As to the change, it makes you wonder about dual cores: one with Windows, one with OSX. Or Multi cores one with Linux and one with OSX and one Windows. Then there will never be a s/w tool you can not run.

I was absolutely sure the x86 rumours were false. I mean, who would have thought that was seriously planned?

The feeling from WWDC is that the transition will basically be a non-issue. The hardware won’t matter. MacOSX will Just Take Care of It™ so it really doesn’t matter what the chip is. This could be much smoother than the 68k-PPC transition.

Or, you know, don’t use them. Roll your own code. And update/port/migrate that code on your own.

However, people don’t stay rational. They freak out about “but – why would I buy a G5 now, if they’re moving to Intel?” – Apple’s moving future machines to Intel. They’re not disabling the G5 in a machine you buy 6 months from now…

I’d guess Apple’s going to have to come up with some generic performance numbers to market machines with over the next year, so you will only care about system performance, and not the logo on the chip. That should be interesting to watch unfold…

Whoever thought of the switch to be real. Clearly mapped out, coming to a conclusion that it would boost sales. A lot of people though that Macintosh was like a brother, being ”different” than the rest of corporate America. Well let me be the first to say, along with the proof (intel switch) that Macintosh is nothing more than a money grubbing company like any other. They cut corners off of circles but they were genius in making you think otherwise. Your loyalty was their profit from the ground up. If you are going to buy a Mac, buy it because you want the Mac, not because you want to boycott windows, and certainly not to support the Underdog.