Intel, Mac time to unite!

Showtime · 08-08-2002, 11:56 PM

Got this from Anchordesk:

Macs with Intel inside? You bet! Here's how
David Coursey,
Executive Editor, AnchorDesk
Wednesday, August 7, 2002

Here's a prediction: In less than 18 months, you'll be able to buy an Apple Macintosh computer with an Intel (or equivalent) processor inside. The machine will be able to boot either Mac OS or Windows, although it might not come with Windows preinstalled.

I've considered--and rejected--this idea in the past. My feeling has been that, unless Apple were ready to cut the cord with Microsoft, it wouldn't attempt this kind of head-to-head platform competition.

WELL, GUESS WHAT? With Apple ads encouraging Windows users to switch platforms, and Microsoft whining about supposedly slow sales of Office for OS X, it's clear that the relationship is in trouble. As the two drift apart, Apple has little reason not to make a processor change.

I'm not the only one thinking this could happen. Bear Stearns analyst Andrew Neff recently issued a report in which he enumerated the reasons Apple might want to adopt the Intel platform. Neff and I largely agree, though I'm pretty sure there won't be a direct Intel/Apple alliance.

Some of you may find this bewildering. How can Apple's OS run on an Intel processor? The non-bewildered should say, in unison, "Because it's a Unix!" Since Mac OS X is built atop a version of Unix, porting it over to Intel processors is fairly straightforward. This wasn't possible with previous Mac operating systems and is, perhaps, the biggest benefit of moving to an industry-standard platform for Mac OS.

WITH THE MOVE to an Intel-equivalent processor, Apple's hardware prices could come down slightly, and the real battle to get Windows users to switch to Mac OS would be on.

And if those converts find they don't like the Mac OS after all, they could always use their Intel-equipped Macs to run Windows XP. Maybe Apple will even offer to replace Mac OS with Windows as a satisfaction guarantee. I can already see the slogan: "Macintosh: Satisfaction guaranteed or double your Windows back!"

OK, maybe I can't. But anything Apple can do to make it easier for Windows users to buy a Mac is a good thing--both for the company and for potential users.

Whether we'd see non-Apple hardware booting up Mac OS remains a question. My bet is that, even if Apple does make the switch to Intel, it will lock out other PC makers and continue to be the exclusive supplier of Mac hardware. That revenue is just too important to Apple's bottom line for Cupertino to allow just anyone to make Macs.

A GOOD WAY to do this might be to hire AMD to be the exclusive supplier of "Intel" processors for Macintosh, perhaps configured in such a way that Mac OS would only run on them rather than on any Intel-based system.

I don't think Apple's switch to Intel would create a second source for Mac hardware, something Steve Jobs stopped almost as soon as he arrived back at Apple in 1997. (Remember Power Computing's Mac clones?) It's both a marketing opportunity to snag switchers and a chance to reduce Apple's dependence on Motorola's PowerPC chips.

Getting away from Motorola--a company that seems to go through a major reorg every three to six months--is probably a good thing. Can it really be counted on to develop PowerPC into the future? And even if it can, what's to stop Apple from using AMD's "Intel" chips in its low-end machines and PowerPC processors in high-end systems? That's precisely what I might do if I were Apple-CEO-for-Life Steve Jobs.

Keeping Apple the sole supplier of Mac hardware, regardless of processor, would not only protect Apple's revenues, but also assure that the tight link that exists between Apple's hardware and software continues. Such OS/hardware coupling is very much in the interest of Apple customers. (I occasionally wonder what would have happened if Microsoft were in the PC hardware business, too--but that's another column.)

For Apple, going from PowerPC to Intel is a bigger leap conceptually than practically. Back at Next, Steve Jobs made the transition from Motorola to Intel. And, as I said before, Apple's OS X, based on Unix, would be a straightforward port from PowerPC to Intel.

SO THE HARD PART isn't the technology, it's Apple getting its head around the business issues involved and lining up the necessary support to make it a go. And a special relationship with a CPU maker, like AMD, is essential to make this fly.

How likely is this scenario to play out? I have no special insider knowledge of what, if any, plans Apple may have in this direction. But all the signs are that Apple and Microsoft are disengaging from one another, and that Apple is making the conversion of Windows users Job No. 1 for marketing and sales. And if that's really the case, then an Intel-based Mac can't be too far away.

What would that mean to you? Someday soon you may be able buy a machine that boots whichever OS you choose--Windows or Mac.

May the best OS win.

What do you think? Should Apple switch to Intel processors? Would you buy a Mac if it could run Windows too? TalkBack to me!

jel

2 cents: A little faster a lot stabler and a lot cheaper!

