Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel! The end
of the closed box?

Phil Weldon

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

Phil Weldon wrote:

> Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel! The end
> of the closed box?
>
> Phil Weldon
>
>

Yeah. What's next? Windows on an Apple?

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

"David Maynard" <nospam@private.net> wrote in message
news:11ad8mvhbm79v72@corp.supernews.com...
> Phil Weldon wrote:
>
>> Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel! The
>> end of the closed box?
>>
>> Phil Weldon
>
> Yeah. What's next? Windows on an Apple?
>

OSX on a PC?

Ed

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

Ed Medlin wrote:

> "David Maynard" <nospam@private.net> wrote in message
> news:11ad8mvhbm79v72@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>Phil Weldon wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel! The
>>>end of the closed box?
>>>
>>>Phil Weldon
>>
>>Yeah. What's next? Windows on an Apple?
>>
>
>
> OSX on a PC?
>
> Ed
>
>

There's been a push for that even before the 'Intel processor' announcement.

Shouldn't be all that incredibly difficult since it's a 'nix variant.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

Either Apple solves the problem of preventing OSX from running on PC
compatibles other than Apple boxes, or Apple will be marginalized to
botiqueware.

Phil Weldon

"David Maynard" <nospam@private.net> wrote in message
news:11aehui54a1vl4c@corp.supernews.com...
> Ed Medlin wrote:
>
>> "David Maynard" <nospam@private.net> wrote in message
>> news:11ad8mvhbm79v72@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>>>Phil Weldon wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel! The
>>>>end of the closed box?
>>>>
>>>>Phil Weldon
>>>
>>>Yeah. What's next? Windows on an Apple?
>>>
>>
>>
>> OSX on a PC?
>>
>> Ed
>
> There's been a push for that even before the 'Intel processor'
> announcement.
>
> Shouldn't be all that incredibly difficult since it's a 'nix variant.
>

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

Phil Weldon wrote:

> Either Apple solves the problem of preventing OSX from running on PC
> compatibles other than Apple boxes, or Apple will be marginalized to
> botiqueware.

Yeah. Or figure a way to make their hardware 'better' than the IBM clone
alternative.

OTOH, Microsoft seems to have done rather well with 'just software'

>
> Phil Weldon
>
> "David Maynard" <nospam@private.net> wrote in message
> news:11aehui54a1vl4c@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>Ed Medlin wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"David Maynard" <nospam@private.net> wrote in message
>>>news:11ad8mvhbm79v72@corp.supernews.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Phil Weldon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel! The
>>>>>end of the closed box?
>>>>>
>>>>>Phil Weldon
>>>>
>>>>Yeah. What's next? Windows on an Apple?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>OSX on a PC?
>>>
>>>Ed
>>
>>There's been a push for that even before the 'Intel processor'
>>announcement.
>>
>>Shouldn't be all that incredibly difficult since it's a 'nix variant.
>>
>
>
>

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

"Phil Weldon" <notdiscosed@example.com> wrote in message
news:mEJpe.1291$pa3.421@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Either Apple solves the problem of preventing OSX from running on PC
> compatibles other than Apple boxes, or Apple will be marginalized to
> botiqueware.
>
> Phil Weldon

From my understanding of S. Jobs' comments, OSX will not be able to be run
on typical X86 systems. They are probably going to use the MB as a restraint
IMO. Opinions are like a$$holes though.......everyone has one...:-) That is
about the only way I can think of to prevent it since about everything else
will be the same.

Ed
>
> "David Maynard" <nospam@private.net> wrote in message
> news:11aehui54a1vl4c@corp.supernews.com...
>> Ed Medlin wrote:
>>
>>> "David Maynard" <nospam@private.net> wrote in message
>>> news:11ad8mvhbm79v72@corp.supernews.com...
>>>
>>>>Phil Weldon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel! The
>>>>>end of the closed box?
>>>>>
>>>>>Phil Weldon
>>>>
>>>>Yeah. What's next? Windows on an Apple?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> OSX on a PC?
>>>
>>> Ed
>>
>> There's been a push for that even before the 'Intel processor'
>> announcement.
>>
>> Shouldn't be all that incredibly difficult since it's a 'nix variant.
>>
>
>

