At any rate, Apple going to Intel chips wont' mean the end of Microsoft. MS isn't going anywhere.
Intel makes the processor chips, not the operating system. It doesn't mean squat to MS windows.
At any rate, Apple going to Intel chips wont' mean the end of Microsoft. MS isn't going anywhere.
Why will this hurt Microsoft? It might hurt IBM. And some commentators have speculated that it might hurt Apple to change it's supplier again. But Microsoft will have the edge as long as Apple Computers continue to be more expensive than PCs.
Do people not buy Apple because they don't have an Intel chip? I think not.
Add user friendly and this would be MS's best strategy to beat back the competition.
Say what now? Apple is a hardware manufacturer. They are not a software company. They lose money on their software just to sell their hardware. The chip that Apple is looking at is reportedly the XScale processor, which is the same chip that is in the Pocket PC.
They will NOT be releasing the Mac-OS on the PC. Apple wants to sell hardware.
Take a chill pill. Microsoft dominates not due to what chip they run on but because users prefer their interface, functionality, interoperability, and price.
Whenever I see Microsoft mis-spelled to denigrate the fact that they are profitable, it indicates a shallow view of the world. A few steps for recovery: 1) own a company, 2) make a product, 3) give it away for free and make a payroll. When you recover from that disaster, try charging for a product and paying people rather than laying them off.
I am no fan of Prince William, but you anti-Microsoft zealots slay me.
Why do so many people approach these Linux/Mac/Microsoft threads with the fervor of a religious fanatic?
I'd like to see Apple moving to a different architecture for the future: once they had a quad processor machine (or was it a clone? - 4x200MHz, IIRC). If in the future they would have a "controller" on the motherboard and multiple expansion slots to put processor daughterboards in (say, any number from 1 to 8, or even higher) - it would be much easier than trying to advance from 2G to 2.5GHz on a single chip. And 8x2G would easily beat 2x2.5G.
This won't do jack squat to microsoft.
All this is is a sign of distress for apple.
Surely you remember how apple fans crowed about how superior PPC chips are to intel and how the mac hardware is so superior to anything on the intel side.
Now Apple is going to use the same damn hardware they maligned for years.
I guess it either wasn't that superior, or apple is in more trouble than they are letting on.
PING!
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
Sorry, I really doubt Apple is switching from the PowerPC to the Pentium, or one of its derivatives.
Most likely, Jobs will tomorrow announce a speed upgrade in PowerPC desktops, and that Intel will supply chips (not processors) for some other technology--maybe Intel chips will power the receptor box of the rumored Apple HDTV service?
Even if Apple uses the Pentium processor one of its derivatives, it's still not going to directly compete with Microsoft in the off-the-shelf OS market. Apple will continue building its own closed-format PCs, just with Intel CPUs instead of IBM.
Of course, if this IS true... why Intel? AMD has a major technological advantage over Intel, especially in dual core CPUs. And what about the Cell? I can see Apple solving laptop heat problems by using a Cell processor with less sub-processing units than desktop variants.
Tomorrow will tell.
Only a small portion, the best parts of the O/S are proprietary to Apple, and they know better than to give it away for free.
This comes at a particularly strategic juncture for the desktop, as linux is finally beginning to make some small inroads into M$oft's dominance on the desktop.
Which is one of the main reasons they're doing this, to get back at IBM. This could effect Linux more negatively than Windows, especially in the short term.
To whom it may concern, please knock off the personal stuff.