“Apple’s mercurial and high-handed relationship with its chip suppliers” was what caused Apple’s switch from IBM to Intel processors, according to Ars Technica’s Jon “Hannibal” Stokes.
Apple over the years has routinely demanded that Motorola dedicate their CPU design teams to making special chips for Apple that will never generate much revenue. If Motorola won’t play, Apple will go to IBM. Apple kept up the demands with IBM, threatening with their only valid threat: we’ll go to Intel. “Apple has been pulling these stunts for a long time, as anyone who followed the company’s relationship with Motorola knows,” Stokes writes.
Basically, IBM told Apple, “Fine, go to Intel.”
“The cold, hard reality here is that the Mac is Apple’s past and the iPod is Apple’s future. It’s a shame that Steve Jobs can’t be upfront with his user base about that fact, because, frankly, I think the Mac community would understand. The iPod and what it represents… is the Macintosh of the new millennium… [It’s not that IBM] dropped the performance ball,” Stokes explains. “What Jobs is really doing is shifting the focus of Apple from a PC-era ‘performance’ paradigm to a post-PC-era ‘features and functionality’ paradigm.”
“For the real reason behind the switch, you have to look to the fact that it’s the iPod and iTMS—not the Mac—that are now driving Apple’s revenues and stock price. Apple is more concerned with scoring Intel’s famous volume discounts on the Pentium and XScale lines than it is about the performance, or even the performance per Watt, of the Mac,” Stokes writes.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Stokes’ questions about the recently announced PowerPC 970MP and 970FX chips from IBM are interesting. You’ll need to read Stokes’ full article, which we highly recommend. For us, it’s always been about “features and functionality” over “performance” anyway. As we used to ask Windows users, “what good are high performance CPUs if you’re constantly running virus scanners, routinely fighting the user interface, and can’t run best-in-class applications like Final Cut Pro, Motion, Logic, DVD Studio Pro, GarageBand, iMovie, or iDVD, to name but a few?”
Now that the CPU issue has been eliminated from the conversation, Apple’s strong points are highlighted even more. The Mac OS and the applications are without compare in the Wintel world. Mac OS X Tiger vs. Windows XP? Puleeze. If the Mac is Apple’s past, it’s also its present and future.
“Apple has been pulling these stunts for a long time”
Just that he refers to this as a ‘stunt’ putting it in such a negative light immediately makes this article suspect. The Mac certainly is part of Apple’s past, but it is also in the future. People arent suddenly going to want to stop computing, and with Microsoft dropping the biggest ball of all time, and people getting wise to their antics and inferior products, the future of the Mac platform certainly figures to be brighter than its past.
right on hammer!!
I find the argument that the Mac is the past a tad overstated. The big question to me is “Who decides what is now ‘the past’ and ‘the future?'” Depending on who you talk to, one thing always supercedes another. If anything, I see the iPod and the Mac working to create a more diversified structure. No one could have predicted the iPod’s success– because of that, no one knows exactly how it’ll all end up either. For once, Apple is maximizing a segment of their sales; this is a new strategy. So for now, it seems to outshine the Mac, but water always finds its own level, and so will this business. Over time, things are going to seem more balanced, I believe. One more smelly opinion of mine…
And I thought that Mac sales were up 40% year over year? Guess we’ll find out the numbers this week.
I think the importance of the iPod may have been over-stated. If No-one bought any iPods for the next three years Apple would still have a market in computers and their losses would be covered by massive amount of money in the bank. Apple makes good profits from the Macs compared to most others from their PCs. So long as we want them, Macs will be sold to us. There is no reason why Apple should not sell both iPods and Macs.
The analysis by Ars Technica is totally correct. The Mac is dying (at least taking a 2nd seat at Apple) – Steve is trying to become a media-type company controlling distribution of music, movies and tv programs.
From the article: (read it)
“The laptop G5, which is the long-rumored and now-announced 970FX, has supposedly been ready to go into an Apple laptop since at least early last month.”
So it was Steve that held back the laptop G5 from us????????
