Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 06/04/2005 2:32:52 PM PDT by HAL9000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: HAL9000
Maybe I should take this a little more seriously since the WSJ is reporting it. This will make me furious!


2 posted on 06/04/2005 2:36:15 PM PDT by rdb3 (Yeah, but what's it spelled backwards?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: HAL9000
Once the Apple Operating systems run on Intel, it isn't a big sttep to have them run on PCs. That will let PC users start out with a dual boot system and replace their Windoze Apps over time with Mac Apps until they can finally dump Microsloth altogether.

The big barrier of changing systems now is not the cost of the machine, but the cost of replacing all your software at the same time.

So9

3 posted on 06/04/2005 2:43:17 PM PDT by Servant of the 9 (Trust Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bush2000; antiRepublicrat; Action-America; eno_; Glenn; bentfeather; BigFinn; byset; Bubba; ...
More rumor mongering on Apple -> Intel PING!

If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.

10 posted on 06/04/2005 3:07:09 PM PDT by Swordmaker (tagline now open, please ring bell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: HAL9000; All

I doubt this will happen..

IBM is way ahead of Intel when it comes to processors...

XBOX 360 has a 3 core IBM processor, Nintendo Revolution will feature a 4 core IBM processor, and the Playstation 3 will feature a single Core processer featuring 8 "subcores".

Apple would be leaving the IBM line at the wrong moment. Intel and AMD are just starting to get into the mulicore PC business.

Imagine a dual processor G5 with 4 cores in each processor.. It's closer than you realize...


17 posted on 06/04/2005 3:35:46 PM PDT by 1stFreedom (1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: HAL9000

Moving to x86, or at least offering optional support for it, I can understand.

But Intel? Intel is way behind technologically. Apple should be in talks with AMD.


20 posted on 06/04/2005 3:52:16 PM PDT by Terpfen (New Democrat Party motto: les enfant terribles)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: HAL9000

Apple wouldn't do this if they didn't feel forced. IBM has been pushing Linux on every corner, signing new deals with everyone else under the sun, while starving Apple for chips, or being unable to provide the laptop processors they need. According to this report today, portables are now outselling desktops, and may have been at Apple for some time already.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050604/ap_on_hi_te/notebooks_vs_desktops

Being a long time Apple supporter going back to the Apple ][ days, who lived through the bitter IBM/Apple rivalry that existed back then, I was much more surprised they actually started using IBM CPU's at one point than I am by this change now. That was much more shocking than this development is, and one that I felt would leave Apple at IBM's mercy much as it has.

PowerPC is IBM's platform more than it is Apple's, and IBM obviously prefers to sell Linux on Power, which is something Apple obviously has no control over, nor is it likely to change. Jobs is smart enough to realize that, although he did make the original mistake of trusting his former nemesis IBM to be his provider. But only Intel can give him what he desperately needs right now - capacity to produce all the chips he could want, a powerful low power processor for laptops, and a huge number of existing systems that he could eventually market a shrink wrap version of his product to if/when he feels that is prudent.

Unfortunately for Jobs there seems to be incredible outrage by his current customers over the mere possibility of the change, who don't seem to sense the same level of urgency that Jobs realizes. They will have to make their own decisions about whether they remain loyal Apple customers, or move to Microsoft, or IBM/Linux. But apparently Jobs has already made his decision. In my opinion, it was the best one he had available.


35 posted on 06/04/2005 7:03:19 PM PDT by Golden Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: All
The full text of the Wall Street Journal article is available at nasdaq.com.
37 posted on 06/04/2005 7:56:08 PM PDT by HAL9000 (Get a Mac - The Ultimate FReeping Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: HAL9000

I havent' a clue as to what the technical problems will be, but if this is true, I'm for it.

If it works and you can choose between OS X, Windows or Linux on the same box, without buying new desktops - excellent. May the best OS win.


39 posted on 06/04/2005 8:28:49 PM PDT by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: HAL9000

Suppose Apple could beat Longhorn to market with a next-generation OS for x86 computers. Would it be worth pissing off IBM -- not to mention Microsoft -- to capture a much bigger share of the OS market, on non-Mac hardware?


51 posted on 06/04/2005 10:42:53 PM PDT by AZLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MikeinIraq; bigsigh

Mike, this thread should make you squint at the sky and yell obscenities at elderly couples.


77 posted on 06/05/2005 11:35:32 AM PDT by Lazamataz (The Republican Party is the France of politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: HAL9000

Rush is trying to speculate about all this...

I read that IBM is the source for the Xbox3 and Playstation 3, and that they didnt have the resources for Apple.


114 posted on 06/06/2005 11:39:52 AM PDT by BurbankKarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson