This could very well drive Mac users toward Linux actually.

Call it sentimentality, but "Wintel" has been the enemy for so long, asking customers to get in bed with them is just a bit too much to handle.

It's like asking China to let the US have Taiwan as a colony.

Dvorak has long been dismissed by Mac users as, well, on Pluto when it comes to reality.

I'd lose an 's' in that headline.

Quote

Tiger wrote:
This could very well drive Mac users toward Linux actually.

Dude yeah I'm totally gonna pay more for a Mac and then run Windows on it instead of OS X! Wow this guy really understands stuff and things! This is perhaps one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

Apparently he forgot the simple rule of thumb. Let's try again:

"Can I buy an x86 Mac and install Windows on it?"

Can you do that now? No. Therefor the answer is no! Remember folks, all Steve announced was a change in the architecture of the CPU chip on the motherboard. That's ALL. Unless you're into playing with your Mac and a soldering iron, this probably won't have much affect on you! Zeroes and ones will go in and stuff will happen.

I would think that more people would be interested in running OS X, or whatever it is called by the time Apple has an operating system running on Intel processors, on their own Intel based PCs. Maybe download a new BIOS and then install OS X rather than Windows.

Seems more likely than running Windows on a Mac.

Hey it's not my idea. Dvorak said it. Look above in the story. Also, you forgot the rule of thumb:

"Will I be able to run OS X on a computer made by other companies?"

Can you do that today? No. So the answer is no. Last time I checked, changing CPU architecture did not fundamentally alter the entire business plan of a company that has produced and sold computer HARDWARE for the last couple of decades.

Apple needs good processors. IBM couldn't deliver, so Apple switch manufacturers. It's that simple. Apple's hardware business will slow for a time because of confusion by those who are overthinking the situation. But you will be surprised when you see how this is going to enhance Apple's hardware business. So wait a few months and then buy some stock!

You're right in saying OS X won't run on a PC. It would be easy for Apple to prevent that by simply requiring some specific hardware to be present.

However, Apple doesn't control Windows, and if there's one thing Windows has that Macs don't, it's wide hardware support. Macs are fairly standard hardware-wise these days, so I have no doubt that some geeks out there will figure out how to get Windows up and running.

Phil Schiller himself reportedly said it would be *possible* to run Windows on an Intel-based Mac.

If you do, then you will notice that the iMac Jobs is using looks just like any other iMac, runs just like any other iMac, it just HAPPENS to have an iNtel processor in it. Until Jobs pointed this fact out, nobody knew that it was different from the G5 based iMac.

It's the OS stupid. What makes WinTel so bad is the Win part, not the Tel part. Linux is stable on iNtel hardware, Windoze is not. OS X/x86 will be stable on iNtel hardware, just like it is on PPC hardware.

I don't understand why one OS loses if another gains market share. Ever hear of "growing" market share.

If any company were to lose in a finite marketplace, it would be MS because they have the most to lose with their disproportional market share.

Choice is good.

Several years ago SGI introduced the best Intel-based workstation ever. It had a screaming front-side bus, onboard graphics, and memory, graphics, and CPU were not in contention with a bus bottleneck. Only a special SGI NT build supported these at first, then Linux, and eventually, Windows 2000 had native support for the architecture.

These machines could run lightning fast real-time 3d rendering on a 350MHz Pentium II because they bypassed the crappy architecture of the standard Intel-compatible motherboard. The same graphics rendering was not slow on a standard PC, it was impossible.

I fully expect Apple to do the same thing. Look at the motherboard of the G5 PowerMacs; it is well ahead of anything Dell and Gateway produce right now. Windows will most probably NOT run on this new hardware, unless MS wants to take the time to add support for it.

Because Apple has the best desktop OS, I belive they could have switched to Intel CPUs without telling anyone and nobody would have known the difference if they didn't open up the box and look. I mean, they told us half way through the keynote that they were demonstrating an Intel Mac.

For Apple to keep their edge in stability and ease of use, they still need to control the hardware, supporting only a tiny amount of the hardware Windows has to support. We use Macs at home, and at work I use Linux, Windows, Solaris, and OpenBSD. I have seen nothing in this announcement that indicates those separate markets are going to collide just because Apple is switching CPUs.

Why would someone wait to purchase a new Mac system? If you are skeptical of the Intel switch you would think that you would go buy a Power Mac today.
My other question, is this intel chip the same one that runs Windows? Or did Intel design a new chip from the ground up for Apple?