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

"David Maynard" <nospam@private.net> wrote in message
news:11afqio32ignvb2@corp.supernews.com...
> Phil Weldon wrote:
>
>> Either Apple solves the problem of preventing OSX from running on PC
>> compatibles other than Apple boxes, or Apple will be marginalized to
>> botiqueware.
>
> Yeah. Or figure a way to make their hardware 'better' than the IBM clone
> alternative.
>
> OTOH, Microsoft seems to have done rather well with 'just software'

I kind of agree David. OSX on an X86 does not seem to me to be a bad move
for Apple. MS wouldn't like it, but what the hell, OSX would be a more
acceptable alternative than Linux IMO. I don't think it would make a huge
impact on Windows sales, but I think would bring more users to it than Linux
just because of the ease of use factor.

Ed
>
>>
>> Phil Weldon
>>
>> "David Maynard" <nospam@private.net> wrote in message
>> news:11aehui54a1vl4c@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>>>Ed Medlin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"David Maynard" <nospam@private.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:11ad8mvhbm79v72@corp.supernews.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Phil Weldon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel!
>>>>>>The end of the closed box?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Phil Weldon
>>>>>
>>>>>Yeah. What's next? Windows on an Apple?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>OSX on a PC?
>>>>
>>>>Ed
>>>
>>>There's been a push for that even before the 'Intel processor'
>>>announcement.
>>>
>>>Shouldn't be all that incredibly difficult since it's a 'nix variant.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

Ed Medlin wrote:

> "David Maynard" <nospam@private.net> wrote in message
> news:11afqio32ignvb2@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>Phil Weldon wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Either Apple solves the problem of preventing OSX from running on PC
>>>compatibles other than Apple boxes, or Apple will be marginalized to
>>>botiqueware.
>>
>>Yeah. Or figure a way to make their hardware 'better' than the IBM clone
>>alternative.
>>
>>OTOH, Microsoft seems to have done rather well with 'just software'
>
>
> I kind of agree David. OSX on an X86 does not seem to me to be a bad move
> for Apple. MS wouldn't like it, but what the hell, OSX would be a more
> acceptable alternative than Linux IMO. I don't think it would make a huge
> impact on Windows sales, but I think would bring more users to it than Linux
> just because of the ease of use factor.
>
> Ed
>

I'd think it would have the best chance to compete with windows on the
desktop because, for one, it already has a reputation behind it.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

"Ed Medlin" <ed@edmedlin.com> wrote in message...
> From my understanding of S. Jobs' comments, OSX will not be able
> to be run on typical X86 systems. They are probably going to use the
> MB as a restraint IMO.

If that does turn out to be the case it'll be interesting to see how long it
takes the third party community to create a "fix". ;-)

> Opinions are like a$$holes though.......everyone has one...:-) That
> is about the only way I can think of to prevent it since about
> everything else will be the same.

One can't help but wonder how strong Apple will make this "protection". It
could be a thinly disguised attempt to evaluate market demand for a "true"
X86 version of OS-X.
--


Richard Hopkins
Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
(replace nospam with pipex in reply address)

The UK's leading technology reseller www.dabs.com

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

I'd say the announcement is very real; this has got to hurt sales of the
final runs of Power Chip Apples (except for the rush by true believers to
buy up the last of the 'real' Apples.) I do think that Apple OS will make
the jump to x86. It would seem to me that OSX for x86 would have a
significant market worth more than keeping the box closed. Apple might have
to give up its boutiques with the hardwood floors, but ...

Phil Weldon

"Richard Hopkins" <richh@dsl.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:42a8ab83$0$289$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
> "Ed Medlin" <ed@edmedlin.com> wrote in message...
>> From my understanding of S. Jobs' comments, OSX will not be able
>> to be run on typical X86 systems. They are probably going to use the
>> MB as a restraint IMO.
>
> If that does turn out to be the case it'll be interesting to see how long
> it takes the third party community to create a "fix". ;-)
>
>> Opinions are like a$$holes though.......everyone has one...:-) That
>> is about the only way I can think of to prevent it since about
>> everything else will be the same.
>
> One can't help but wonder how strong Apple will make this "protection". It
> could be a thinly disguised attempt to evaluate market demand for a "true"
> X86 version of OS-X.
> --
>
>
> Richard Hopkins
> Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
> (replace nospam with pipex in reply address)
>
> The UK's leading technology reseller www.dabs.com
>
>

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

"Phil Weldon" <notdiscosed@example.com> wrote in message
news:HM2qe.1826$VK4.1623@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> I do think that Apple OS will make the jump to x86. It would seem to
> me that OSX for x86 would have a significant market worth more than
> keeping the box closed.

