Potential new blood for a.c.h.o.? Apple announces change t..

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?)

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?)

"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" <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?)

'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?)

A nice development, although after the horse has bolted.
Would have been nice to have had OS/X competition earlier,
and the Apple GUI before that - more directly on i86 platform.

Computer usage is changing...
o Laptops beginning to dominate
---- IBM did not get a Mobile G5 in Apple laptop users hands
---- P-M conversely is a reasonable chip re speed & power
---- Laptops as desktop replacement are popular with business
---- Laptops are popular re 1) sunk cost 2) proprietary 3) growth market
o Desktops slightly shrinking, or bifurcating
---- Servers still being key -- eventually in dual-core forms
---- HTPC & Entertainment is growing -- multi-desktop ownership
---- SOHO 24/7 PC -- major 2nd PC market, quiet, low-power

However, so too might O/Systems...
o Unix is a good Enterprise O/S re cheap, proven, stable, secure
---- Solaris, Irix, AIX, Linux kitchen sink - The Internet
o Windows Enterprise is a proven solution with broad product suite
---- from web serving to dbase to email

It would be interesting to see if OS/X targets a full enterprise suite,
with the inherent benefits of Unix, yet the GUI usability from Apple
o That might have more than just usability benefits
o It might have a key IT staffing cost benefit re skills/time/mgt

Apache/Unix do better than Windows at least re 1) cost 2) security.
Managing a Win based web farm is rat-race on security updates,
whereas OS/X potentially could provide both easy-face & muscle.

Windows does have some peculiar characteristics of 1) doing things
in very peculiar ways and 2) re-inventing the wheel just to MSFTify it.

Of course Windows isn't standing still, but the change perhaps
goes a little deeper than just Apple using Intel chips - it opens the
door to O/S level competition which has long been needed really.

Will be interesting - AMD keeps the pressure on Intel similarly.
--
Dorothy Bradbury
www.dorothybradbury.co.uk for quiet NMB & Panaflo fans