This is my favorite:
“So why didn’t Apple take any of these offers? Was it performance, as Jobs claimed in his keynote? Here’s something that may blow your mind. When Apple compiles OS X on the 970, they use -Os. That’s right: they optimize for size, not for performance. So even though Apple talked a lot of smack about having a first-class 64-bit RISC workstation chip under the hood of their towers, in the end they were more concerned about OS X’s bulging memory requirements than they were about The Snappy(TM).”
Ars must have needed some traffic this week.
Here is the editorial staff meeting:
“Let’s write a Mac-is-the-past conspiracy column. We can get tons of hits. Then we the Mac faithful *infer* exactly what we are *impling* we’ll throw a mirror up in their faces and call them zealots who need reading comprehension classes. It’s Foolproof!”
This crap pisses me off.
I think this whole “Mac is second place to the iPod” thing is plain wrong. Steve’s big passion has always been making beautiful computers and I think now, more than ever, he wants to beat Microsoft and beat Bill. The iPod is useful to Steve and it’s a nice sideline, but I truly think at the end of the day, Steve wants to rule the computer industry. And I have no doubt that day will come.
What a dolt! If Apple were de-emphasizing the Mac, why so much R&D for Tiger and Leopard? Get a clue dude, Jobs is not so stupid as to hang the future of the company on a single business line.
These tech writers have no sense of business. They are lost in their own little pathetic geeky world.
Past my ass. The sign says Apple Computer Inc. That means, and will always mean they make computers folks. Apple didn’t switch processors to build an iPod. I didn’t hear or see in jobs last keynote to where he says the Mac is now dead long live the iPod as our current product line. He said there will be more Power PC Macs released before the end of the year and then the new Mactel Macs will start being produced. No mention of cancellation or discontinuation. I don’t understand where these people get these wierd ideas from when they’re so WRONG! Oh and why would Steve Jobs cancel the Mac when market share is now on the rise. Do these people think he’s that dumb? The Mac is only getting started now and will continue for as long as Apple is in business. Which I think will be longer than many PC companies.
Even if Apple becomes a media empire, I’ll bet its Mac computers will still be worlds better than the competition. No-one said computers can only be made by computer companies….
Actually, if you think about it. Once Mac goes Intel and Microsoft’s Virtual PC is updated for a Macintel (providing native x86 speed), then most Applications will be available for Mac with the help of Windows being an application of applications so-to-speak. Mac will have more available applications than any other platform.
He pinned the tail on this ass. A geek w/o a clue doing business strategy–give me a break.
RT
I don’t know why Wintelians all think that Apple is going to use exactly the same chips and mobo’s as every other PC for every one of their products. I can see desktops using legacy free chips that Microsoft will not code for and I don’t see Intel designing and building all of Apple’s mother boards. Apple is the king of miniaturization, not Intel.
Wintelians seem to think that Apple has just become another Intel box assembler with a third OS to compliment Windows and Linux. That is what is behind all of this bullshit speculation. They couldn’t be further from the truth.
This guy ignores so many facts that are inconvenient to his little theory that he’s not even worth taking seriously.
“Just that he refers to this as a ‘stunt’ putting it in such a negative light immediately makes this article suspect. “
You people do know a little bit about the history of Steve Jobs don’t you? I mean your not all speaking from a position of ignorance are you? Because if so your comments are the ones that are suspect.
Steve Jobs has a long and storied history of being the master manipulator. I mean everyone has heard of the reality distortion field right?
Yes stunts, thats often what it amounts to when you get right down to it and if you actually read the article you might actually educate yourself to soem of what went on behind this switch instead of just living inside of Steve’s keynote RDF.
I don’t know about the Mac being a part of the past, but I have no doubt that there is more to the switch than an unseend roadmap that only his Steveness is privy to and performance per watt. But the tactics described behind the scenes are pure Apple and even purer Jobs. Sounds spot on to me.
Either way, long live the Mac. On whatever friggin chip they decide to go with.
Jon “Hannibal” Stokes article is the most slanted slanted piece I have ever read at Ars Technica. He takes a posistion then uses annomus sorceses, amost zero facts and logic that lacks all proportionality.
