right now it's 6.30am in san francisco. the sparse sparkling summer sunshine peeks through the gentle summer fog. the moscone center is abuzz as the morning chill gives way to bleary-eyed peons and middle managers.
steve jobs is probably finishing his yoga routine in his hotel suite, looking forward to a nice vegan breakfast before heading down for a last pow-wow with his top executives. coming up from his last 'downward-upward dog pose' he surveys the san francisco vista from high above the sleepy city nursing its undoubtedly hedonistic weekend.
he briefly contemplates an 'iAprrentice' type television show, no doubt one of many universal insights he gets in those few calm, enlightening post-yoga minutes.
he surveys the puffy, lazy cotton-wool gently cascading down twin peaks and then looks south, imagining in his mind's eye the chaos soon to reverberate through silicon valley. iOwn bay area tech today, he thinks, a wry smile across his face...
I hope this has not been discussed before in this thread, as I did not scan through all the pages:
What will a switch to the Intel-platform mean in regards to:
a) Mac OS X. Will it be tied to Intel-based Apple hardware, or will it able to run on any x86-based hardware?
b) the price of Apple hardware. Switching to x86 will remove even the last differences between the parts Apple uses compared to every other manfacturer.
What will Apple do to differentiate their equipment form the rest besides the OS?
c) the crippeling of features. Will Apple be able to get away with disableing features like monitor spanning. How about expandability options?
d) and last but not least, developers. Do you think a switch will help to expand the Mac market share and thus ensure and enhance attractiveness of the Mac market from a developer's point of view?
And one last question which is a bit off topic: Are there any sites offering life coverage of today's keynote?
whoa... relax there fella take some deep breaths, we still got 3 hours to go
I saw a BUNCH of Apple QA job offers recently.
And the requirements for QA had all become uncharacteristically consistent, automation with C shell and Perl.
Can YOU say that: "uncharacteristically", I like the way you blither...
Now they could have done this before, but they did not, before there a lot of hand testing and all kinds of variations on automation.
Now its all the same.
That means they have been given the edict to automate as much testing as possible with C shell and Perl because that will run on any platform with OS X.
a) Mac OS X. Will it be tied to Intel-based Apple hardware, or will it able to run on any x86-based hardware?
It really is too early to tell. At this stage we don't know what Apple plans to do. Will Intel produce a PPC variant? Will Apple use a future version of the Pentium chip? Will Intel produce a variant exclusively for Apple (with e.g. better Altivec compatibility)?
My biggest fear is that whatever strategy is planned that backfires somehow. For example if Apple were to use a bog-standard Pentium chip but somehow modifies OSX so it will only run on Apple hardware to protect its hardware business - it is perhaps only a matter of time until some PC hacker finds a way around it and OS X will get pirated by the bucket load on standard beige boxes. Great for Apple to get that many new users? No. Because Apple wouldn't sell a single computer nor a single license for OS X. Their move simply backfired.
b) the price of Apple hardware. Switching to x86 will remove even the last differences between the parts Apple uses compared to every other manfacturer.
Apple will likely try to steer an iPod course. Use standard parts, but have their hardware so well designed that people still pay a slight premium for it. The iPod is not the cheapest MP3 player, but not overly expensive compared.
At least this will make it easier for consumers to compare like for like.
But it also means that it will get more difficult to have hardware that sets itself apart. Current 2.7GHz PowerMacs use a 1.35GHz front side bus. A speed simply unheard of in most Intel boxes. 800GHz is the standard there for most. So the top G5 has a massively better throughput. These types of feature advantages will likely get lost with a move to Intel.
But we hopefully gain a laptop CPU that is massively better than the G4.
What will Apple do to differentiate their equipment form the rest besides the OS?
The usual: design and hardware/software integration. Although if OS X is to run on standard PCs as well, the latter might phase out over time. And whether Apple will be able to keep its hardware business alive just because of the design will be hard to tell. This might also be a point which backfires over time.
c) the crippeling of features. Will Apple be able to get away with disableing features like monitor spanning. How about expandability options?
