http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/ Engadget Comments for Switched On - Macintel: Expanding market share via the chic, the geek, and the IT meek http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
Doesn't this mean that DELL, Lenovo, HP, etc can soon offer a different Operating System when selling desktops and laptops?

It would be a nice alternative, especially if the price of the O/S was well below that of Microsofts.

Just a thought.
JIM]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
Jim,

No, this isn't what this means at all. Apple has stated that Mac OS X will not run any other machine then an Apple Macintosh. No Dell, HP, Lenavo, etc. Besides, if they wanted to ship machines with other opereating systems, there is always Linux. Hey, some of them already are. And talk about beating MS on cost! :)

--token]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
Calih]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
No. Mac Clones proved themselves to be a bad idea last time around.]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
Right. 129$ a year is a tithe, not a tax.

What a maroon!]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
I'm no computer buff, but wouldn't this switch mean that we (Mac users) will be more vulnerable to spyware and worms and such? >_<]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
You might or might not remember the last time Apple allowed other manufacturers to run Mac OS on their machines. The result was a brief moment of some real competition, with boxes that in some cases undercut Apple on price, and other ones (like Radius) that were just plain BETTER.

I doubt there is a manufacturer out there today that could make a better machine than Apple, but I'm sure there are a lot of companies itching to make one cheaper.

You're right, the Mac OS is cheaper than Windows XP right now, and I think there is a huge market for it on a non-Apple machine, especially in a dual-boot environment.

Unfortunately, there are two major reasons we're not likely to see MacOS running on anything but an Apple box. One, it was Steve Jobs himself who killed the original clones. He's notoriously fanatical about the Temple of Mac OS, and whether it makes (short or long-term) business sense or not, he seems to be emotionally dead set against letting the OS loose. Then again, it's his instincts that helped create Apple in the first place, as well as popularizing the GUI and the mouse; launching the PDA market, not to mention the iPod. So maybe he knows something, even if we don't (or he doesn't) know how he knows it.

Two, a major reason the Mac OS is less expensive than Windows, and the reason it works so seamlessly, is that Apple has a lot of control over the hardware that will work with it.
With only one manufacturer of the computers, and a limited number of peripherals (compared to the Windows and Linux worlds), it's comparatively easy to make it all "just work."
If the jungle of PC makers out there were all making Mac OS compatible products, we'd see the world of OS X suddenly become a lot less smooth, as driver conflicts, hardware incompatibility, and noncompliant manufacturers caused the Mac's reputation for ease of use its ability to "just work" go right down the drain.

Of course, the Mac OS would still be many of the things it is now - fast, slick, well-designed, robust, etc... but it wouldn't be the same experience as running on an Apple Macintosh.

It's too bad the source code can't be open for Mac OS. I'd love to see a world where only Apple computers could run the "official" Mac OS, but a thousand distros of Mac OS could compete on Intel chips, a la Ubuntu, Knoppix, Gentoo, Linspire, etc. I'd love to see a Yellow Dog Mac OS!]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
Now, having said all of that, I wish Apple would put their foot to the pedal and adopted PCI Express and actually allowed standard PC video cards to be added to the PowerMacs instead of being charged four times the price of the PC version for a sole pleasure of installing it in your Mac.]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
Ironicaly enough the x86 platform itself might have to potential to be MORE secure than PPC. Perhaps someone could confirm or help me out, but aren't both Intel and AMD adding that 'Zero-bit' thing or whatever it's called that is supposed to stop buffer overruns on a hardware level ?

But if you're talking about it in concert with the MacOs It's kinda like putting a patch on a roof that's not leaking. Yeah...it's less likely to leak in that spot, but you'd never know it cause there wasn't any problem in the first place...]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
what a moron]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
I am currently a PC user looking for a switch very soon (a week) until the Intel news was confirmed. Apple is very vague about any dates and upgrade path of its future line of product.