To the owners / editors of Ars Technica a few more articles like that and you will have lost all credibility.
I think I smell a potential “Apple Death Knell” count … well, certainly a “Mac Death Knell” count.
I don’t see Macintosh users going to Windows … and THAT is what this wackadoodle means when he says that the Macintosh is the past.
This is just gossip, life is all about accepting changes !
I have a friend who worked for Moto but left with Freescale. He’s been telling me for years that Moto spent way too much money trying to keep up with Intel and the pressure Apple put on them was enormous.
I spoke to him a couple of weeks ago and he implied that Freescale and Apple were better off parting.
Oz: It’s really hard to take anything you say seriously, when you write “annomus sorceses.” Wow.
Of course Thurrott jumped in this, but I have to say, iPod and Mac are inseparable.
As the iPod goes, so does the Mac, it’s only natural. The iPod may end up being the cash cow.. (kinda like Windows) but the Mac isn’t GOING AWAY as Thurrot would say
So basically, Apple was putting pressure on it’s chip suppliers to give them better prices and better performance. I am shocked at such arrogance! Steve Jobs is a baby-eating monster.
Seems like someone is contemplating his navel too much. Why does everybody have to come up with secret ulterior motives and hidden agendas? Is the simple answer that was provided too…… simple?
The growth area for the computer market is Laptops and Apple saw much better performance per watt down the road with Intel.
Steve is God. Please do not belittle our God´s wise decisions.
As the Apple Bible says in book of Jobs 3:24 “iSteve is wiser than iBM.”
And Jobs 5:18: “Thou shalt travel from Motorola to IBM to finally reach the Intel.”
And so it was.
In re-reading Stokes’ article for a third time, I’ve found a hint that demonstrates his bias and total misunderstanding of the iPod and Apple:
“The XScale is plenty powerful enough to do video playback, and I have reason to believe that Apple is currently working on a video iPod to counter the Sony PSP. (My guess is that we might even see it in time for Christmas.) When the video iPod hits the streets, Apple will have an iPod product that plays each of the media formats (music, pictures, video) represented in its iLife suite.”
So long as he continues to think that Apple is trying to COUNTER another company’s product — the sony PSP — in the production of newer versions of the iPod, he will forever misunderstand and “misunderestimate” Apple.
Apple is NOT “countering” ANYTHING from Sony; indeed, the situation is precisely the reverse. What makes Stokes think that Apple hasn’t had in mind, all along, an iPod that plays music, pictures, and video as a companion to iLife? iLife came out a long time ago … LONG before Sony’s PSP … and I have ZERO doubt that Apple has LONG projected such products as part of the “digital hub.” Remember that term?
Whiners, read his update.
“UPDATE: If you read all the way to the bottom of this article, and you think that my basic thesis is that “the Mac is doomed and Apple is planning to quit selling personal computers,” or some other such fatuous nonsense, then you need serious remedial help with reading comprehension. I already made my point about Apple’s shift in focus from the desktop PC (as exemplefied by the Mac) to the post-PC gadget (as exemplefied by the iPod) in a previous article, where it didn’t occasion nearly this much contention and idiotic, defensive ranting. I have no idea why stating the exact same case a bit more strongly should induce such spasms and seizures of rage in the Mac Faithful, but there you go. (Ok, actually, I do have an idea. It’s because I published the blasphemous, vulgar, and generally irreligious suggestion that The Holy Steve (may peace be upon him) was high-handed and arrogant in his dealings with chip suppliers, and that he was less than forthright about the reasons behind the switch. For such impiety I’m sure I’ll be duly punished… assuming that The Steve even really exists, of course, and isn’t just a figment of our collective human imaginations…)”
Not bad, Zeldorf … about on-par with the cries of Windows Evangelicals: “Macintrash is of the AntiChrist! Soon … by December, for sure … all Mac users will cast their Macintrash boxes into the junkyard of forgotten toys, where there will be much wailing and gnashing of hard drives. Then, only the “hole-y” Windows will remain as Lord of Master of all that is Digital. Bow down and worship the Holy Savior, Bill Gates … and his prophet, Michael Dell!”
the Steve does not exist???
