Originally posted by Simple Ranger
Yes, sells may be hurt in the short term, but this is obviously a long term strategic move. And to call the current machines "crippled" is just plain histrionic. Sure, maybe one should hold off on buying a laptop -- they've been stagnant for two years. But there's no way you can say a G5 now isn't going to run OS X beautifully for the next 3 or four years.
To get to a long term win, you have to survive the short term. I worry about Apple in the transition. I don't think current Macs are crippled, but listening to Jobs talk about all the shortcomings and missed dates and power problems, that is sure the feeling he seemed to be giving.
What are you talking about? Just because Mac's will be running on Intel doesn't mean you can compile a Windows app for OS X. The reason the Mac platform is doing so well is because of the software -- specifically the great development tools. This isn't going to change. OS X has been processor independent from the beginning and yet it's still the best OS going.
What software do you use? This is already a problem as Adobe and Macromedia have moved cross-platform, Apple's system technologies aren't adopted quickly. One of the touted advantages of this in the media is that it will be easier to port Wintel programs.
And while OSX has been processor dependent, much of the software isn't. In many field, including mine, Alitivec has sped things up a lot--and that is tied to the processor. Also the giant front side busses have been a godsend, but again, they are tied to the processor.
The software is the same? Yes, you will still be able to choose between Photoshop on the Mac and Photoshop on Windows. And yes, Windows will be faster than the Mac in some cases. Has that not been the case previously? Again, Apple differentiates itself as a platform. OS X and the iApps and the Mac experience is what makes a Mac a Mac. Windows is still going to suck even if it moves to PPC.
But most users don't seem to think Windows sucks, otherwise we wouldn't even be having this conversation because Macs would be selling in huge volumes. I think Apple will have to try harder to keep it's unique brand.
And how much leverage would they have with IBM going forward now that they are focused on delivering for Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo?
As far as I can tell, you have not provided one good argument.
But the game console market at least wasn't actively hostile to Apple, which Dell and MS are.
Lastly, even if my fears are irrational, I still think they show Apple has some serious marketing challenges ahead of them. Steve Jobs is usually so good at selling his vision, and this time I just don't get it. I guess I can accept that this was a necessary move, but it's still not one the excites me--or much of anyone judging from most of the coverage I've read.