Again, too early to say. But it is to be feared that Apple has less x86 knowledge than top hackers out there and will blunder here. They might try to cripple things deliberately, only to find hacks pop up on the Internet within hours to circumvent them. It will likely be an uphill battle for Apple to plug all these holes.
Hopefully they realise this and don't start crippling things in the first place.
d) and last but not least, developers. Do you think a switch will help to expand the Mac market share and thus ensure and enhance attractiveness of the Mac market from a developer's point of view?
That is the biggest question of all. And by far the most difficult. If for some reason Windows/Longhorn would run on the Intel Apple hardware then things look bleak. If Microsoft would decide to release Longhorn for Apple hardware then big developers might jump ship and abandon the Mac market altogether. Their argument: "just install Longhorn on a partition and use our Windows version instead." Adobe, Alias, Quark and Microsoft (Office) could all argument like that. It would be a sad day for the Mac community.
Similar issues will arise if Apple were to have some kind of 'Windows Compatibility' in their box. Like 'Classic' now running OS 9, some other compatibility layer which allows to run Windows applications inside OS X. It would be great for users as they can now play PC games etc. But it will also be the end of every Mac version of any software. These vendors will simply tell Mac users to run their Windows version inside OS X.
Of course Apple knows this and I think this is why they will likely try to avoid this scenario.
But what if Microsoft releases a VirtualPC version that will run on the Apple Intel box offering such a compatibility layer - running at speeds almost as good as on a normal PC? That would backfire for Apple massively! It would be Microsoft's final 'Trojan Horse' to bring down the Macintosh software market.
he surveys the puffy, lazy cotton-wool gently cascading down twin peaks and then looks south, imagining in his mind's eye the chaos soon to reverberate through silicon valley. iOwn bay area tech today, he thinks, a wry smile across his face...
BY JOVE YOU HAVE GOT IT, OLD BOY !!!
He is possessed by the EVIL demon from TWIN PEAKS !!!!!!
I'd really, really hate Apple if they put those damn "Intel Inside" stickers on the cases in exchange for marketing dollars. That would be betrayal on a grand scale.
they wouldn't - nor would they have those crappy Intel inside jingles on their adverts. Apple are a high-end computer company and Intel want Apple too much to not allow Apple these rights.
Apple are a well-known company and therefore do not need the stickers on the case.
they wouldn't - nor would they have those crappy Intel inside jingles on their adverts. Apple are a high-end computer company and Intel want Apple too much to not allow Apple these rights.
Apple are a well-known company and therefore do not need the stickers on the case.
(not that Apple will switch to Intel)
2 hours to go
hey cool... we are kinda doing a tag-team on the countdown
now half-hourly. i'm up next for the 1.5 hours to go
But what if Microsoft releases a VirtualPC version that will run on the Apple Intel box offering such a compatibility layer - running at speeds almost as good as on a normal PC? That would backfire for Apple massively! It would be Microsoft's final 'Trojan Horse' to bring down the Macintosh software market.
So let's just brace ourselves and enjoy the ride!
Even though I don't see this move happening I don't think VirtualPC would push developers to switch. Mac OS X is based on UNIX and that alone will keep many developers even if Apple do go over to x86.
I've said this before but I think all this Intel talk is for a new product - NOT the current computers (Mac mini as the exception).
Comments
steve jobs is probably finishing his yoga routine in his hotel suite, looking forward to a nice vegan breakfast before heading down for a last pow-wow with his top executives. coming up from his last 'downward-upward dog pose' he surveys the san francisco vista from high above the sleepy city nursing its undoubtedly hedonistic weekend.
he briefly contemplates an 'iAprrentice' type television show, no doubt one of many universal insights he gets in those few calm, enlightening post-yoga minutes.
he surveys the puffy, lazy cotton-wool gently cascading down twin peaks and then looks south, imagining in his mind's eye the chaos soon to reverberate through silicon valley. iOwn bay area tech today, he thinks, a wry smile across his face...
