intel hardware. This platform isn't going to go anywhere. I wish otherwise but all signs point Apple fading into the sunset.

Ask yourself this

"What concessions did Apple make to Adobe and Microsoft to get them aboard?"


Forget an Office or Photoshop competitor. Apple gave something up to gain their support whether we want to believe it or not.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #10 of 125
Apple has survived a lot of really bad company decisions not least due to their rabidly loyal followers and their image of "doing things different".

All this is in extreme jeopardy right now. Jobs may believe he can sell people the same box like Dell only 1.5 times as expensive, but I don't.

This might well be the beginning of the demise of Apple - Apple caught in a very painful transition right when Longhorn comes down, sales dwindling due to customer insecurity - thank god I sold all my AAPL shares in time
post #11 of 125
Quote:
And yet it's a burden on the already shrinking number of Mac developers.

You must have not watched the keynote - the number of developers is strong and growing, transition to the x86 is easy, and emulation is fast.

You guys are a bunch of whiners - which would you rather, that Apple stays with the PPC and dies, or switches to the x86 and lives.

I am looking forward to the new machines. I think that they will be a big hit in business, because businesses can buy mac machines and experiment with switching, and load windows on the hardware if OS X doesn't work out - it removes a lot of risk.

Right now, the PC and the mac are the same speed, but the PC is bound to jump ahead later if they dont switch to x86.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #12 of 125
BenRoethig just hit the nail on the head. People asking why Apple doesn't switch to another niche processor with unproven capabilities (Cell, etc) make me cringe. Apple should have made this switch (x86) ten years ago. It's about time. IBM AND MOTOROLA CANNOT COMPETE* WITH INTEL AND AMD. History has proven this AGAIN AND AGAIN. Apple know what is coming out of IBM in the next couple of years, and the same is true of Freescale, and the same is true of Intel and possibly AMD too. Apple's decision is informed in the same way that the posters' opinions here are not.

* and achieve parity, let alone win over the long term.

Intel has dedicated notebook chipsets, with features and performance and power savings galore. They have desktop chips with performance galore (as do AMD). IBM has a desktop chip that can't reasonably be used in a portable. Freescale... well, let's just say they STILL HAVE A 166MHZ BUS IN THEIR MOST "CUTTING EDGE" CHIP IN 2005.
Their architecture really hasn't grown in what, 5 years?

And you would rather Apple stay with these two forever than achieve performance parity with PCs and offer state-of-the-art hardware?
post #13 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
You must have not watched the keynote - the number of developers is strong and growing, transition to the x86 is easy, and emulation is fast.

Biggest this decade, he said. Nothing compared to what it was in the late 80's and early 90's. Trust me, its much harder to get a job as a Mac developer than it ever has been in the past.

Quote:
You guys are a bunch of whiners - which would you rather, that Apple stays with the PPC and dies, or switches to the x86 and lives.[/B]

If it were that clear cut, duh. I fear Apple dies anyway.

Quote:
I am looking forward to the new machines. I think that they will be a big hit in business, because businesses can buy mac machines and experiment with switching, and load windows on the hardware if OS X doesn't work out - it removes a lot of risk.[/B]

I seriously doubt it. We know windows booting wont be supported, all we know is it might be possible. I don't think that will sway many enterprise IT departments.
post #14 of 125
Quote:
You must have not watched the keynote - the number of developers is strong and growing, transition to the x86 is easy, and emulation is fast.

Steve? Is that you? LOL...let me pick myself up from laughing. Someone's been gulping the koolaid

Quote:
You guys are a bunch of whiners - which would you rather, that Apple stays with the PPC and dies, or switches to the x86 and lives

6 billion dollars in the bank. Highest gross margins in the industry yet someone you deduce that staying with IBM equals death? That's rich.

Quote:
I am looking forward to the new machines. I think that they will be a big hit in business, because businesses can buy mac machines and experiment with switching, and load windows on the hardware if OS X doesn't work out - it removes a lot of risk.

Sure if Apple decides to support Windows installations. Oh wait Phil Schiller already stated that they won't preclude the use of installing windows but they won't support it. And knowing Microsoft neither will they. Next

Quote:
Right now, the PC and the mac are the same speed, but the PC is bound to jump ahead later if they dont switch to x86.

Sure if you make Steve Jobs' RDF your own which you obviously have. Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony obviously disagree that Intel is the hotspot for microprocessors tight now ..but hell what do they know??

