“‘It’s a sell-out,’ proclaimed one computer geek on an online forum. In any other business, changing component suppliers rarely registers with the customer, but Apple is no ordinary business. Last week’s announcement that it would be abandoning its long-standing chip suppliers, IBM and Motorola, and switching to industry-leader Intel was met with disbelief,” Graham Stewart writes for The Scotsman. “It brings to an end a relationship of more than 20 years since Apple first included a Motorola chip in their computers. Meanwhile, the Microsoft platform went with Intel. From that point on the battle lines were drawn, becoming ever more entrenched over the years, with much mudslinging between the two over whose systems were the fastest.”
“No surprise then that many Apple devotees see the company’s plans as tantamount to surrender, though others suspect that chief executive Steve Jobs will see it as an opportunity to move more of his tanks on to Microsoft’s lawn,” Stewart writes. “When Jobs introduced IBM’s next-generation G5 processor at Apple’s 2003 Developer Conference he promised that speeds would top 3GHz within a year. Two years later he’s still waiting. More importantly, IBM has failed to come up with a G5 that can be used in laptops, currently the fastest-growing sector of the PC industry and the largest part of Apple’s PC business.”
Stewart writes, “With Macs using the same processor as Windows, Apple’s Intel machines could offer customers the best of both worlds: the ability to run both Mac and Windows software on the same box. If that is indeed Apple’s long-term strategy, it is not letting on. Senior vice president Phil Schiller has merely indicated that Apple ‘won’t do anything to preclude someone running [Windows] on a Mac.’ Apple may be saving its attack on Microsoft until late 2006, when the Redmond company is expected to release its delayed Longhorn operating system. Apple has announced that it will be releasing its own spoiler around that time in the form of Mac OS X Leopard.”
Full article here.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Report: Apple Mac OS X 10.4.1 for Intel hits piracy sites – June 11, 2005
Is Apple setting up the ultimate “Switcher” campaign by preparing to let Mac OS X speak for itself? – June 10, 2005
Intel-based Macs running both Mac OS X and Windows will be good for Apple – June 10, 2005
Twin Mac website debuts, dedicated to dual booting Intel-based Macs running Mac OS X and Windows – June 10, 2005
Cringley: Apple and Intel to merge; Steve Jobs finally beats Bill Gates – June 09, 2005
Fortune: Apple’s switch to Intel processors to accelerate Windows users switching to Mac OS X – June 09, 2005
Will developers stop writing Mac applications if Apple ‘Macintel’ computers can run Windows? – June 08, 2005
Why buy a Dell when Apple ‘Macintel’ computers will run both Mac OS X and Windows? – June 08, 2005
“Steve Jobs will see it as an opportunity to move more of his tanks on to Microsoft’s lawn”
Apple just crossed the Rhine!!
Does this necessarily mean that Apple will use an existing Intel chip or could a new architecture be in the works?
MDN magic word “straight” as in: “Job’s tank corp went straight on to Redmond.”
I know that Apple tends to push forward new technology like USB, Firewire, etc etc before there is necessarily a demand (dragging us kicking and screaming into the future) while the rest of the comodity box PC world pretty much waits for demand before following. Or they wait until a competitor does it then they are forced to in order to compete. For a company like Intel which does better when newer technology is bought I could see Apple having a higher standing with them, disproportianate with their installed base.
For better AND worse Apple is more like a Dictatorship…or actually a Republic then a Democracy, and so iMacs suddenly didn’t have floppy drives despite the fact their was no demand to drop it. They went to USB despite their customers having invested in ASB peripherals, they added firewire (forcing us to pay for it when buying a new Mac) despite their not being much to take advantage of it at the time, and now they move to Intel. For a company like Intel that usually has to work within the more democratic arena of the PC world, where demand usually has to come from the bottom up, they must feel like they are held back from innovating too far from the fold.
Having Apple as a customer for their CPUs may be their way to come up with newer technologies that the rest of the PC world would not pick up because it would cause a disruption like those previously mentioned without their even being a demand. Once Apple leads away with it the rest of the PC world will be much more likely to follow. As always we Mac users are on the forefront.
Of course it would seem that may be more long term thinking or completely wrong altogether in the face of the fact that Apple is having developers use a Pentium 4 to move their software over. If it was some radically new chip then what would be the point of that.
“Apple has announced that it will be releasing its own spoiler around that time in the form of Mac OS X Leopard.”
The spoiler was already released, it was called Tiger! Leopard will just be the icing on the cake (or the final nail in the coffin).
Uhm, yet another slow news day.
INTEL
– needs to showcase its technology, possibly shrinkwrapped in top-design, something Apple excels at;
– needs to cut the wires connecting it to crappy, bugged, virused OS (read windows) i.e. needs to polish and reestablish a reputation.;
– needs vision
APPLE
– needs fast portables, possibly NOT power hungry;
– needs a path for the next decade;
– needs at least 60 fps in Doom 3 and a way to grant a cheap switching path for people that invested a lot of dough in software for windows;
– has vision
…
Groundless most ridiculous prediction for late 2006:
BG and SJ already agree to MS to buyout Apple. When buyout is announced, BG will remain Chairman and SJ will become iCEO (again) and BB will be forced out. When Apple releases Leopard, they will announce the buyout and also officially rename Leopard to Windows 2006 (Longhorn).
