Forums | MacLife

Onanum wrote:

ibm StinkPad

That's funny , I refer to my Dell as my Smell.

Last edited by thume (2005-06-07 9:55 am)

I would expect to see Intel inside the laptops first because thats where the greatest need is right now.

macfiend wrote:

i agree..i hate to think my 4month old powerbook will soon be obsolete but, ill definately have to plunk down some cash to get my hands on a true POWERBOOK

imagine no more comparing apples to orange, just brute force now..

no argument about hardware just OS vs OS.

There will always be comparisons with hardware.... always have been, always will be.

OSXDave wrote:

Cyberpawz wrote:

macfiend wrote:

i agree..i hate to think my 4month old powerbook will soon be obsolete but, ill definately have to plunk down some cash to get my hands on a true POWERBOOK

imagine no more comparing apples to orange, just brute force now..

no argument about hardware just OS vs OS.

There will always be comparisons with hardware.... always have been, always will be.

Joy AMD vs Intel threads galore.... maybe someone should update the sticky pre-emptively.

*smirks* that and how the PC will have more stuff for it still unless someone decides to make the drivers for the Mac now since it's going with the x86 base processor...

OSXDave wrote:

Cyberpawz wrote:

OSXDave wrote:

Joy AMD vs Intel threads galore.... maybe someone should update the sticky pre-emptively.

*smirks* that and how the PC will have more stuff for it still unless someone decides to make the drivers for the Mac now since it's going with the x86 base processor...

Actually the Darwin / NetBSD/ FreeBSD x86 driver support isn't that bad.  I imagine that driver support in a years time will not be much of an issue.  It'll be nice to be able to purchase a video card that doesn't charge a price premium just because it's Mac.

The kicker is software, always will be.  The new Intel Macs will be able to run Windows natively.  Why would you want to?  *games*

Allow me to pimp my own thread:

http://www.macaddict.com/forums/topic/62623

Pimp away, but I'll respond here...

Games is damned right... Now we won't have to wait for the "Mac Release".  My only question is how well will Windows work on an Intel Processor Mac system?

Cyberpawz wrote:

OSXDave wrote:

Cyberpawz wrote:

*smirks* that and how the PC will have more stuff for it still unless someone decides to make the drivers for the Mac now since it's going with the x86 base processor...

Actually the Darwin / NetBSD/ FreeBSD x86 driver support isn't that bad.  I imagine that driver support in a years time will not be much of an issue.  It'll be nice to be able to purchase a video card that doesn't charge a price premium just because it's Mac.

The kicker is software, always will be.  The new Intel Macs will be able to run Windows natively.  Why would you want to?  *games*

Allow me to pimp my own thread:

http://www.macaddict.com/forums/topic/62623

Pimp away, but I'll respond here...

Games is damned right... Now we won't have to wait for the "Mac Release".  My only question is how well will Windows work on an Intel Processor Mac system?

Just as well, or *ahem* poorly as it does on any other piece of x86 hardware. If the classic or "Beige Box" mode is attempted you may see a minor performance hit - Mostly to increase memory requirements Video game running on windows running on OS X.  You may not have speedy DMA controls or some other such nonsense - the compatibility layer would have to "ask" OS X to use the resource.  Kinda like running a game in classic.  Try running American Mcgee's alice in classic on a 1Ghz G4 w/ 512 MB of RAM.  Not that much of a performance hit really.

However, with the ability to dual boot Windows / OSX - you could just run the games natively on apple's hardware.  However - a seamless transition - or mostly seamless, like classic would not only provide a bridge for switchers (use all of your old software) but would also get q few more game developers on board.

The real trick is, for apple to double its installed user base (right now it's at 16%) 30% is the magic number.  That's when every developer jumps on the bandwagon.

If you could get most games / apps that were Apple / Intel native and only 10% had to run in "Beige Box" mode - why would you buy a windows machine?

Other than the ability to choose which hardware components go in the box?

