Comments on: Apple on Intel? Not likely. http://www.darcynorman.net/2005/06/04/apple-on-intel-not-likely/ apparently much happier in person Sat, 21 Nov 2009 05:03:04 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Bill K. http://www.darcynorman.net/2005/06/04/apple-on-intel-not-likely/#comment-79912 Bill K. Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000 #comment-79912 The WSJ is confirming this announcement: http://billkosloskymd.typepad.com/wirelessdoc/2005/06/wall_street_jou.html The WSJ is confirming this announcement:

http://billkosloskymd.typepad.com/wirelessdoc/2005/06/wall_street_jou.html

]]> By: D'Arcy http://www.darcynorman.net/2005/06/04/apple-on-intel-not-likely/#comment-79913 D'Arcy Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000 #comment-79913 I can't read the article on WSJ, because it's subscriber-only, but the brief abstract blurb sounds like an echo of the CNET "article" - which didn't list any sources, so is basically a rumour being printed as fact. If anyone can link to the full text of the WSJ article, it would help. Do they list sources, or do they just say "Apple is expected to..." - expected by whom? Scoble? CNET? Steve Jobs? Slashdot? I can’t read the article on WSJ, because it’s subscriber-only, but the brief abstract blurb sounds like an echo of the CNET “article” – which didn’t list any sources, so is basically a rumour being printed as fact.

If anyone can link to the full text of the WSJ article, it would help. Do they list sources, or do they just say “Apple is expected to…” – expected by whom? Scoble? CNET? Steve Jobs? Slashdot?

]]> By: D'Arcy http://www.darcynorman.net/2005/06/04/apple-on-intel-not-likely/#comment-79914 D'Arcy Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000 #comment-79914 The "industry executive familiar with the matter" could well be Scoble. Unless the WSJ names names, it's just speculation. The “industry executive familiar with the matter” could well be Scoble. Unless the WSJ names names, it’s just speculation.

]]> By: King Chung Huang http://www.darcynorman.net/2005/06/04/apple-on-intel-not-likely/#comment-79915 King Chung Huang Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000 #comment-79915 "Apple on Intel" doesn't have to mean x86 processors. I think it's more plausible for Intel to start producing processors that support the PowerPC ISA than for Apple to transition to a processor using the x86 ISA. After all, Intel is a very capable semiconductor manufacturer and IBM's been pushing the adoption of Power-based technologies lately with stuff like power.org and the PowerPC licensing program. In any case, Monday's keynote should be very interesting, as always! :) “Apple on Intel” doesn’t have to mean x86 processors. I think it’s more plausible for Intel to start producing processors that support the PowerPC ISA than for Apple to transition to a processor using the x86 ISA. After all, Intel is a very capable semiconductor manufacturer and IBM’s been pushing the adoption of Power-based technologies lately with stuff like power.org and the PowerPC licensing program. In any case, Monday’s keynote should be very interesting, as always! :)

]]> By: D'Arcy http://www.darcynorman.net/2005/06/04/apple-on-intel-not-likely/#comment-79916 D'Arcy Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000 #comment-79916 Yeah. I could see Intel making a G5 (licensed from Apple). That might even make sense, assuming they've solved the heat problem for higher performance chips - that's seemed to stump the best folks at both IBM and Motorola so far. But Apple switching to x86 is what the rumours appear to be saying (or assuming in the lack of actual information), and that's what I was trying to say is just plain silly. Monday morning will definitely be interesting. Wonder if they'll be allowing cameras inside this years :-) Yeah. I could see Intel making a G5 (licensed from Apple). That might even make sense, assuming they’ve solved the heat problem for higher performance chips – that’s seemed to stump the best folks at both IBM and Motorola so far.

But Apple switching to x86 is what the rumours appear to be saying (or assuming in the lack of actual information), and that’s what I was trying to say is just plain silly.

Monday morning will definitely be interesting. Wonder if they’ll be allowing cameras inside this years :-)

]]> By: what is nailchipper? » Blog Archive » Mac OS X: http://www.darcynorman.net/2005/06/04/apple-on-intel-not-likely/#comment-79917 what is nailchipper? » Blog Archive » Mac OS X: Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000 #comment-79917 [...] [...] [...] [...]