Customers
-don´t want to have to buy new software and hardware every two years…
“more democratic arena of the PC world”
I would not call “PC world” democratic. They were duopoly, Intel and MS. Intel pushed PC vendors to have USB on all PCs long time before Apple implemented USB on Mac, but MS did not ship a stable driver for USB on Windows until after Apple shipped their Mac with USB ports, so USB remained unused ports on PC for few years. For Intel, MS was a heavy anchor dragging them back. With Apple on its team, Intel may able to play MS and Apple against each other to push their technologies out to market faster (not that Apple needs the push. If any thing, Apple and Intel will play on each other to intensify their march toward new technologies).
“Customers
-don´t want to have to buy new software and hardware every two years…”
Agreed, especially now that it’ll be the same chips as in a Dell. Apple will put commodity hardware in a fancy case and charge a premium for it. Wintel users will continue to scoff as they will still have to buy in to proprietary Apple hardware to run OS X. This is going nowhere.
Why don’t you wait for a shipping product before blathering unsubstantiated nonsense.
Still keep wondering about long term future of Mac software other than from Apple. If virtualPC can run well enough on a MacIntel, why bother making Mac versions at all. There has to be some over-riding advantage to hooking into OS X abilities, otherwise we end up running everything thru VPC/Windows. Doesn’t Apple then become much like Sony, making attractive, higher end PCs, but Pcs none the less. “Look people, run all your crap windows apps, only now you are secure from etc etc.”
macnut222: “Why don’t you wait for a shipping product before blathering unsubstantiated nonsense.”
It’s about time someone said something sensible.
The bottom line is Market Share Gain. Steve has been after that since he came back and keeps adjusting his attack. It has been starting to happen already and I think this bold move will further that end tho it may cause a slight dip in the short-term.
“Apple may be prepping for attack on Microsoft in late 2006”
Yeah, if it can make it to late 2006. iBooks haven’t been updated in close to 9 months, PowerBooks with no upcoming update roadmap (and looking a bit pricy these days), and eMac’s looking grossly outdated.
Who wants to buy an Apple other than an imac these days?
“Yeah, if it can make it to late 2006.”
What are you talking about?!?!? Apple has over $6 billion in the bank, if they have to take a few lousy quarters, they can afford to do so. I think Apple will release their first Intel-powered system at Macworld SF – PowerBooks (and maybe iBooks) are my bet.
No one doubts Apple’s cash reserve (and was not the point of my post). That’s not the issue. Can Apple afford to loose valuable mindshare if they appear to have slowed their product releases. Will they loose future customers who have lost faith in Apple being the leader in their sector?
Apple’s bank balance cannot and should not be always used as an excuse.
…Meanwhile, the Microsoft platform went with Intel.…
There was no “Microsoft Platform” twenty years ago. Microsoft gathered in the Intel platform. They did it very well. No denying that, but I get sick of false comparisons and staged arguments. Apparently, getting paid to write guarantees writers will make stuff up to get paid.
No, I didn’t just fall off the turnip truck, but I still have hope for us all.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Wouldn´t it be ironic if Apple now releases a PowerMac with a 3+Ghz chip????
stantheman raises the issue of Apple losing mindshare. This is a bit of a concern and that’s why many feel there is something else that is big just around the corner. But it won’t be a Mac desktop or laptop. Something that can compete for mindshare with Xbox and Playstation (but not an Apple game console).
Of course, with Longhorn not ready until the end of 2006 and all the Windows box makers just spewing out the same old same old since the OS isn’t ready to take advantage of anything, there doesn’t seem much competition for mindshare in computers anyway.
By the way, stantheman, you (and many others) need to know the difference between “lose” and “loose”. If you used Mac OS, the system-wide dictionary would certainly be of use.
wordcheck – wrong-o.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
word check will show that “lose” and “loose” are both spelled correctly. It will not change anything. Word check does not analyze a sentence and then determine if the usage is correct. It just checks speling….
Apple losing mindshare. This is a bit of a concern
————
lmfao!!!!!
Excuse me.. I’ve only seen about 243 iPod ads in the last week..
hahahahahahahahahha
what’s that you say? There’s an Apple Store within 20 minutes of 80% of the US? Fascinating…
mac-aholic: that is a concern. But that’s why Apple introduced things like Spotlight, Dashboard, and Automator in Tiger. Those items would not be accessible to Windows apps. We will likely see more such apps-to-OS tie-ins or special kinds of apps in Leopard. And once users see the advantages, users may choose apps that take advantage of great OS features over the isolated Windows app in the box.
What I love is Apple now is squeezing MS from at least two directions. First, the pressure is on MS to take advantage of every advance that Intel makes because if they don’t, Apple will, and Windows-based hardware will look last century by comparison. As it is, those Windows hardware partners are leery of MS taking the living room for themselves through the Xbox, leaving those partners to fight for the consumer scraps.
Second, Apple’s move to iTunes, which is a Web-based client-server apps for the average consumer. First came music, now podcasts, and who knows what’s next. This allows Apple to establish a beach-head inside Windows. MS does have .Net for developers and MSN through a browser for the public. Will the consumer prefer a dedicated media app like iTunes (virus-free so far) or a browser-accessed store like MSN music to acquire their media?
Apple’s strategy is intriguing, and I am certain more pressure points will be revealed in the next few months as Apple takes on MS from more and more directions (i.e., the future of iWork)