But, but, but I see him once a year on stage somewhere at a mac thing…
Of course they don´t let the Steve give interviews that are not scripted, people would be shocked.
Gotta go…the apple info control police are knocking at the door.
No I don´t believe Steve is like into the Tom Cruise thing!!!!
RUN!!!!
Ben … methinks thou hast “read between the lines” in his update. hehehe
But it DOES sound like the kind of self-important arrogance I would expect from such.
To Rev/Neal, you must read your Apple Bible closer:
Apple Bible Revelations 2:12 “And The Steve called upon the masses of Apple worshippers – Ye shall toss thine PowerPC Macs into thy hell of false chipgods and rejoice in thine power of the Intel!”
And so it was.
Hallalujah! Praise The Steve!
I don’t want to jump on the bandwagon of being upset at any negative comment about Apple. But I find it amazing that newfound success in one area (iPod), is used as proof of failure in another (Macs). Macs have been succeeding in the all important “PROFIT” component under Steve Jobs. The iPod’s astounding success was a little bit of a surprise. Of course, Steve is trying to leverage that into other areas–he would be a fool not to try. The building blocks of an all media control device are there.
And yes, Apple is small potatoes to IBM. But I don’t think it a stunt for Jobs to push for better (and promised) performance from a manufacturer. I’m sure Dell does it to Intel on occasion when AMD chips are looking better from a cost/performance basis. That is just business. I was excited and worried about all three major gaming platforms moving to the Power architecture. It means more chips but it also means less leverage for Apple. I think, more than based on any real technology shortcoming, Steve Jobs is learning from past mistakes; Motorola started making more and more profit from embedded processors, such that they stopped really caring about desktop processors that required more research and achieved less profit. Now we look at IBM. Blades and Games are where the profit is. Sony will put out more Play-stations by itself than all of Apple’s Macs. Add in Nintendo and Microsoft and you get a marginalized Mac. Intel, for the next several years, will make the bulk of its profits from; Desktop chips, Laptop chips, and wireless (WiMax) technology. Apple won’t need leverage because they can count on the huge PC industry to keep up demand for better chips.
So, the real story isn’t technology, it is relevance to the provider (leverage). Nothing new about that.
And I would also argue about the “size over speed” assumption. Unless ArsTechnica (who, is on average, the most technically astute website on the web) had Apples original OS X code, they can’t really know what performance tradeoffs Apple made. Sometimes Size does Equal Speed. The 64 bit reduced instruction set code (64 bit RISC) is quit a bit bigger than 32 bit complex instruction set code. Perhaps in testing they found that, not only were they using a lot of hard drive space, but the compiled instructions were filling up the cache on the chip too quickly. So, that “on average”, reducing size resulted in faster code execution because more of the instructions could be fetched from L1 cache. I haven’t read the article and I don’t know the true facts. But I don’t think you can use the simple compile instruction of “optimize for size over speed” to prove anything. Why would Apple want to make things slower? You’d have to have a lot of mental juggling and conspiracy theories to make sense of that. The simplest answer to me would either be ignorance, or more likely, the engineers at Apple made a decision that a second hand observer just doesn’t understand.
When something good happens, Steve is King. When some nut suspects something foul, Steve is a rat. We jump to conclusions with only a scant bit of knowledge about anything. The truth is that we know very little about anything–yet we act as if we are all knowing and as if our opinion is God. Apple has a group of very intelligent people working there, and I believe they actually think about what they are doing before they do it. Yet the Monday morning quarterbacks are always going to be on the side lines trying to second guess everything that happens. I gives me a headache!
For an example of the average thinking of the Windows-Worshippers, check out what someone called “The Real Blastdoor” has to say in the article’s comment section:
“I would not be at all surprised if in 5 years there are no more updates to OSX and Apple switches to selling Longhorn boxes with some cool custom Apple apps pre-installed, and maybe some unique GUI tweaks. Don’t believe me? Just wait until people have Windows and OS X installed on the same hardware and we start seeing the benchmarks showing that Windows smokes OSX in performance.”