Hell man I know when someone is pissing on my leg and telling me it's raining. If Jobs' pulls off this he will go down as they #1 marketer of all time.

As smircle says...I doubt people are going to spend $100s of dollars more for what is the exact same computer down to the CPU. It's not going to happen. Before we could all revel in Jobsian fantasy about megahertz myths and how uber cool the PowerPC was. Today he just demolished that fantasy. Apple has a much harder road now.

Longhorn is going to perform better on the same hardware it's going to be more secure and good enough to keep the denizens onboard. What we just heard today was Apple raising the white flag.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #15 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
You must have not watched the keynote - the number of developers is strong and growing, transition to the x86 is easy, and emulation is fast.

According to Apple, not the developers. With some applications, including games, adding intel will increase workload 30%. With almost full speed windows emulation, some programs will programs will disapear. While this move is necessary given the circumstances, Apple's own mistakes caused it. To be honest, at this point Apple might as well release of stand alone version of OSX for x86 and hope enough consumers buy it for their home PCs.
post #16 of 125
I voted yes . . . I don't really know that much about it . . . but what worries me is the loss of hardware/software specificity . . .

I guess: what's gonna stop people from using Windows on Macs rather than learning the new system?

And what's gonna compell programmers to write for Apple when they can tell people to boot up the Windows partition . . why spend all that R&D for a minor nitch?

I hope it works out . . kinda feels like a sudden collapse of everything special about Macs!!
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #17 of 125
Hmurchison, are you suggesting that right now people are paying $100s more for macs because they have 1.42ghz G4s? Because the stats for the computer industry suggest the opposite.

Quote:
Before we could all revel in Jobsian fantasy about megahertz myths and how uber cool the PowerPC was.

My fantasy was dashed long ago when neither Motorola nor IBM could compete with x86 for any period of time.

And personally, I think Longhorn is going to drive users to the Mac and Linux.
post #18 of 125
I think people are mistaking the readership of this and similar messageboards as the average Mac user. I have alot of colleagues, friends, and family who use Macs; and the manufacturer of the CPU just does not enter the equation as to why they bought a Mac in the first place. It's the OS (and associated iApps) and the look and feel (yes, I said feel) of the computer that make of the Apple experience. Look, I know many our sense of self is wrapped up in being anti-Wintel. But I don't see how the actual experience of working on you Mac two years from now is going to be any different from what it is today. And that's the important thing, isn't it?

BAM
I'm Cloning!
Reply
I'm Cloning!
Reply
post #19 of 125
Yes every apple computer model does not match up specwise with most PCs in its catagory.

Apple moving to Intel won't change this because they will simply charge me more money for design and some fancy white casing.

I do betrayed. I've been told that PowerPC was "Pentium Crushing" and now I'm supposed to drop that and welcome Intel with open arms?

I'll buy an Apple X86 laptop and perhaps a desktop. However my support for the company as far was dreaming about a whole Mac home network is for the most part over. I can't support a company that is willfully deceitful. I believe Apple to have poor character and that stems from Job's "say anthing today to make the sale" attitude.

Mamma didn't raise no fool.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #20 of 125
Man, with fans like this, Apple doesn't need MS out to kill it, you guys will do it before the products even hit the market.

FUD, FUD, FUD. No better than an RDF, just more bitter.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #21 of 125
Quote:
I do betrayed. I've been told that PowerPC was "Pentium Crushing" and now I'm supposed to drop that and welcome Intel with open arms?

It was, for a little while. Now it is even, as the clock speed on the x86 has ramped faster than PowerPc has.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #22 of 125
I think this was a great move. A couple of things nobody ever thinks about:
(1)
On the Windows side you have
Microsoft advertising Windows
Intel advertising Pentiums
Every single computer manufacturer advertising their own computers
But on the Mac side
Apple has to advertise the OS
Apple has to advertise the computers
Apple has to advertise the processors
Now, Apple gets the benefit of Intel advertising, and the Intel advertising machine is HUGE.

(2)
Despite Apple's best efforts, most people still think you can compare MHz across different architectures. Now they don't have to worry about this because they're using the same architecture - and they'll always have computers on par with whatever is running the Windows world.

Also, keep in mind that Intel offered Apple a better deal than they were getting from IBM. This means either cheaper machines or high profits, both of which are good for the company.
post #23 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by D.J. Adequate
Biggest this decade, he said. Nothing compared to what it was in the late 80's and early 90's. Trust me, its much harder to get a job as a Mac developer than it ever has been in the past.