Exactly, and that was my underlying point. They'll expect to pick up market
share from many of the graphics/web/etc. bods, while also probably trading
on OS-X's generally better (than Windoze) security.

What short term hardware sales losses they have to put up with in the short
term they should make up for many times over by being able to break out of
the niche they've occupied for the past howevermanyitis years, and into the
mainstream PC market.

....although it'll probably also make Microsoft a little more competitive
too, so all in all good news, if/when it happens.
--


Richard Hopkins
Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
(replace nospam with pipex in reply address)

The UK's leading technology reseller www.dabs.com

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

http://www.shapeofdays.com/2005/06 [...] n_int.html

Richard Hopkins wrote:
> "Phil Weldon" <notdiscosed@example.com> wrote in message
> news:HM2qe.1826$VK4.1623@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
>> I do think that Apple OS will make the jump to x86. It would seem to
>> me that OSX for x86 would have a significant market worth more than
>> keeping the box closed.
>
>
> Exactly, and that was my underlying point. They'll expect to pick up market
> share from many of the graphics/web/etc. bods, while also probably trading
> on OS-X's generally better (than Windoze) security.
>
> What short term hardware sales losses they have to put up with in the short
> term they should make up for many times over by being able to break out of
> the niche they've occupied for the past howevermanyitis years, and into the
> mainstream PC market.
>
> ...although it'll probably also make Microsoft a little more competitive
> too, so all in all good news, if/when it happens.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

'Chris' wrote, in part: well, actually, he only posted a URL.

Interesting speculation. But don't blogs seem kinda pathetic?

Phil Weldon

"Chris" <cwallace@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:1118583535.a737c56f64f5180069823038f1e181d2@teranews...
> http://www.shapeofdays.com/2005/06 [...] n_int.html
>
> Richard Hopkins wrote:
>> "Phil Weldon" <notdiscosed@example.com> wrote in message
>> news:HM2qe.1826$VK4.1623@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>
>>> I do think that Apple OS will make the jump to x86. It would seem to
>>> me that OSX for x86 would have a significant market worth more than
>>> keeping the box closed.
>>
>>
>> Exactly, and that was my underlying point. They'll expect to pick up
>> market
>> share from many of the graphics/web/etc. bods, while also probably
>> trading
>> on OS-X's generally better (than Windoze) security.
>>
>> What short term hardware sales losses they have to put up with in the
>> short
>> term they should make up for many times over by being able to break out
>> of
>> the niche they've occupied for the past howevermanyitis years, and into
>> the
>> mainstream PC market.
>>
>> ...although it'll probably also make Microsoft a little more competitive
>> too, so all in all good news, if/when it happens.

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking (More info?)

Indeed, some bloggers focus on patehetic pleas and rants, disregarding
logic entirely, and making countless emotional appeals for their
particular flavor of thought.

Come to think of it, so do some newspaper editorial writers. So do some
newspaper reporters, and editors for that matter. And some politicians,
and some presidents...


about blogs:

http://www.jacc.com/articles/mktg22.htm

Very briefly, some blogs are worth reading, and some are not. I
probably wouldn't have known about this one except for the slashdot article.


Here's the slashdot article that led me to the previously link.
http://apple.slashdot.org/article. [...] =179&tid=1

Phil Weldon wrote:
> 'Chris' wrote, in part: well, actually, he only posted a URL.
>
> Interesting speculation. But don't blogs seem kinda pathetic?
>
> Phil Weldon
>
> "Chris" <cwallace@hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:1118583535.a737c56f64f5180069823038f1e181d2@teranews...
>
>>http://www.shapeofdays.com/2005/06/mac_os_x_on_int.html
>>
>>Richard Hopkins wrote:
>>
>>>"Phil Weldon" <notdiscosed@example.com> wrote in message
>>>news:HM2qe.1826$VK4.1623@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>I do think that Apple OS will make the jump to x86. It would seem to
>>>>me that OSX for x86 would have a significant market worth more than
>>>>keeping the box closed.
>&