On Jun 9, 2005, at 12:44 AM, Alex Black wrote:
What we wonder is: 'What line of logic expects this drastic change to
make a
lot more money for Apple?'
Very simple. PPC has promised to supply a faster, more efficient
processor for years, and has just flat failed to deliver on that
promise, probably in violation of contracts,
What we ended up with is a large 64-bit processor which cannot be
placed in laptops, which runs slower than equivalent processors mfr'd
by other companies, which produces so much heat that, in addition to
fans, requires a liquid cooling system (with a questionable lifespan),
etc.
Apple has been putting up with these shenannigans for years. Now that
I'm reviewing what has transpired, I'm surprised they allowed it to go
on as long as it has. Things apparently got to the point where Apple
would end up stalled on the tracks if they continued the relationship
with PPC.
I'm not a big Intel fan myself, but the point is this: They are capable
of delivery, which will allow Apple to move ahead.
All the best,
Ken N.
--
Unsupported OS X is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/>
Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html>
Unsupported OS X list info <http://lowendmac.com/lists/unsupported.html>
--> AOL users, remove "mailto:";
Send list messages to: <mailto:[email protected]>
To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For digest mode, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subscription questions: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Archive <http://www.mail-archive.com/unsupportedosx%40mail.maclaunch.com/>
iPod Accessories for Less
at 1-800-iPOD.COM
Fast Delivery, Low Price, Good Deal
www.1800ipod.com