What will a switch to the Intel-platform mean in regards to:
a) Mac OS X. Will it be tied to Intel-based Apple hardware, or will it able to run on any x86-based hardware?
b) the price of Apple hardware. Switching to x86 will remove even the last differences between the parts Apple uses compared to every other manfacturer.
What will Apple do to differentiate their equipment form the rest besides the OS?
c) the crippeling of features. Will Apple be able to get away with disableing features like monitor spanning. How about expandability options?
d) and last but not least, developers. Do you think a switch will help to expand the Mac market share and thus ensure and enhance attractiveness of the Mac market from a developer's point of view?
And one last question which is a bit off topic: Are there any sites offering life coverage of today's keynote?
Originally posted by sunilraman
3 hours to go
Originally posted by RolandG
And one last question which is a bit off topic: Are there any sites offering life coverage of today's keynote?
www.macrumorslive.com
Originally posted by MacCrazy
4 hours to go
to be proved wrong!
I figured it out...
... Apeple is going ALL INTHEDEL !!!
Originally posted by MACchine
I figured it out...
... Apeple is going ALL INTHEDEL !!!
whoa... relax there fella
Originally posted by kim kap sol
i am building intel mac plastics right now.
BIG BROTHER inside...
Originally posted by sunilraman
whoa... relax there fella
I saw a BUNCH of Apple QA job offers recently.
And the requirements for QA had all become uncharacteristically consistent, automation with C shell and Perl.
Can YOU say that: "uncharacteristically", I like the way you blither...
Now they could have done this before, but they did not, before there a lot of hand testing and all kinds of variations on automation.
Now its all the same.
That means they have been given the edict to automate as much testing as possible with C shell and Perl because that will run on any platform with OS X.
Originally posted by RolandG
a) Mac OS X. Will it be tied to Intel-based Apple hardware, or will it able to run on any x86-based hardware?
It really is too early to tell. At this stage we don't know what Apple plans to do. Will Intel produce a PPC variant? Will Apple use a future version of the Pentium chip? Will Intel produce a variant exclusively for Apple (with e.g. better Altivec compatibility)?
My biggest fear is that whatever strategy is planned that backfires somehow. For example if Apple were to use a bog-standard Pentium chip but somehow modifies OSX so it will only run on Apple hardware to protect its hardware business - it is perhaps only a matter of time until some PC hacker finds a way around it and OS X will get pirated by the bucket load on standard beige boxes. Great for Apple to get that many new users? No. Because Apple wouldn't sell a single computer nor a single license for OS X. Their move simply backfired.
b) the price of Apple hardware. Switching to x86 will remove even the last differences between the parts Apple uses compared to every other manfacturer.
Apple will likely try to steer an iPod course. Use standard parts, but have their hardware so well designed that people still pay a slight premium for it. The iPod is not the cheapest MP3 player, but not overly expensive compared.
At least this will make it easier for consumers to compare like for like.
But it also means that it will get more difficult to have hardware that sets itself apart. Current 2.7GHz PowerMacs use a 1.35GHz front side bus. A speed simply unheard of in most Intel boxes. 800GHz is the standard there for most. So the top G5 has a massively better throughput. These types of feature advantages will likely get lost with a move to Intel.
But we hopefully gain a laptop CPU that is massively better than the G4.
What will Apple do to differentiate their equipment form the rest besides the OS?
The usual: design and hardware/software integration. Although if OS X is to run on standard PCs as well, the latter might phase out over time. And whether Apple will be able to keep its hardware business alive just because of the design will be hard to tell. This might also be a point which backfires over time.
c) the crippeling of features. Will Apple be able to get away with disableing features like monitor spanning. How about expandability options?
Again, too early to say. But it is to be feared that Apple has less x86 knowledge than top hackers out there and will blunder here. They might try to cripple things deliberately, only to find hacks pop up on the Internet within hours to circumvent them. It will likely be an uphill battle for Apple to plug all these holes.
Hopefully they realise this and don't start crippling things in the first place.
d) and last but not least, developers. Do you think a switch will help to expand the Mac market share and thus ensure and enhance attractiveness of the Mac market from a developer's point of view?