~~DoPeY5007~~ · 08-08-2002, 11:59 PM

hmm, interesting, But I would like that, a boot option to go to MAC or PC. . . .

kewl!!!

Jeffbx · 08-09-2002, 05:59 AM

Now THERE is a good idea from Apple!!

Their case design has always been much further ahead of mainstream PC companies. If I could get a G4 case or a PowerBook with an Intel chip in it, I'd be all over that.

topane · 08-09-2002, 06:03 AM

You can make your own PC out of a G4 case!

LegendKiller · 08-09-2002, 08:53 AM

Personally, I think that whole article is BS. Its pure conjecture that has been started by one stock analyst who has his head up his butt, as do most analysts.

I loved the part where he said he was thinking about this for a long time, and Neff just also came up with the idea. BS, this dude thought of it AFTER neff released his little statement, just like everybody else on the net.

Apple cannot afford to go from a hardware/software company just to a software company. First, it would alienate their whole consumer base by making them "the same as PC users", and second, it would get rid of what has always made MAC the "superior", the claim to speed. THey have always held onto the fact that their comp's were faster in certain apps, and they were/are. Get rid of that and you just have a funky OS, not something thats very special.

Second, apple has ALWAYS been built around the "think different" type of thing, breaking "big brother", being the "elite" and such. Switching to more of a commodity market that is the PC world would ruin this image, and as I said before, alienate their current congregation/flock of minion followers.

LK

Jeffbx · 08-09-2002, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by topane
You can make your own PC out of a G4 case!

Heh - that's pretty cool! Now if I could only get my hands on a G4 case...

~~Cantacuzene~~ · 08-09-2002, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jeffbx

Heh - that's pretty cool! Now if I could only get my hands on a G4 case...

...ebay...

hapoo · 08-09-2002, 03:05 PM

1. Apple makes way too much money on hardware to give that up and become a software company

2. A new 64 bit PPC is coming out soon

I bet that timeout is driving ribitch nuts right now

Showtime · 08-11-2002, 04:31 AM

Damn them for fooling me and damn it for being easily mulnipulated.....
Sounded legit when I read it. Oh well my bad

How bout that ati 9700 i got my hands on......

-jel

ps: thanks df for giving credit where its due, too bad it's for this ....

08-08-2002, 11:56 PM	#1
Showtime Lakers fanatic Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: L.A. ->SoCal<- O.C. Posts: 7,338	Intel, Mac time to unite! Got this from Anchordesk: Macs with Intel inside? You bet! Here's how David Coursey, Executive Editor, AnchorDesk Wednesday, August 7, 2002 Here's a prediction: In less than 18 months, you'll be able to buy an Apple Macintosh computer with an Intel (or equivalent) processor inside. The machine will be able to boot either Mac OS or Windows, although it might not come with Windows preinstalled. I've considered--and rejected--this idea in the past. My feeling has been that, unless Apple were ready to cut the cord with Microsoft, it wouldn't attempt this kind of head-to-head platform competition. WELL, GUESS WHAT? With Apple ads encouraging Windows users to switch platforms, and Microsoft whining about supposedly slow sales of Office for OS X, it's clear that the relationship is in trouble. As the two drift apart, Apple has little reason not to make a processor change. I'm not the only one thinking this could happen. Bear Stearns analyst Andrew Neff recently issued a report in which he enumerated the reasons Apple might want to adopt the Intel platform. Neff and I largely agree, though I'm pretty sure there won't be a direct Intel/Apple alliance. Some of you may find this bewildering. How can Apple's OS run on an Intel processor? The non-bewildered should say, in unison, "Because it's a Unix!" Since Mac OS X is built atop a version of Unix, porting it over to Intel processors is fairly straightforward. This wasn't possible with previous Mac operating systems and is, perhaps, the biggest benefit of moving to an industry-standard platform for Mac OS. WITH THE MOVE to an Intel-equivalent processor, Apple's hardware prices could come down slightly, and the real battle to get Windows users to switch to Mac OS would be on. And if those converts find they don't like the Mac OS after all, they could always use their Intel-equipped Macs to run Windows XP. Maybe Apple will even offer to replace Mac OS with Windows as a satisfaction guarantee. I can already see the slogan: "Macintosh: Satisfaction guaranteed or double your Windows back!" OK, maybe I can't. But anything Apple can do to make it easier for Windows users to buy a Mac is a good thing--both for the company and for potential users. Whether we'd see non-Apple hardware booting up Mac OS remains a question. My bet is that, even if Apple does make the switch to Intel, it will lock out other PC makers and continue to be the exclusive supplier of Mac hardware. That revenue is just too important to Apple's bottom line for Cupertino to allow just anyone to make Macs. A GOOD WAY to do this might be to hire AMD to be the exclusive supplier of "Intel" processors for Macintosh, perhaps configured in such a way that Mac OS would only run on them rather than on any Intel-based system. I don't think Apple's switch to Intel would create a second source for Mac hardware, something Steve Jobs stopped almost as soon as he arrived back at Apple in 1997. (Remember Power Computing's Mac clones?) It's both a marketing opportunity to snag switchers and a chance to reduce Apple's dependence on Motorola's PowerPC chips. Getting away from Motorola--a company that seems to go through a major reorg every three to six months--is probably a good thing. Can it really be counted on to develop PowerPC into the future? And even if it can, what's to stop Apple from using AMD's "Intel" chips in its low-end machines and PowerPC processors in high-end systems? That's precisely what I might do if I were Apple-CEO-for-Life Steve Jobs. Keeping Apple the sole supplier of Mac hardware, regardless of processor, would not only protect Apple's revenues, but also assure that the tight link that exists between Apple's hardware and software continues. Such OS/hardware coupling is very much in the interest of Apple customers. (I occasionally wonder what would have happened if Microsoft were in the PC hardware business, too--but that's another column.) For Apple, going from PowerPC to Intel is a bigger leap conceptually than practically. Back at Next, Steve Jobs made the transition from Motorola to Intel. And, as I said before, Apple's OS X, based on Unix, would be a straightforward port from PowerPC to Intel. SO THE HARD PART isn't the technology, it's Apple getting its head around the business issues involved and lining up the necessary support to make it a go. And a special relationship with a CPU maker, like AMD, is essential to make this fly. How likely is this scenario to play out? I have no special insider knowledge of what, if any, plans Apple may have in this direction. But all the signs are that Apple and Microsoft are disengaging from one another, and that Apple is making the conversion of Windows users Job No. 1 for marketing and sales. And if that's really the case, then an Intel-based Mac can't be too far away. What would that mean to you? Someday soon you may be able buy a machine that boots whichever OS you choose--Windows or Mac. May the best OS win. What do you think? Should Apple switch to Intel processors? Would you buy a Mac if it could run Windows too? TalkBack to me! jel 2 cents: A little faster a lot stabler and a lot cheaper!