FOFLMAO … yeah, RIGHT. Dream on, bub. Dream on. By the looks of things now, if something called “Longhorn” is available by 2010 I’ll be surprised.
Zeldorf, LOL Not quite … but LOL nevertheless.
I have but one word to say about the author of this blatantly BIASED article”
JACKASS!!
U R confused: At MDN when Steve does something right, Steve is god; when Steve does something wrong, Steve is still god and everyone else is wrong.
Do I have to do The Steve´s 10 Apple Commandments????
Okay, only one then:
“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor´s PC.”
It should be noted that, although the Mac clone fiasco of the mid-90’s may have whipsawed Motorola’s PPC production line and sales projections, Steve Jobs had absoulutely nothing to do with it — he was still at NeXT at the time.
Under Steve Jobs leadership, the Apple of today is a far better/different entity than the Apple of the mid-1990s. Any judgements or comments about today’s Apple should reflect upon the period of time from 1998 onward, not become mired in the details of the AIMless and Job-less Apple of the 1990s.
Niffy
If IBM makes such great chips then why is it in every commercial they air about their servers it is always followed by an Intel plug? Why didn’t IBM ever switch it’s own servers to PowerPC, or at least the ones they advertise? If the company that makes the chip can’t use it in their own servers, which probably run Linux, then I guess they don’t put much faith in their own technology. No one has ever commented on this and I always found it perplexing.
“the Mac is Apple’s past and the iPod is Apple’s future” is a huge statement only to cop out at the end and say “I don’t really mean it like that, ya’ll.”
I realize you need to write articles to get web hits to sell advertising space. But, it doesn’t really matter why Apple went to Intel at this point. This is about evolution. Apple is in a huge growth spurt in its evolution, and moving to Intel is just part of that.
“in the same way that the “PC” is the industry’s past and the post-PC gadget is industry’s future.”
I mean, what are you going to tell Michael Dell? “Sorry man. The PC is Dell’s past and the DJ is Dell’s future.” Read: Bleak.
“Time and time again Apple has changed business strategies abruptly, only to reverse itself again a short while later…”
He is anthropomorphizing Apple, Apple is not a single sentient being and the “business strategy” changes depending on who is in charge. Don’t forget they went from Jobs to Scully to Amelio back to Jobs.
Just when Apple was making its move JOBS decided to beach
the Mac–Future generations of MBA students will study this suicide
with wonder–Why did he do it they will ask? Putting Apple on the same
footing with Dell isnt a good thing—Its a bad thing. It means there is
no real good reason to buy a Mac–It means that Apple will be competing on the basis of its OSX except Microsoft will be selling its operating system to over 97% of the market while Apple will be selling its OSX to only 3 per cent of the market at most since JOBS refuses to sell OSX to
anyone who isnt buying an Apple. Wasnt it better to also have superior
hardware? Wasnt it better to be able to say our powerpc is better and faster today–will be better and faster with these new chips available from IBM today, and will be better and faster tomorrow too NOTWITHSTANDING THE INTEL FANTASY ROADMAP–when on that roadmap does Intel get to where IBM and Apple is standing right now???
what is it about Mac owners that they cant see the difference between the hardware market and the osx market and that when apple goes intel –“being on the same footing” means not being any different from the
97 per cent of computers out there that arent Mac exept for OSX? That means Apple has given up the hardware fight. It gave up while it was ahead. The best way to retire.
lisa = troll
————————
Stunt? So? As a result, Apple now has processor independence. Quite a stunt indeed!
Sure, Apple has pulled some fast ones, done 360’s, etc. Do these stunts impugn Apple? Question Intel’s sanity? I don’t know, but Apple has more processor leverage than it ever has had before.
Am I the only one that thinks this article is crap?
imo the iPod is the wedge that will crack the dam that is holding back the water that is MacOSX
Get ready for the world to flood… thanks iPod..
all of his “new news tht is getting ready to be old news” was already old news… I am sick of reading idiots opinions… OSX is Apple’s Jewel, iPod is Apple’s rocket booster.
