On 5/23/05, DJA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Todd Walton wrote: > > I seriously doubt that many people buy Apples because of the CPU > > they're using. They buy Apples because either 1) they're easy to use, > > 2) they have desirable performance, or 3) they're cool. Apple could > > still maintain all three with an Intel processor, even if 2 and 3 > > became a little bit more difficult. > > Then I guess I'm in the minority. When I can finally justify buying a > laptop, it will be an Apple unless there is a compelling reason to go > x86 (the only reason I can think of now is more games). Why?
I think you missed my point. That being that if you still had Mac OS, but it was an Intel chip buried in the hardware, then there would be no effective difference for most people. That it's the OS (and its support) that matters for the majority of people. The reasons you listed were mostly OS related, which supports this statement. The ones that would be affected: > o Because battery life on a PPC-powered slab is vastly > superior to any comparably equipped x86. and > o It's not an x86. Battery life would probably suffer from a move to x86, but I can see Apple working hard to raise it again, probably at cost to the consumer. One could argue that x86 chips don't belong in laptops at all, regardless of if they're running Mac OS, Linux, or a hand-compiled assembly language custom operating system. As for "It's not an x86", well, can't argue with that. -todd -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