08-09-2002, 06:03 AM	#4
topane turducken all the time Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Between the wheels Posts: 5,055	You can make your own PC out of a G4 case! __________________ Shall we buy a new guitar? Shall we drive a more powerful car?

08-09-2002, 03:05 PM	#8
hapoo Fleet Admiral Join Date: Jan 2000 Location: 742 Evergreen Terrace, Springfield USA Posts: 9,276	1. Apple makes way too much money on hardware to give that up and become a software company 2. A new 64 bit PPC is coming out soon I bet that timeout is driving ribitch nuts right now __________________

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

08-08-2002, 11:59 PM	#2
~~DoPeY5007~~ court-martialled Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Brig Posts: 0	hmm, interesting, But I would like that, a boot option to go to MAC or PC. . . . kewl!!!

08-09-2002, 05:59 AM	#3
Jeffbx Fleet Admiral Join Date: Mar 2000 Location: Michigan Posts: 9,390	Now THERE is a good idea from Apple!! Their case design has always been much further ahead of mainstream PC companies. If I could get a G4 case or a PowerBook with an Intel chip in it, I'd be all over that.

08-09-2002, 08:53 AM	#5
LegendKiller Vice Admiral Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,927	Personally, I think that whole article is BS. Its pure conjecture that has been started by one stock analyst who has his head up his butt, as do most analysts. I loved the part where he said he was thinking about this for a long time, and Neff just also came up with the idea. BS, this dude thought of it AFTER neff released his little statement, just like everybody else on the net. Apple cannot afford to go from a hardware/software company just to a software company. First, it would alienate their whole consumer base by making them "the same as PC users", and second, it would get rid of what has always made MAC the "superior", the claim to speed. THey have always held onto the fact that their comp's were faster in certain apps, and they were/are. Get rid of that and you just have a funky OS, not something thats very special. Second, apple has ALWAYS been built around the "think different" type of thing, breaking "big brother", being the "elite" and such. Switching to more of a commodity market that is the PC world would ruin this image, and as I said before, alienate their current congregation/flock of minion followers. LK

08-11-2002, 04:31 AM	#9
Showtime Lakers fanatic Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: L.A. ->SoCal<- O.C. Posts: 7,338	Damn them for fooling me and damn it for being easily mulnipulated..... Sounded legit when I read it. Oh well my bad How bout that ati 9700 i got my hands on...... -jel ps: thanks df for giving credit where its due, too bad it's for this ....

User Name
Password
Remember Me?