]]> By: what is nailchipper? » Blog Archive » Mac OS X: http://www.darcynorman.net/2005/06/04/apple-on-intel-not-likely/#comment-79918 what is nailchipper? » Blog Archive » Mac OS X: Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000 #comment-79918 [...] The past 4 years have been a testing bed for what Apple planning on doing all along: to make a comeback. Microsoft has become fat and stagnant, creating the perfect opportunity for Apple to break ahead while the competition is weak. Microsoft has lost sight of what people want, and instead fills its operating systems with features that no one uses – for example, DCOM. Companies like Google and Yahoo have demonstrated that a company needs to listen to its loyal consumer base and give its users features that excite (Google Maps, Spotlight, Exposé ). A bit of eye candy doesn’t hurt, but don’t be tacky (Windows XP). Apple has proven itself (Tiger); Microsoft has not (Vista). Smaller companies have lead; Microsoft has not. Microsoft has been losing top executives and developers to younger and fresher companies. Almost every month a top ranking person leaves Microsoft. What would be more appropriate than for Apple to begin unraveling Microsoft? Apple has positioned itself to take over the PC market by allying itself with the largest PC processor manufacturer in the world, Intel. They now need a computer manufacturer, like Dell or HP, to package their proven Mac OS X operating system. If this happens then Apple will not need a "switch" campaign. The system will sell itself. PC users have oogled at Mac OS X for so long that a switch would prove easier than ever before. We are beginning to see a new era in Apple. A slimmer, more agile Apple that is no longer bound to or by its hardware or its hardware manufacturer. [...] [...] The past 4 years have been a testing bed for what Apple planning on doing all along: to make a comeback. Microsoft has become fat and stagnant, creating the perfect opportunity for Apple to break ahead while the competition is weak. Microsoft has lost sight of what people want, and instead fills its operating systems with features that no one uses – for example, DCOM. Companies like Google and Yahoo have demonstrated that a company needs to listen to its loyal consumer base and give its users features that excite (Google Maps, Spotlight, Exposé ). A bit of eye candy doesn’t hurt, but don’t be tacky (Windows XP). Apple has proven itself (Tiger); Microsoft has not (Vista). Smaller companies have lead; Microsoft has not. Microsoft has been losing top executives and developers to younger and fresher companies. Almost every month a top ranking person leaves Microsoft. What would be more appropriate than for Apple to begin unraveling Microsoft? Apple has positioned itself to take over the PC market by allying itself with the largest PC processor manufacturer in the world, Intel. They now need a computer manufacturer, like Dell or HP, to package their proven Mac OS X operating system. If this happens then Apple will not need a "switch" campaign. The system will sell itself. PC users have oogled at Mac OS X for so long that a switch would prove easier than ever before. We are beginning to see a new era in Apple. A slimmer, more agile Apple that is no longer bound to or by its hardware or its hardware manufacturer. [...]

]]> By: Gardner http://www.darcynorman.net/2005/06/04/apple-on-intel-not-likely/#comment-79919 Gardner Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000 #comment-79919 My point is that it doesn't pay to take Apple's assurances or apparent ethos at face value.... I'll be good now. ;-) My point is that it doesn’t pay to take Apple’s assurances or apparent ethos at face value…. I’ll be good now. ;-)

]]> By: Gardner http://www.darcynorman.net/2005/06/04/apple-on-intel-not-likely/#comment-79920 Gardner Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000 #comment-79920 Fascinating to see this post come up in the "similar posts" column with your post on the new G5 boxes. And you *still* think iTunes U ain't so nefarious after all? ;-) Fascinating to see this post come up in the “similar posts” column with your post on the new G5 boxes. And you *still* think iTunes U ain’t so nefarious after all? ;-)

]]> By: D'Arcy http://www.darcynorman.net/2005/06/04/apple-on-intel-not-likely/#comment-79921 D'Arcy Wed, 31 Dec 1969 17:00:00 +0000 #comment-79921 Not sure what's nefarious about this... Shiny new hardware is never a bad thing :-) Not sure what’s nefarious about this… Shiny new hardware is never a bad thing :-)

]]>