The end of the World is near

[Alejandra]

Apple to Use Intel Microprocessors Beginning in 2006

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html

[Ian]

Maybe they'll be cheaper now.



hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[LoneWolf]

As long as Apple keeps tight control of the firmware, they'll keep a lock on the design. They'll be sure to keep OS X off of clone Intel hardware. Since part of the appeal is in the computer's exterior design, and part in the OS itself, I see the prices dipping a little perhaps (prices on chipsets might be lower in addition to CPU's, making production less expensive), but not anywhere near to the level of cheap stuff. Probably a good move on Apple's part too. I know a lot of people complain about Apple's prices, but if they got as cheap as those people wanted, the same people would trash Apple as "just another eMachines cheapie". It'd be like BMW finding a way to make a knockoff of the M3 for half the price and marketing it to compete with the Hyundai Tiburon.

[Alejandra]

Well, but I think when there is it is going to deliver the new Macs they'll easier to update, Just buy a faster Pentium (if is the processor they use) and swap it.

[Alejandra]

Maybe they'll be cheaper now.



hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Come on, you never gonna buy an Apple even with Intel or a cheap one

[Boba_Fett]

Oh the irony! Now all that is unique about Mac is their quaint OS that is just a little more compatable with everyday programs than the 31-flavors of linux...

[LoneWolf]

Oh the irony! Now all that is unique about Mac is their quaint OS that is just a little more compatable with everyday programs than the 31-flavors of linux...

Don't knock it `til ya try it.

For audio and video editing, I have to say that the Mac platform is the most friendly platform for the average user...and if you're a power user, it just means you can do that much more.

OS X is also inherently more secure. Not just because less people use it, but because the OS truly is more secure. The average user logs in with standard privileges, and if you wish to install software or make major changes, you actually have to elevate your privileges temporarily to do it by entering in the username and password of an account with admin privileges. This means the average person actually has to make a real decision regarding installing software. This is the one big thing I feel Windows XP should have had...better user privilege structure, which IMO would have cut down greatly on malware/spyware infections by making shee--, er people, think a little harder about what they were doing. Too many people are logged into their Windows XP box as admin, and some of them should NEVER have this kind of access by default.

I use both Mac and PC. I stick with PC mostly because I enjoy building them and gaming, but if Mac went Intel, I could certainly envision having a dual-boot Mac someday with Windows and OS X; Windows would probably become mainly a gaming OS for me, and at that point I might very well use OS X for everything else.

[Boba_Fett]

Oh the irony! Now all that is unique about Mac is their quaint OS that is just a little more compatable with everyday programs than the 31-flavors of linux...

Don't knock it `til ya try it.

Oh but I have! My first "PC" was a 90mhz Power Mac... boy that sucked. But seriously, my college is about half Mac/half PC so I get even times with both. I agree that Mac would satisfy security nuts and people who like very easy programs to do very complicated things, but the compatability is killer. So is the closed-source nature of Mac. Don't get me wrong, if it came down to using linux or Mac, I would take Mac in a heart-beat, BUT Windows XP gives me everything and more of what I need. It's all good

[LoneWolf]

Oh the irony! Now all that is unique about Mac is their quaint OS that is just a little more compatable with everyday programs than the 31-flavors of linux...

Don't knock it `til ya try it.

Oh but I have! My first "PC" was a 90mhz Power Mac... boy that sucked. But seriously, my college is about half Mac/half PC so I get even times with both. I agree that Mac would satisfy security nuts and people who like very easy programs to do very complicated things, but the compatability is killer. So is the closed-source nature of Mac. Don't get me wrong, if it came down to using linux or Mac, I would take Mac in a heart-beat, BUT Windows XP gives me everything and more of what I need. It's all good

But see, there's the problem.

Most people I know (not neccessarily yourself) that knock today's Mac do so based on an OS 9 or earlier machine, or worse, a first-gen PowerPC. I'm more than willing to admit that Apple has had some failure products which include certain lines of computers (the entire PowerMac 52xx/53xx line comes to mind as one). Apple has also had moments where their software didn't utilize their hardware efficiently (MacOS 7.x on the PowerPC 601 comes to mind). I really think that today's Mac running OS X Panther (I haven't played with Tiger much yet so I can't say until I've done some more work) has come a long way, and comparisons based on anything older just don't measure up. Classic MacOS loses quickly to OS X in stability and in flexibility. Classic Mac hardware also quickly loses to anything non-beige that has come after it (though I must say I loved my PowerPC 604ev-based PM8600 tower). There's also more app compability than people realize. MS Office does exist for the Mac, and for every app a PC can do, I can probably find a Mac one, and many are free/open-source or low-cost solutions. Since Macs can read PC-formatted media without problem as well, I think that in a lot of cases, the perception of incompatibility is just that --a perception.

