Afternoon,
This is emotive, but some is fact, questions are answered with
rhetoric or more questions, fun times for the future. Answering a
response to thoughts I published yesterday!
On 07/06/2005, at 1:28 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 06:13 +0800, Rob Davies wrote:
I feel sorry for all the Apple retailers who have to re-evaluate
future whilst surviving the transition, knowing they are going to be
competing with our x86 brethren after the dust settles.
They already are. I don't see that too much changes here, frankly,
unless Apple decide to let MacOS/X run on standard PCs. Do you think
that's likely, 'cos I sure don't.
I do not know of many Apple stores whom sell Intel or Windows hardware.
Yes, in short term people will be sceptical of Apple and their
products, for those that it already is an issue it will just give
them more fuel to throw on a already burning fire. Hence, orders
cancelled or Corporations worried about bottom line in future will
play waiting game and re-evaluate planned moves within their offices,
but most cannot afford to wait and will move on. This I see happening
with the xserver range of products and already institutions I know
would have changed are planning to survive on already installed base
or looking elsewhere.
Long term depends on support of PPC products and software in the
interim, how fast Apple get all onboard working with public
exhibition of final products; as a programer you say it should not be
too huge a task I hope not for Apples sake. Then the final hurdle is
to end up solid as they are today with the so called advantages of
switching to Intel achieved? Consumer faith restored into company...
with the chance of another major change looming in 5 years?
Their is also the underlying innuendo it is same as windows, so why
should I buy Apple at the higher price?? Thought it was hard
convincing future customers try it when they have to pay more for
what they perceive as the same.
Thus, the competition is much the same
as it was, though Apple might have a bit of an advantage if they let
users dual-boot, or sell bundled versions of VMWare with Windows or
something.
I am not sure at the moment.This smells very much a hardware right-
off and lets become an OS and software provider whilst maintaining an
iPod market.
Of course, I won't be surprised if the Mac-on-Linux crowd have cracked
out a version that lets you run MacOS/X on a standard Linux PC
within a
few weeks of getting their hands on a preview build. That's geek
territory really - I don't see your average user buying MacOS/X then
installing Linux to run in in a virtualized environment. You have no
idea how happy the idea of being able to run (probably virtualized)
MacOS/X on my nice AMD desktop makes me, as a software developer and
tester, though.
I wonder how much more interest Apple might get from software
developers
if they provide a legit way to run MacOS/X on developers' existing
Windows workstations? Marketing to the developers and improving the
availability of the target platform, all in one.
I think it is more practical and very much possible, more than
people give credit!
Obviously Apple did not learn from the last fore-ray into sharing
chips and technology.
Maybe they won't shoot themselves in the foot quite as hard this
time ;-)
Lets Hope! They need to outlay a supported plan for 10.5 and software
developers to guarantee support, this I see as a huge problem.
As Shay mentioned earlier PowerPC offered security x86 definitely
does not
That's BS IMO. The incompatible OS APIs offered "security" - and still
will offer the same level of it now. Just like before, there won't be
viruses unless someone decides to target MacOS/X with them. The CPU
doesn't matter.
But it also becomes that little bit easier and practical when all
playing with the same end product the similarities are no longer
unobtainable. They sit on your desktop no need for any other
hardware, yes Apple will do this and that to prevent it. But it is
like a red flag to a bull come on try me and some one will and the
dominoes begin.
oh well what's another day on a weekend checking for
rootkits, spyware, malware and this weeks new virus or rebuilding
OS.
Dunno. Do you plan on running Windows on yours? If not, I wouldn't
worry. Not unless you worry about viruses on your current mac. Just
like
always, you'll want to be aware of the possibility, but won't need to
expect every file to be wrapped in viruses.
CPU specific attacks have happened, and at the moment their is some
conjecture about encryption within the HT chips from Intel and this
is not the first problem with this company and x86 cpu's.
At Least $M Gates will be smiling another 12 months to get his
Longhorn $M stable, and out the door. Whilst knowing he can control
another part of the Apple, it's future development.
Er... how so? Apple can go to any x86 chip maker - currently AMD and
Intel for the high end, VIA and Intel for the low end. Microsoft can
pressure Intel, but not as hard as they once could. I wouldn't think
Apple has opened themselves to anything they weren't already
subject to
because of their platform's dependence on MS Office.
Quite simple really instead of having to rush out Longhorn he can now
progress as he sees fit all media hype can be directed at Apple
having to move to Intel and whether or not they can make it happen,
so now he has the twelve months or more of reprieve.
Intel would approach $M about future plans of chips and Apple would
get some say but basically it would be Intel telling them what they
can and cannot do based on M$ demands. AMD does offer an option, does
AMD want Apple. But, it would be same issues as they once had with
IBM can they meet demand I would suspect so but their is that doubt
and how tight is Intels processor for Apple can they actually go to
AMD once firmwares are set. OpenFirmware very questionable not on
developer box apparently or supported with Rosetta.
Microsoft can't afford to pressure Apple right now, either. They have
legal problems and need to look like well behaved, honest above-board
folks.
But that does not stop them from giving a third party a helping hand!
When one moves control from within ones grasp. Then rely on others to
provide, their are inevitable risks and moments of extreme
vulnerability that allows ones opposition or enemies to strike. Intel
will have too many eggs in one basket for my liking and I think they
like that but, will control too much of our electronic universe. Also
I believe this issue has been brought on by many more irons than one
can suspect, and when ever has $M behaved itself in establishing or
maintaining it's edge.
One must ask if PowerPC has no future roadmap or growth why have all
the leading games console manufacturers switched to them for the next
generation.
Well, they /are/ using very specialized chips. Not desktop PC material
at all, really. IBM /has/ been having trouble ramping
desktop/workstation chips to very high speeds, and remember that
there's
the Opteron to consider in the workstation market now.
I do not believe Apple left IBM, I am starting to see signs of IBM
pushing Apple out the door. It has been commented in US IBM was the
party whom leaked info to WSJ. Apple with Intel are taking a hit on
processor speed and architecture that is going to have huge
ramifications for Digital Video products unless Intel have something
which has not been released. I think reasoning behind long
transition which could be even longer and open support for PPC (if
IBM still supply) in upper end machines is Intel do not have anything
to replace it, but have something due at or about 2007. If they had
64 bit do you not think $M would have a matching or full on
development program supporting it. Apple got pushed and Steve is
hoping Intel works, but has the fallback from AMD if it does not, maybe?
--
Craig Ringer
Cheers!
Rob Davies
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"You can always tell if you're working on a Mac or a PC," he said.
"Just take your applications and stick them in and see if they run
(Gates 05)." If it does Welcome to Mac OS X! (RJDarts 05).
