In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 07:23:45AM +0800, Rod wrote: > Steve says the soul of the Mac has always been the OS
And the hardware its heart. Also, while there's been attention given to the fact that old PowerPC apps will work on Mactel thanks to dynamic translation in Rosetta, what happens the other way around? There are plenty of people who can't replace all their hardware every three years. It's continual pain for me that for most software, development for Mac OS 9 stopped several years ago. So, the backward compatibility of Mactel software (i.e. ability to run newer software on PowerPC Macs) is very much a concern for me. It sounds like it's simple a consequence of poor circumstances that, at a time when embedded systems (incl. PC-type items like game consoles) are increasingly using high-performance RISC CPUs (e.g. ARM, Cell, PowerPC -- including Microsoft's own Xbox), Apple is moving to a legacy design. Admittedly, it's doing so with a company that is thoroughly commercially successful, is a beacon of success with standard commodity parts, can invest heavily in developing higher clock speeds, and can develop manufacturing techniques that IBM can't match for the G5s. In "economic terms" it makes some sense. And, obviously, if the G5 is never going to make it into laptops due to manufacturing issues, then that is in itself a glaring problem for Apple. But to me, x86 architecture seems like a relic and is reminiscent of some of Apple's 'cheap', disappointing hardware choices -- need I mention the backward steps Apple took with its flaky CRT-style iMacs?! I guess Apple must have an assurance from Intel to design and deliver a leading 64-bit chip in time for Mactel. But whatever CPU gets used in Mactel, it seems to be given that it will be a standard Intel part -- so that still leaves questions about DRM. And as I understand it from yesterday's comments, it's not as though Apple's going to facilitate "building your own" Mactel boxes. So there's no analogous advantage for Mac in comparison to the sheer deployability of BSD, Linux or Windows anyway.
