Go Bryan!

Kick his ass, sea bass!!
I think you are going to have some fun Bryan.
One thing I noticed is that Enderle seems to thinking a little bit more, rather than shooting from the hip. This must be a tremendous strain on the bean. Is there verification this is actually coming from Enderle?

No verification other than the fact that I know and trust the MacNewsWorld editor not to lie to me.

BTW, if you think that Mr. Enderle is writing more thoughtfully, wait until you read my rebuttals.

Rock him Bryan, will be following the debate with interest.

Go Bryan.
Go Bryan.
It's your Birthday.
Go Bryan.

This is classic Enderle.

"When Steve Jobs made his own choice, at NeXT, he chose Intel..."

"In fact, Popular Mechanics basically said Apple was cheating, indicating there may be no performance advantage with the PowerPC today."

However, Bryan did give Enderle some ammunition as well.

"This, however, is where the kicker comes into play: Apple would be doing so with a fraction of the user base that is has now. "

I was on a roll last night, making the jokes about Enderle. Good to see I won't be disappointed.

though some long reads...

Go for the K.O., Bryan!

Enderle is dead wrong about the Power PC; if all 3 major gaming consoles are moving to Power PC, and in XBox's case that would be a direct rejection of x86 in favor of Power PC, his economics of scale argument goes down the crapper.

I WILL read the article right after posting this, but stopped dead at the photos of each of you and had to laugh. It was pretty obvious why they didn't bother to identify which one of you was which!

Only a moron couldn't pick the Mac user and the PC user out from THIS lineup. I don't mean to generalize (ah hell... yes I do!), but given the choice of who to have a beer and talk Macs with-- the hip young guy or the used car saleman-- it's no contest!!! Rob's exactly as I pictured him, and Bryan, well... I thought you'd be more on the geek end of the fashion spectrum. Rob just looks sooooo 1970s! Dig that groovy mustache...

Still smiling... Now on to the article!!! Go Bryan!
-Ken P

Quote

Bookman wrote:
Enderle is dead wrong about the Power PC; if all 3 major gaming consoles are moving to Power PC, and in XBox's case that would be a direct rejection of x86 in favor of Power PC, his economics of scale argument goes down the crapper.

Not only that, but he was factually wrong on at least one point. The Next boxes that Jobs sold were based on Motorola 68k series processors. The NeXT Cube and NeXT Station used 68030 and 68040 processors only. While NeXTSTEP was ported to x86, Jobs never sold x86 based hardware. Also, I'm not sure what he's talking about when it comes to IBM making X-Box processors. I'm relatively certain the current X-Box uses a Pentium III processor produced by Intel plants, while the X-Box 2 is supposed to use multiple PPC 970 processors, which are obviously not x86 based.

And one sticking point few seem to realize. OS X does not use the FreeBSD kernel. It uses the FreeBSD system (meaning the base utilities) paired with a Mach kernel.

Bryan,

Enderle's articles are made for entertaining reading, however, if you COMPLETELY IGNORE THE FACTS... Enderle sounds more plausable to an uneducated lemming. You had too much verbage. Widgets? Emulation? It just works? Stay away from the rhetorical questions!

Bryan, keep it short, sweet, stick to to facts and go for the kill...

It's Enderle, he makes it sooo easy to put him in his place. However, don't take it for granted and stumble over something stupid!

You cannot let Enderle win on even ONE point.

Isn't debating Enderle kind of like debating Cabbage?

This is like hunting squirrels with a bazooka. It almost makes me pity Enderle. Almost.

I liked your quote about plug'n'play; I've got a good friend who's just starting to get interested in computers and is toying with "The Switch". His barely year-old Toshiba died a gruesome death and it left him a little frustrated. We gutted the laptop and then dumped its RAM, hard drive, and combo drive into a rev A iMac in his lab. That little computer took the PC components without complaint and recognized everything without needing drivers. We then upgraded the thing to 10.3 and he got it to map the university network and to do Windoze printing. The cincher was when sasser shut down our department but his new system was blissfully unaffected. He's saving for a Powerbook now and is looking forward to the next major hardware refresh.

The bottom line is this, people. Apple likes to DIFFERENTIATE their offerings, not offer the same type of bland product that so many PC OEMs are offering today. Think about it. What's the difference between a Gateway machine a Dull errr.. Dell box or any other Windows PC crate? A silk-screened name and a bunch of company logo's stickered aimlessly on the case? They all run on the SAME hardware and run the same Winders OS. In short, they offer more or less the SAME experience. That said, there would be little or no reason to choose one Win-PC offering over any other Win-PC other than say... price. Attempting to compete on price alone wouldn't be good and Apple needn't play this game. In reality it's the BIGGEST point that Enderle misses.

Something else he misses is that if Apple chose the same processor that everyone else is using, it would mean that the Mac would have no real chance to be faster at anything when compared to other Win-PCs. An Apple box using a 3.2 GHz. x86 Pentium running Photoshop wouldn't be any faster than a Win-crate running the same or similar apps. on the same 3.2 Ghz. processor. Therefore, there would be little reason to choose Apple hardware over anyone else's Enderle never touches these points. What's more, he never brings up the fact that both Intel and AMD are moving AWAY from speed ratings. I think they know people are either starting to catch on to the hype or they finally realize that they already have more machine speed than they know what to do with and anything more is overkill for their needs. Now they'll have to sell boxes based on something else. What could that be? Enderle, are you reading this?

I don't like personal attacks either, but I can't help myself with this one: I wonder who makes up the "The Enderle Group", Rob's two left feet?

Bryan, you seem to focus only on the x86 question (in some depth) in your opening article, omitting discussion of user experience, longhorn, Apple customer loyalty, and growth of the iPod, some of which Enderle half-conceded to Apple. This may be followed up in later pieces, but it did look a little as if you were focusing on only one aspect of the discussion, and possibly the most awkward one at that.

Andrew

Please note, Andrew, that the question I (and Mr. Enderle) were answering was "Intel or PowerPC?" I chose to answer the question as asked.

In my rebuttal, however, which will be published today (Monday), I address the points in Mr. Enderle's answer.

+

Bryan, you are talking to a wall, and a particularly dumb wall at that. You are countering all of Enderle's statements with quotations, yet he keeps spouting the same FUD. His saying that the Popular Mechanics article saw the G5 "trounced" is a lie, as your quotation from the article clearly shows. Furthermore, his saying that PM claimed Apple "cheated" is contradicted by the following, also taken from the article:

Quote

But in a way, the controversy over Apple's use of SPEC benchmarks, the discarding of the "fastest computer" claim and the adoption of new tests may call into question the idea of benchmarks themselves rather than Apple.

PM is questioning benchmarks here, not Apple. Anyone (meaning Enderle) who could read that article and spew such FUD is not a person to listen to reason. His mind is made up before he even hears you.

Bryan, you clearly won part 2.

Thanks.