Forums | MacLife

The iBook still uses G3...

If they don't upgrade it soon then they'll have 3 generations of processors!

And that page says it will go intpo productin during the 2nd half of 2003...meaning Apple will probably release PowerMacs with them at MWSF 04, or possibly MWNY 03 (or somwhere in between)...meaning PC processor speeds will be even higher. Will Apple EVER catch up?

I know...mhz myth, blah blah, but the gap IS way too big as it is.

There's an interesting article here: http://www.newsfactor.com/

It all sounds great, until one realises what X11 could mean for Apple.

Something that most Macolytes agree on is that if Apple ported to Intel, or AMD without proprietary locks, it would mean the end of Apple, because people could just get cheaper hardware elswhere and run Mac OS.
In a way, that's what Apple risks with X11. Linux users (like myself) could run our *nix servers and apps on Apple hardware with X11, but why on earth would we? Why pay a hardware premium, and then be saddled with proprietary cases and video cards? Maybe to run all our Mac apps; but we generally don't have any Mac apps (we're the great unwashed  mass of Linux users, right?).

So who's Apple going after with X11? Are they seeking the 'anti-market' of Linux home users? (Apple is the uber-market). Are they going after the corporate market of Linux servers that IBM covets (can Apple compete?) Or are they going for the desktop workstation market where Linux faces it's toughest challenge?

Will Linux and other GNU users be satisfied with Apple hardware, when there are so many less expensive and less proprietary alternatives? How would the 970 fit into this? Is it going to be so far ahead of everyone else that it's not even a contest anymore? Intel's 32 bit will be running on an 800MHz bus soon, and AMD is shipping Opterons already. It's not a slam dunk by any stretch, and if it is shown ,and I think it will be, that competeing 64 bit and 32 bit workstations and servers can outperform the fledgling IBM offering, then it could be disasterous for Apple's workstation and server plans.

With AMD on the other hand, Apple could gain far greater acceptance  with their *nix/Linux/X11 plans.

I think X11 is the equivilant to "Classic", Apple's plans are to use it for transition purposes with the Unix/Linux guys they want so bad.  If they can get them to use the apple apps, as well as allow them to develop and use x11 stuff, then they'll be happier to come over to Mac OS X (which they should already be partially familar with due to its unix core).  All those developers/users may eventually start developing/using the apple stuff more and eventually we won't need x11, at least that's the plan I think.  It's just like Classic, if you wanted Mac OS 9 faster, you would simply be running OS 9, but the point wasn't to have two operating systems, but to instead make the transition easier.

hmmm... not available for use until 2004 ..... maybe its just a coiencidence that this is "The year of the notebook" cause not much will be happenin for the desktop.