If it were that clear cut, duh. I fear Apple dies anyway.

I seriously doubt it. We know windows booting wont be supported, all we know is it might be possible. I don't think that will sway many enterprise IT departments.

But, Mr. Adequate, how does the highest number of developers at the conference in the last decade equate to the "already shrinking number of Mac developers" that you alluded to in your previous post? Surely the number shrank to a level 10 years ago and has been growing back up to that level ever since?
post #24 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Kickaha
Man, with fans like this, Apple doesn't need MS out to kill it, you guys will do it before the products even hit the market.

FUD, FUD, FUD. No better than an RDF, just more bitter.

We're just venting. Eventually the Macintel products will be here and if they meet a price vs performance ration that we all like we'll buy. Nothing much has changed. Apple is still a cool company, Steve Jobs' is still a master marketer and the beat goes on.

However I will say that now Apple has no perceived advantage anymore. PC users were successfully marketed on the PowerPC G5 being a fast processor that they should be looking at as well as OS X the wunder OS. Well Apple has effectively killed half that marketing duo. Not much you can do to market your computer against the other 4 billion Pentium 4 based computers.

I remain steadfast. I don't think it is positive overall. We'll see in a couple of years how the chips fall. I'll still be here.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #25 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison

I do betrayed. I've been told that PowerPC was "Pentium Crushing" and now I'm supposed to drop that and welcome Intel with open arms?


PowerPC may have been Pentium Crushing some time ago, but it's not anymore. Pentiums are at dual core whereas PowerPC is stuck at 2.7 at most, single core.

Things change. Intel has changed. The market has changed. Evolution. Life.
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
post #26 of 125
Do not forget the Intel subsidies. Intel gives huge subsidies to computer makers. Apple may very well be in that group.
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
post #27 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
Sure if you make Steve Jobs' RDF your own which you obviously have. Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony obviously disagree that Intel is the hotspot for microprocessors tight now ..but hell what do they know??

None of those consoles use the G5, though..

As it became clear that IBM would fail to deliver on the G5, they approached Intel which has a much more promising roadmap, and one that suits Apple's plans better. OSX was designed to work on all kinds of CPU's, so why not?

Simple as that really.
post #28 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by 1337_5L4Xx0R


And you would rather Apple stay with these two forever than achieve performance parity with PCs and offer state-of-the-art hardware?

"Achieve performance parity?" How come when I go to the top 500 supercomputer list, the VA Tech system is ahead of other X86 systems that have FASTER and MORE processors?

I guess your idea of performance parity is for mac users to take a step backwards.
post #29 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
I can see Apple trying to woo a switcher in 2007.


Apple-"Come over to Mac OS Leopard and get all these new whizzbang features!!" .

Switcher- "Great and I have a P4 3.8Ghz computer! How much is Leopard I want to install it today"

Apple- "uh sorry...Leopard won't run on your computer but we have a shiny new P4 4.2Ghz for you!"

Switcher- "but...they are the same platform. Why should I buy a new computer to run your OS on the same hardware?"

Apple- "Hey I gotta eat man"

Switcher- "Wow a $400 premium you must be eating filet mignon"


This stinks folks.


Am hoping, and the only way I see this working - is if Apple remains with their GX branding. So, the intel chips will be G6's. Just as IBM's chips are G5's.

Otherwise yeah, read above. It will stink.

Anyone think this is a possibility?
post #30 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Sopphode
None of those consoles use the G5, though..

As it became clear that IBM would fail to deliver on the G5, they approached Intel which has a much more promising roadmap, and one that suits Apple's plans better. OSX was designed to work on all kinds of CPU's, so why not?

Simple as that really.

Oh please. Whatever you guys need to tell yourselves to deal with this disaster.
post #31 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
I remain steadfast. I don't think it is positive overall. We'll see in a couple of years how the chips fall. I'll still be here.

Good.

And here I *do* think it's positive overall, because what's the biggest problem with getting switchers? Migration.

Look, right now you can show a Windows user how much better it really is on MacOS X, and they might even agree with you - but there's no way they're going to give up their software library.

MacOS X/Intel, even if it doesn't boot Windows... will still run WINE. Voila. Switchers still get all their old software, and can migrate over as they feel the need to. Don't ever have to boot into Windows.