My question is whether it is wise for me to purchase a powerbook right now. I am new to PowerPC so I don't know how the specs, of say, 1.5ghz stack up against a Pentium M 1.5 or P4 3.0ghz. Help me out here guys. =)]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/I want to know the same thing.]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
P.S. I loved Permission! What a small world... I now feel old realizing the issue in my bathroom is from 1997...]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
Leave a comment to let me know if you agree, disagree, or have another insight.

Thanks!]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
Does anyone remember the days when the two software choices were "IBM compatible" and "Macintosh"???]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
Seems it would be better to simply include a G4 chip with Macs in addition to an x86 during the transition years. Somehow, taking a modern Intel processor and emulating G3 speeds with it for the majority of the software sitting on the store shelves does not sound that appealing in the meantime. But that's just me, and I could be wrong.

]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
Right. 129$ a year is a tithe, not a tax.

What a maroon!

------------------

The MS tax referred to all the shit you had to get to make up for Windows. No such 'costs' exist on a Mac.

You make it sound like MS is giving away system upgrades. They're not. Since 2001 Win Xp has gotten a shitload of patches.. and SP2.. (which was basically a way to get people to upgrade to XP in the first place.. which hasn't happened)

Apple has released IMPORTANT system UPGRADES (ie. Tiger ~ Longhorn), in addition to the free security updates (which.. on a Mac are SLIGHTLY less frequent ;))

Zero viruses on a Mac. How much would you pay for that peace of mind, hmm?]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
I don't see why someone should build a virus for a so little market. Apple grow up and you'll see as many viruses you want.
]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/Apple users don't realize they are small potatoes in the tech world. IBM looked at Apple marketshare as compared to the tens of millions of game consoles to be sold and the choice was obvious about who they would support.
When new processors are introduced by Intel, Apple will be way back in the pack. What will be Apple's volume ranking as a Intel customer... maybe 10th?....even Acer sells more computers than Apple. Mark my words, new Intel processors will always appear on Dell machines first. You think Intel wants to lose that account?
Also, it is very much an open question if MS will allow Longhorn to run on Apple hardware, see their latest comments on their Hypervisor plans for clues to their position on that little matter.

]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
During this time, Apple has diligently been developing OS X into a fully-functional and featured desktop OS, while simulataneously insuring that the APIs remained portable enough to allow switching to another architecture at a moment's notice. Add to the OS the full complement of third-party apps (all written to said portable API), and you have an OOtB drop-in replacement f/Windows.

Regarding Apple's efforts to keep OS X on their propreitary Intel implementation: I can assure you, it's all for show, though Jobs et al would never admit it. They can't, for to do so would be to encur the full and direct wrath of MS's competition. As it stands, they have Plausible Deniability on their side regarding their future plans to compete wMS. Jobs KNOWS Apple cannot keep people from reverse-engineering any HW/SW protections that are implemented; indeed, he's counting on it. In any case, about the only place in the world where such limitations would have even a shadow's chance of being enforced is in America anyway (DMCA). Sooner or later, SOMEONE SOMEWHERE WILL get OS X running on beige box HW. Hell, we'll probably even seen some fool running it on a P60 or something! Any restrictions placed on OS X WILL have to be lifted eventually. Again, Jobs et al know this and have PLANNED for it.

I know people will dismiss what I've said here, but I guess time will tell, won't it? :-)]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/You think you feel old? How about me, I had already been doing the magazine for 5 years by '97! (I like that it's still in the bathroom, though. Heh.)

Drop me a line and I'll send you a free copy of the new one, since you're old school. Use one of the email links on the Permission website (click my name here).]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
The released another big batch of patches today for the half finished 10.4.1.

Wait until the hackers start paying attention like they did with Firefox. More holes that IE had in 3 years in less than a year.