Quote

Biff wrote:


Apparently he forgot the simple rule of thumb. Let's try again:

"Can I buy an x86 Mac and install Windows on it?"

Can you do that now? No. Therefor the answer is no! Remember folks, all Steve announced was a change in the architecture of the CPU chip on the motherboard. That's ALL. Unless you're into playing with your Mac and a soldering iron, this probably won't have much affect on you! Zeroes and ones will go in and stuff will happen.

Quote

David Moody, VP of worldwide Macintosh product marketing at Apple, says emphatically that this does not mean that anyone with an Intel-based PC will be able to install the Mac OS X. However, he notes that while Apple will not sell or support other operating systems with next year's Intel-based Macs, the company has no plans to prevent users from concurrently installing a second operating system like Windows XP. The possibility of running Mac OS X and Windows on the same Intel box may make Apple hardware more appealing to enterprise customers.

Cool. There we go. Good concrete information. Thank you for that, jdearr. Frightening, but good to know. I guess it's really not a problem as long as Apple is selling hardware.

Yes. It's called VMWare, which is more reasonably likely to be recompiled to run on OS X using an intel processor.

A lot of people want a Mac but they buy a PC becuase thats what they have at work and VPC doesn't cut it. So being able to run Windows on a Mac is a plus, since people will no longer have to choose, between Windows and a Mac.

But as we all know it this will be a big coup for the Mac, since people will get hooked on the Mac once they get a chance to start using it. Plus people will be less afraid to make the switch since they can always switch back, by just booting up Windows on the Mac. A big boone for school sales too, since schools will be able to have multi-platform classrooms on the same hardware.

But let's face it, once they see how OS X runs in compassion to Windows on the same machine, they'll dump Windows like a dead wood.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Seems more likely than running Windows on a Mac.

Here's what I'm afraid of:

Developer: "We could write a Mac Version, but Mac users can just boot into Windows and run our program"

Mac User: "I like this program but It's only available for Windows, I guess I'll go ahead and buy it and boot into Windows to run it."

Mac User: "I need to check my email, I'm already booted into Windows, I guess I'll just use outlook.

Mac User: "I need to check this website, I'm already booted into Windows, I guess I'll just use explorer.

Mac User: "I need to write a report, I'm already booted into Windows, I guess I'll just use Office for Windows.

Mac User: "I need a new computer. You know I love the mac but I never boot into Mac OS any more, I might as well just buy a Dell; It's cheaper.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Here's what I'm afraid of:

Developer: "We could write a Mac Version, but Mac users can just boot into Windows and run our program"

Mac User: "I like this program but It's only available for Windows, I guess I'll go ahead and buy it and boot into Windows to run it."

Mac User: "I need to check my email, I'm already booted into Windows, I guess I'll just use outlook.

Mac User: "I need to check this website, I'm already booted into Windows, I guess I'll just use explorer.

Mac User: "I need to write a report, I'm already booted into Windows, I guess I'll just use Office for Windows.

Mac User: "I need a new computer. You know I love the mac but I never boot into Mac OS any more, I might as well just buy a Dell; It's cheaper.

I was already planning to start building PCs with X86 CPUs and putting MacOS on them. If this will not be possible thn I'd better stick to Linux and Window$

First of all, we all agree that MACos is a great OS. It is Unix based just as Linux is. I have dabbled in Linux and must say that I am impressed. To say that Linux is going to die because of this news is absurd. Linus is still growing in the embedded, server, and desktop arenas (although mostly business desktops at this time).
Also, remember our beloved MACos has infusions by Microsoft (remember the announcements of Microsofts involvement in OSX).
Just a few points to consider before taking rubbish like the above article as fact. It is only their opinion. My opinion is different than theirs. The only difference is mine is backed by fact. Theirs is backed by idiocracy.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Yes. It's called VMWare, which is more reasonably likely to be recompiled to run on OS X using an intel processor.

Do you remember Microsoft owns 20% of Apple?

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
Do you remember Microsoft owns 20% of Apple?

Quote

Intruder wrote:

Microsoft needs nothing from Apple. They even sold all of their shares for two-headed storks years ago (unfortunate for Apple, since they would have made a tremendous partnership with Microsoft if Apple had let Gates make the decisions).