Now... I can hear the "But then why would anyone develop for Mac then?" starting. Cocoa perhaps? Look at this change coming down the pipe. What is the Cocoa workload? A recompile covers most of it. Will there be tweaking? Oh hell yes. Will it be a 'port'? Nope. I'll bet my last dollar that PPC -> Intel will be a smaller move for Cocoa developers than Carbon -> Cocoa was. (And here you thought there wasn't a good reason to make that move, you silly devs you...)

2007 will have MacOS X vs. Longhorn, and .NET vs. Cocoa.... *on the same hardware*. No more excuses, no more handwaving. Same hardware, head to head. Let the games begin.
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #32 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Gene Clean
PowerPC may have been Pentium Crushing some time ago, but it's not anymore. Pentiums are at dual core whereas PowerPC is stuck at 2.7 at most, single core.

Things change. Intel has changed. The market has changed. Evolution. Life.

Yes and the PPC 2.7Ghz G5 is faster per clock than the Intel chip. Hell Anandtech's June 3rd comparison of OS X vs Linux basically concluded that PPC hardware is up to snuff. It's OSX that isn't performing. No surprise here since Apple hasn't fully commited to their own platform.

I wouldn't be putting the Pentium D up as a dual core poster child Gene. It's the poorest DC solution out. AMD's DC solution allows the chips to communicate together. Intel's DC Pentium D must use the FSB to snoop each others caches and communicate. Thus a Pentium DC is only really saving a socket compared to todays current Powermacs DP systems. There is no other saving.

Smoke and mirros folks. Intel's roadmap isn't written in stone. They cancelled Tejas and the next Xeon successor last year. They recently cancelled their LCos chips after crowing about how they would enable 60" screens for sub $2k prices. Anyone who bets on Intel paperlaunches is going to get bloodied.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #33 of 125
Quote:
However I will say that now Apple has no perceived advantage anymore.

If apple has no perceived advantage, then neither does Bentley - might as well buy a VW...

Look at a G5 tower, and then look at a Dell box. Work with windows, and then work with OSX. You will remember what the perceived advantages of Apple are.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #34 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Tuttle
Oh please. Whatever you guys need to tell yourselves to deal with this disaster.

Why do people get so worked up about this? Would you really want to work on a platform that is slower just so you could know that there is a PowerPC chip inside? The G5 was clearly going nowhere (2.7ghz after two years -- it was supposed to be at over 4ghz by now), and even worse, it proved impossible to get into a portable.

Some people here just need to chill out. PowerPC chips are perhaps "better", but it's of no use when X86 chips will be faster. No one really cares what processor sits inside a Mac anyways, as long as it isn't slow. And slow is exactly what Macs have been.
post #35 of 125
How many of you actually believe half of what Apple or Intel says? When Apple claimed it's G5 is four times faster than a Pentium 4, did you really believe that?

(If you did, you need a better RDF deflector shield)

If the end result is we get slightly faster but cooler processors at about the same price point today, what's the problem?
post #36 of 125
Who says we're gonna be stuck with basically the same hardware as Dell? The chip is changing. That's all. It's still going to be a Mac. For many years, Apple has IMHO led the way in function and design and usability of its hardware. There's nothing to suggest they won't continue to just because they're changing chip vendors.
May the road to recovery be free of rubberneckers.
Reply
May the road to recovery be free of rubberneckers.
Reply
post #37 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Tuttle
Oh please. Whatever you guys need to tell yourselves to deal with this disaster.

Or perhaps you're just being a drama queen.
post #38 of 125
well, he screwed up. i'm just buying a rebranded sony now, with shit-ass specs. forget it. good thing the iBook is new, because i dont think i'm buying another mac.
"Humankind -- despite its artistic pretensions, its sophistication, and its many accomplishments -- owes its existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains."
Reply
"Humankind -- despite its artistic pretensions, its sophistication, and its many accomplishments -- owes its existence to a six-inch layer of topsoil and the fact that it rains."
Reply
post #39 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Sopphode
And slow is exactly what Macs have been.



I think the RDF has been completely flushed from system now.

Yes the 2.7Ghz 970s are slow...
post #40 of 125
Quote:
Originally posted by Tuttle
Yes the 2.7Ghz 970s are slow...

In two years they definitely are. They barely hold their own against P4's today. Ask anyone with an iBook if its snappy. Or see how smoothly those HD trailers look on brand new 17" PowerBooks.

Something clearly needs to be done, no?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Is the switch to Intel Jobs' worst business decision of his life?