The same will happen with OS X.]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/1- Nobody on any site seems to have addressed what effect this is going to have on Mac OS SERVER software and the Intel-inside X-Server.
2- Expect the first shipping Intel Macs to be a showcase for Intel's newer technology.
3- My bet is that instead of the plain-old BIOS chip in the developer MacIntels we will be seeing EFI. In case you want to know more check this link:
http://www.intel.com/technology/efi/
4- Final bet- I bet you will see an Intel-equipped PowerBook by MacWorld SF in January 2006. By January Apple should have the OS, bundled apps, iLife, iWork and Pro Apps ready. Why not offer your highest margin customers the first chance to fly?]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
Intel in a powerbook - that's what hacks me off. So now instead of a new powerbook this year I must wait till late 2006 or more likely '07 for a beta model and 2008 or '09 for something really good?

Steve - that is where the pain is. Not sure I will wait... and I'm core faithful.]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
when OSX came out from what i know there was another contest for anyone who could hack the OSX box unsecured, no firewall, i believe the price was 25 grand, and no one claimed it because no one could do it. it's the rock solid defense of unix that keeps it safe. not the small market share]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
See the simple economics of it is that Apple has a flexible position now than it did between the years '97-'02. That is why they let expire the agreement with Microsoft. That is why they could gamble with the PPC970 while keeping Intel boxes warm in a Cupertino lab. Apple aligning itself with more standard PC configurations while still differentiating the design with something way more compelling than a Dell will guarantee continued customers. As long as Apple can continue its complete differentiation with all the other PC makers, then the Mac ecosystem will continue to flourish.

Apple commands nice profit margins while increasing their user base. And will continue to do so with the switch to Intel. That is simple economics.]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/25 grand? when? where?
I'll do a virus for mac no problem.

I just need a little file that delete all system fonts.

I did one time on panther and the mac crashed very bad. I had blue screen at the restart. Cool.

if there're people can hack the nasa website, I think there are people to make good viruses for mac. The problem is nobody care having publicity in this small little world.

I bet there aren't viruses for silicon graphics computer and not many for linux.]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/
The availability of PowerPC chips has always been a nagging issue for Apple. All of us in field sales were aware that OS X led "a double life," as a "just in case" scenario, though there was never any official communication about this. It would be poor business sense to rely on a single vendor for anything, especially something so important as a CPU. Steve Jobs presented the matter fairly: this was the "just in case" scenario. I do find it ironic, having delivered hundreds of presentations on the benefits of RISC over CISC, and having had thousands of conversations explaining that clock speed on PowerPC and on Intel isn't compatible. But many of us, myself included, actually pushed for the shift to Intel a number of years ago because of that very issue. Solving the clockspeed issue will make Apple far more competitive. The average user, even in the higher ed market, doesn't want to put the time into educating her/himself on the difference between RISC and CISC and why simple clockspeed comparisons between the two are wrongheaded.

The switch to Intel opens up some other interesting possibilities as well. I should state that I left Apple shortly after the transition to OS X; I have absolutely no inside knowledge. But the Intel move does invite speculation. Many have mentioned the possibility of OS X running on other boxes, a la Microsoft. This notion has been debunked by Apple. Others have noted the possiblity of installing Windows on an Intel Mac. Phil Schiller has said this would be a possibility for some enterprizing individuals, though it wouldn't be supported by Apple. But there's another possibility that I haven't seen mentioned: that Apple itself license Windows and ship PCs in a new line of computers that are not "Macintoshes." (After all, Jobs himself has defined a Macintosh as the software.) Before you dismiss this as insane (and it may very well be) consider the potential advantage to Apple: skyrocketing sales in hardware. I don't think Apple will ever compete with Dell on price points, but I can assure you there are enough PC users out there who are willing to pay a premium for Apple's elegant industrial design to make this an enormously profitable venture (probably multiplying its hardware sales by at least four, though that seems like a modest forecast). Would this mean that Apple would abandon OS X? Absolutely not. In fact, PC sales would give Apple the added revenue necessary to actually mass market OS X and give Windows a run for its money.]]>Dec 19th 2005 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/08/switched-on-macintel-expanding-market-share-via-the-chic/Dec 19th 2005 12:16AM