Hey MDN,
In your “MacDailyNews takes”, you jump all over anyone who says anything bad about Apple. But when this slanted Ars Technica guy constantly uses religious remarks like “The Mac Faithful”, “Maclots”, “The Holy Steve” in just about every other Mac article he writes, you just let it slide?
We all need to email this fool.
mailto:hannibal@arstechnica.com
<mailto:hannibal@arstechnica.com>
hannibal@arstechnica.com
This article has no new info, and zero relivant info.
I dont think hannibal did any real research on this..
take a trip to tomshardware and you will easily see the Pentium M is by far the best cpu available right now. and add to it some tweaks, faster clock speed, more chace, and 2 cores and there IS no competition.
Also making the transition to x86 lets apple choose from at least 5 CPU manufactures instead of 2.
Common sence here folks, All apple hardware and software will continue to exist and get better, OSX is not going away! how stupid.. as long as apple is able to make computers people that arent idiots will buy them.
Even if their market share drops (wich its going up NOT DOWN hannibal!) (dumbass) OSX based Macs will still be the core of Apple Computer. I dont care if their iPods and iTunes music store suppliment them, why should I?
Hard to argue with nonsence, and people that cant grasp basic concepts.
This hannibal guy has an obvious chip on his shoulder. He shows his disdain for Apple and Apple fans in several of his Mac related articles. At the end of those articles, he usually feels the need to insert some kind of snide remarks about “Mac zealots” and their “religion”. (Didn’t MacDailyNews take a USA Today writer to task for doing the same thing?) He constantly stirs the pot and when people do react, he then plays the victim and uses the people’s reaction to justify himself. Read the discussion forums at the end of his articles and look at his responses. How can MacDailyNews be praising this guy’s articles?
Jobs is lucky that he was successful to create a religion based on minority/evangelist smoke and mirrors so he can sell every crap for his lemmings. The deformed minded Mactards would buy even a turd with Apple logo on it.
Reality Check,
Same goes for PCs, too. Only deformed-minded MSidiots would continue to buy an OS that took mear minutes to be infested with malware and viruses.
You sound like a 9yr old with your flame-baiting. Can’t you do better than that?
Let me throw this out there for everyone.
It’s not about Apple vs. IBM or Intel better watt/performance ratio… it is hardly a business issue at all. It’s personal. You all may see where I’m going before I get there… but here goes. Remember when Halo, the much anticipated VideoGame from Bungie was about to debut on the Mac Platform a few yearsago? Who was there to take all the thunder and lightning from Apple…just when they where about to strike gold with Halo? Who just resorted to the same tactics… this time with an even stronger blow… to the hearts (microprocessors) of Apple’s desktop line-up, just when Apple is on the runway once again to soar to even loftier heights of technological bliss…
and Longhorn still in the hangar… yes without mentioning names, an up
to now forced low profile business bully has usurped the Mac faithful again, under the guise of partners, Sony, and Toshiba I believe… for the
X box and more. Yes, IBM could not ignore the captial being thrown at
them no more than Bungie could. The timing in all this is very suspect… Oh nooo not again… no they did’nt!
I’m pretty sure that Mr. Jobs and this non too pleasant De ja-vue experience just pushed him to the point of… well if you (IBM) put your
resources to the development of PowerPCs toward the Xbox… well
what aboout us? We’ll just go elsewhere. Apple has deep pockets… not as deep as a competitors who slickly teamed with others to veil its real intention of putting a real serious roadblock in the way of the momentum that Apple was/is enjoying. Is it dirty pool? It’s been done before. It’s that timing thing. Apple is a real threat to the Microsoft empire. It was verified when the Processor switch took place at the recent WWDC. Why has no one made this connection? It’s as viable as anything else I’ve read …amidst all the speculations.
Hobbes,
Be perplexed no more. The reason that IBM doesn’t use its own PPC chips in its general business server line is the same reason that Apple couldn’t make headway with the Mac in the enterprise market. 97% of businesses are on the x86 platform and have x86 specific server software needs.
Now we will see what Apple can do on the same platform as Windows.