[Boba_Fett]

I think that in a lot of cases, the perception of incompatibility is just that --a perception.

For everyday programs, I'll give you that since I admit I don't hunt for Mac software like you probably do. For games, you lose... bigtime. It isn't even close. Seeing how that is one of the most important things to me, I have no choice but to ridicule Mac until the cows come home

[Ian]

For everyday programs, I'll give you that since I admit I don't hunt for Mac software like you probably do. For games, you lose... bigtime. It isn't even close. Seeing how that is one of the most important things to me, I have no choice but to ridicule Mac until the cows come home

lol.. Yeah, games are a big thing for me as well. A friend of mine is a huge Mac fan. Whenever he got a new game he'd get all excited. I'd always be like "Oh Warcraft.. I played that last year"

[LoneWolf]

I'll give you games. If you're a gamer, you won't be using a Mac. And while I don't play a huge number of games anymore, I still game some and it's on the PC in my sig.

Here's where the Macintel boxes look promising. Imagine being able to dual-boot between OS X and Windows XP --WinXP for your games, but OS X the rest of the time. It'll give the best of both worlds, and remove one of the biggest reasons for computing enthusiasts to not buy a Mac.

I don't agree with the folks who say "Apple should just open OSX up so that any Wintel machine can use it". I believe that'll ruin Apple as a company by killing off their hardware, and at the same time making every cheapo-clone buyer complain that their YongYang TV tuner card or BigSound! audio board isn't supported forcing Apple into an area where they won't be able to please anyone. But letting Windows run on a Mac box is a good way of getting both worlds to work.

[Alejandra]

Here's where the Macintel boxes look promising. Imagine being able to dual-boot between OS X and Windows XP --WinXP for your games, but OS X the rest of the time. It'll give the best of both worlds, and remove one of the biggest reasons for computing enthusiasts to not buy a Mac.

Maybe even dual boot will be unnecessary, maybe games will run more "nativeally", of course DirectX will be needed some how, but how about OpenGL, yeah sounds like opium dream, isn't it?

[Boba_Fett]

lol.. Yeah, games are a big thing for me as well. A friend of mine is a huge Mac fan. Whenever he got a new game he'd get all excited. I'd always be like "Oh Warcraft.. I played that last year"

If you guys haven't checked the Gamer Switch video yet, you really should watch it. I show it to all my Mac buddies:

http://www.roosterteeth.com/archive/episode.php?id=118 (click on the RvBswitch.mov link)

[Alejandra]

OS X 10.4.1 available for download

http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/6012/

"Apple will give thousands, possibly millions, of people a taste of Mac OS X running full speed on their own PCs"

[aviationwiz]

The "leaked" copy of x86 Tiger is a fake, it was posted on slashdot.

[Alejandra]

I had my doubts about it.

But how about this:

Dell Willing To Sell Mac OS X:

"In a Fortune.com article, David Kirkpatrick talks about a recent interview with Michael Dell, CEO of Dell Computers.
So I emailed Michael Dell, now the company's chairman, and asked if he'd be interested in the Mac OS, assuming that Apple CEO Steve Jobs ever decides to license it to PC companies. (For now, Jobs says he won't.)"

http://www.fortune.com/fortune/fastforward/0,15704,1072719,00.html

[Alejandra]

As I type this post I'm installing Macc OS X on my PC, I downloaded two ISO images one (with lot of sources) is fake, I burned with Nero but neither the PC or the Mac can mount it, the other is HFS/ISO image, you can see the directories and files with both Windows and Mac.

I don't know if it'll work since I recently change to AMD, anyway I'll post some pics.

[Alejandra]

Well, yeah, it's only the Darwin Base system, no GUI, apps or anything else, very hard to find the real ISO, a lot of fakes out there.