That is the biggest question of all. And by far the most difficult. If for some reason Windows/Longhorn would run on the Intel Apple hardware then things look bleak. If Microsoft would decide to release Longhorn for Apple hardware then big developers might jump ship and abandon the Mac market altogether. Their argument: "just install Longhorn on a partition and use our Windows version instead." Adobe, Alias, Quark and Microsoft (Office) could all argument like that. It would be a sad day for the Mac community.
Similar issues will arise if Apple were to have some kind of 'Windows Compatibility' in their box. Like 'Classic' now running OS 9, some other compatibility layer which allows to run Windows applications inside OS X. It would be great for users as they can now play PC games etc. But it will also be the end of every Mac version of any software. These vendors will simply tell Mac users to run their Windows version inside OS X.
Of course Apple knows this and I think this is why they will likely try to avoid this scenario.
But what if Microsoft releases a VirtualPC version that will run on the Apple Intel box offering such a compatibility layer - running at speeds almost as good as on a normal PC? That would backfire for Apple massively! It would be Microsoft's final 'Trojan Horse' to bring down the Macintosh software market.
So let's just brace ourselves and enjoy the ride!
Originally posted by sunilraman
he surveys the puffy, lazy cotton-wool gently cascading down twin peaks and then looks south, imagining in his mind's eye the chaos soon to reverberate through silicon valley. iOwn bay area tech today, he thinks, a wry smile across his face...
BY JOVE YOU HAVE GOT IT, OLD BOY !!!
He is possessed by the EVIL demon from TWIN PEAKS !!!!!!
Originally posted by MACchine
He is possessed by the EVIL demon from TWIN PEAKS !!!!!!
Sometimes my instruction pipeline bends back.
The Blue Men are not what they seem.
...
slob dribble dribble slob
...
Oh man the wait is killing me
Originally posted by UnixPoet
A couple of stories by the Register here.
I'd really, really hate Apple if they put those damn "Intel Inside" stickers on the cases in exchange for marketing dollars. That would be betrayal on a grand scale.
they wouldn't - nor would they have those crappy Intel inside jingles on their adverts. Apple are a high-end computer company and Intel want Apple too much to not allow Apple these rights.
Apple are a well-known company and therefore do not need the stickers on the case.
(not that Apple will switch to Intel)
2 hours to go
Originally posted by UnixPoet
C'mon guys admit it! You dont really, really care what the Dear Leader is gonna say do you? I mean, its not the end of the world...
...
slob dribble dribble slob
...
Oh man the wait is killing me
I want the Inthedel INSIDE, its about time Apple got cores from every tree !!!
Originally posted by MacCrazy
they wouldn't - nor would they have those crappy Intel inside jingles on their adverts. Apple are a high-end computer company and Intel want Apple too much to not allow Apple these rights.
Apple are a well-known company and therefore do not need the stickers on the case.
(not that Apple will switch to Intel)
2 hours to go
hey cool... we are kinda doing a tag-team on the countdown
now half-hourly. i'm up next for the 1.5 hours to go
Originally posted by hobBIT
But what if Microsoft releases a VirtualPC version that will run on the Apple Intel box offering such a compatibility layer - running at speeds almost as good as on a normal PC? That would backfire for Apple massively! It would be Microsoft's final 'Trojan Horse' to bring down the Macintosh software market.
So let's just brace ourselves and enjoy the ride!
Even though I don't see this move happening I don't think VirtualPC would push developers to switch. Mac OS X is based on UNIX and that alone will keep many developers even if Apple do go over to x86.
I've said this before but I think all this Intel talk is for a new product - NOT the current computers (Mac mini as the exception).
Originally posted by sunilraman
hey cool... we are kinda doing a tag-team on the countdown
now half-hourly. i'm up next for the 1.5 hours to go
didn't we do this for MWSF as well? OK I'll do 1 hour and the final WWDC NOW then?!
Originally posted by sunilraman
i hereby officially declare that this thread now has a coherence level of < 10%, dropping precipitously by the minute.
I never thought it was that high.