Once the transition to Intel is complete, with most third-party apps on board, and once Macs stop making money for Apple, it can “flick to switch” and license Mac OS X to other PC makers.
The Mac as we know it may one day be dead but Mac OS X will be a force to be reckoned with.
“Once the transition to Intel is complete, with most third-party apps on board, and once Macs stop making money for Apple, it can “flick to switch” and license Mac OS X to other PC makers.”
Why is it that you think that Macintosh computers will stop making money for Apple? And … especially … prior to any “flicking of a switch: that will enable Mac OS X to be licensed to PC makers?
“The Mac as we know it may one day be dead but Mac OS X will be a force to be reckoned with.”
I agree that Mac OS X will, indeed, be a force to be reckoned with … I suspect that, going to x86 chips will enable the Mac OS to run Windows Apps natively through the Mac Interface. Eventually, all PC users will be able to choose which platform to use, and run any software they want.
WmB,
The exact argument I had with a guy at Bestbuy.
I would have sold everything I own to be a fly on the wall in Ballmer’s office when Steve announce Apple’s plans to M$.
my guess is that ‘reality check’ IS hannible, and his post reflects how he feels
hannible just know this, we are happy, safe and secure with osx..
and most of us are simply fed up with windows.. and its unlikely MS will do anything but get worse, and GD OSX is so effing smooth.. So stop writing shit articles or we’ll have your ass fired (once apple takes over the planet you will feel better)
brother’s rejoice (sisters too)
C’mon now — some windows “savant” spinning silliness again.
This is a move which indicates Apple is not prepared to
sit on its laurels in a rocking chair somewhere & muse about past achievements.
So Intel has managed to create processors to compete with the graphics specific Motorola & IBM processors to good result.
If Apple stays with chip development that is oblivious to their future & cutting edge needs, you know what the stories would read. They could rehash more of the same old articles they’ve been printing for a decade & more.
At the same time as the market reaches maturity & saturation with desktops & laptops, a more integrated path is something even microSoft is visiting.
If ever there was a time for Apple to make a move which is a step toward cost cutting parity, now is it, when they are still on the crest of a financial wave.
If the cost & development cycle is better going with the same core chipset as the rest of the market, it brings it closer to a head-to-head competition. Makes the low end of the product line easier to produce.
With the iPod being the premiere recognizable toy & overpriced (which can’t continue too much longer unless they really have some earth-shattering new direction for the iPod), a great suite of first rate applications & a solid OS which winDoze can only pine for at the moment, why not?
MacOS X has a clear identity & direction that works – it is a mature OS ontop of Unix now & there is probably no major fiddling any longer to tune THAT transition.
The future markets are close to saturation at the price points these companies need to operate comfortably, so now its taking market share from one another & competing with growing open source communities.
Addendum:
Portable is IN.
If IBM is not prompt in producing G5s good for laptops, the iBook is a dead end in a year or two, if the performance curve between laptops grows significantly.
Faster G4s in the iBook won’t necessarily make up for new OS features that leave the G4 chip wanting.
That is an ignominious end for a nice product even diehard winDoze users have found elegant & sexy. Its only recently that the wintel hardware has competed favorably with the iBook.
So that also makes it logical to move to something else that will get you there.
It is not going to be a straight wintel box in all probability. Apple hasn’t given up the computer hardware business model yet.
Even if they did — they could run with software only.
Look at the inroads Linux has made into winDOze territory, and Apple does GUI over Unix far better.
So, while ARS Technica is more authorititve than most, go back & look at their failed past predictions too. They’ve had some blunders & misses.
in the meantime, it riles the natives & they get talked about.
What kind of mushrooms is Hannibal eating these days?
Chew on this for a while hannible: http://www.osviews.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=4954&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
Highest Mac sales in over four years. 52% of total revenue. 1.182 million units shipped.
So what was that you were saying about the ipod being apple’s future?
Since the release of the market figures for the latest Quarter, Hannibal and his fellow Machaters have been rather quiet on the subject of the death of the Macintosh. I wonder WHY? </Sarcasem