Which isn;t too difficult for us mac users now - xlr8yourmac.com currently has a list of compatible hardware - w/ apple moving to intel that list will expand drastically.  Plus with the Darwin x86 port and the plethora of x86 drivers available for other BSD variants.  I imagine that beige box Macs will emerge - as a hombrew frankenstien, Apple can prevent off the shelf OSX from installing via a simple apple system profiler check.

A simple kernel replacement or system profiler spoof could allow this, easily.

Unless of course Apple uses Intel DRM to prevent any unauthorized install.....

macfiend wrote:

where do you get the 16% user base? if youre talking share of the computer market its like at 2% or something around there...

http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/5933/

I'm referring to installed userbase.  Not market share.  Marketshare is measured quarterly by sales volume.

If Macs arent offered in Kerplackistan & total system purchase were 5PC's running SCO then SCO would have 100% market share in Kerplackistan.  For that quarter. But if the next quarter Apple starts selling in Kerplackistan & they sell 40 machines, SCO sells 10, & Dell sells 50, that gives apple a 40% market share, SCO a 10% market share & Dell at 50%.  But SCO's installed userbase is 14%.

Basically it's a calculation of apple systems sold during the useful life (4 year average)/ total systems (Macs & PC's) sold during the useful life.

You could play games & say Apple's have a use ful life of 6 years while PC's only 3.  But that's not very honest.

  That's why Apple's market share has been as high as 12%, some times as low as 2%.  In some cases apple's market share could go down even if they sold more computers - especially in a strong economy.

Last edited by OSXDave (2005-06-07 3:58 pm)

macfiend wrote:

i agree..i hate to think my 4month old powerbook will soon be obsolete but, ill definately have to plunk down some cash to get my hands on a true POWERBOOK

Pffft! My 6 year-old Pismo is about to become obsolete. At least that ittle run the last PPC OS that Apple creates before the end! (Last PPC OS for the time being)

I'm more concerned about my tower. I have a lot of money invested in my tower. Ittle be worth nothing when I come to sell it. What is worse, is that the components are not going to be compatible, maybe only the DVD burner, but by then ittle be Blue Ray.

Intel Inside, ittle happen this year. The hardware can't be as difficult to produce as a G5, but Apple will want to refine it a bit from the crude Dell crap...

rahulvk wrote:

It has been already clarified by apple executives before the switch to intel that PPC chipsets will not become obsolete.  Instead, all application will be ported over into what apple calls a universal binary allowing a program to run on both the PPC and x86 environments.  The only thing that will most likely become obsolete with the coming of the intel mac is classic os v.9.  Apple executives have already clarified that it is not "very high on the priority list" to make classic applications compatible on the new mactel systems.  Also, most people speculate that  since a compatibility engine is already in place code name Rosetta, there will be no distinct need for companies to hurrey into making universal binary versions of their software for the intel macs.  The Rosetta program will be able to emulate a G3 processor limiting the ability of a user to use any program needing a G4 or G5 processor apart from OS X.  Though those applications will work, it will allow apps that you could run on PPC OS X to run on x86 OS X.  Most people believe that there will be a significant slow down in those apps as a G3 processor only has so much power.  It is believed that most apps will be ready by the time the final crossover is made with the Powermac in 2007.  So I advise those who are in the market to buy an apple computer to buy if you need it, and if not, wait 6 months and gauge how much you need it at that point.  I would expect that the updates will go mac mini, iBook, eMac, iMac, Powerbook, Powermac.  Likely the powerbook line will see a large bump with the upcoming release of the intel "Yonah" processor line.  But, it is not expected to hit lap tops for some time, so if your looking to buy a powerbook and you are fed up with your current system, mac or windows, i'd say buy.  On all the others, I think waiting will pay off for you.  Likely all the desktop style systems will find huge speed jumps though you won't be able to truly use the power till all the apps are ported over.  If your strapped for cash, wait because the intel mac will likely be cheaper.  If you are a gamer, wait for the intel mac.  If you are an average user or an artist of some kind(at heart we all are) then definetly buy.

Link?