abcnews.go.com/Technology/ZDM/story?id=1491395

Enough for this mac user to get a new one.

A good direction.

But my eMac 700 that I have been running since 2002 is still fine....I went to it after my 7200 went t/u, which I got as an upgrade for my performa 512 that I clocked up to 33mhz from 25 mhz.  I ain't due for a new mac till 2008-10 or so.

I just got a 15" PowerBook in September (along with a 60GB iPod) and they've been FLAWLESS.  Never thought I'd find something that would displace my beloved ThinkPads but this did it with ease.

Yup, drooling over the announced new ones but can't justify it right now.  I'll sit back and see what kind of teething problems arise, let the developers catch up and will probably upgrade next year.

For gods sake wait 3-6 months for them to get the bugs out.  the first Gen apples are ALLWAYS buggy.
(I am an apple cert hardware dude.) once they get the first few problems worked out they are good to go usally. (few procs on the G5's have gone bad and a MB or two.) but watch the first ones out.

Quoted: I just got a 15" PowerBook in September (along with a 60GB iPod) and they've been FLAWLESS.  Never thought I'd find something that would displace my beloved ThinkPads but this did it with ease. Yup, drooling over the announced new ones but can't justify it right now.  I'll sit back and see what kind of teething problems arise, let the developers catch up and will probably upgrade next year.

I doubt there will be that much in the way of “teething problems” or no more than normal… Apple has been running OSX for years on Intel so it should be pretty solid. Software will be the thing that takes awhile to catch up but by the time you are ready there should be a hell of a selection of old programs and new software.

It was amusing to see Jobs touting the new Intel machines were 3 times faster than G5 Mac’s considering the assaults in the past by Apple on how slow Intel processors were/are.

In my view that's the end of Apple as a differentiated entity.  (And, I'm a MAC user).  There will no longer be any difference between them and any other Intel (formerly running Windows) machine running a  properly shelled UNIX, whether it be Linux or some new developer.

Some may argue that the previous advantage in, say, graphics that MAC had, has been overcome.  This may be true.  

Quoted: In my view that's the end of Apple as a differentiated entity.  (And, I'm a MAC user).  There will no longer be any difference between them and any other Intel (formerly running Windows) machine running a  properly shelled UNIX, whether it be Linux or some new developer. Some may argue that the previous advantage in, say, graphics that MAC had, has been overcome.  This may be true.

As long as OSX is around it will be good.

I've had a reliable and stable operating system on my Intel based PC for a while now.

Ubuntu Linux. :)

Since Mac OS X is BSD derived, Linux is a cousin.

In all fairness, my Win XP box hasn't been too bad either, I installed in Fall 2003 and it's still running just fine.  I think my best uptime was about 20 days.

Jim

Can it use XP?



I want to use that power.

I'm thinking the only word that matters is "Yippie"

I mean it's durn near perfect right ?

And it runs OSX right ?

Of course it'll also run WinXP

And it's got a better video card than I can get in a Dell

yeah the word is Yippie

That will be my next computer.

Hopfully by the time I get it they will have a bit more powerful Grafics.

the X1600 isn't worth replacing my X700 laptop.

And I will have Xp on it

Quoted: I guess you could say that the war is nearly over.   Apple switches to Intel.

Apple switched from an IBM processor to an Intel Processor.  What was the war ... why is it over?  The war has always been Mac vs. Windoze ... I have been a Mac user since the 128K machine in 1984 and don't really care whose processor is in the machine.  Apple's Operating System and award winning hardware designs will remain the same.  Unless you select ABOUT THIS MAC under the Apple Menu you will have no idea whether there is an IBM or Intel processor in the machine.  The processor has nothing to do with the Mac Experience ...it's all about the Operating system.

No Mac are More or less PCs. now that they use  X86 processors.

It wont be long before you will be able to use PC video cards and whatnot with the use of PCI express

I put Windows 2000 Pro on my computers.


No issues .

Its been literally bulletproof in every computer I run it on.  I'm pretty impressed with it actually.



Having said all that I love Apple/Mac.  First 'system' I used.  I just can't get myself to switch over and lose all my Windows stuff (not necessarily the programs) I've accumulated over the years.





edit: clarifimification

Quoted: No Mac are More or less PCs. now that they use  X86 processors. It wont be long before you will be able to use PC video cards and whatnot with the use of PCI express

Actually ... Mac's have always been PC's  (Personal Computers) ...

There is no guarantee that the final revision of the Mac Towers will use an industry standard MotherBoard.  Apple has from Day 1 designed and engineered there own Mother Boards.  Right now people are only guessing based on the handful of Intel Developer machines that are out there.  These may have just been slapped together machines using a standard Intel Motherboard so developers could get there Universal Binaries out to market.

I truly hope Apple standardizes on everything and gets a top of the line Quad Processor Intel tower in the stores for $999 .... That would be a beautiful thing.  However,  as you can see by the prices of the machines announced today .. it appears the prices may remain the same ....

I'm really starting to like apple computers.  My next laptop may well be one.  The OS is much more stable, and safer, not to mention OSX is just flippin' awesome.  If the IT guy where I work is right, most Windows programs can be run on an OSX computer if it is running a windows simulation program up to and including games, in that case there is really no reason to go with a windows PC aside from hardware.

Quoted: Actually ... Mac's have always been PC's  (Personal Computers) ...

but they will never be a peecee.
 

Mac OSX may end up being the ultimate Trojan Horse virus to infect the PC world. In less than 24 months I imagine Microsoft may be out of the OS business. Kind of like Neo and Mr Anderson.

Quoted: Mac OSX may end up being the ultimate Trojan Horse virus to infect the PC world. In less than 24 months I imagine Microsoft may be out of the OS business. Kind of like Neo and Mr Anderson. images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/gallery/1127201/photo_05.jpg

No there's no good games for OSX.

Quoted: Quoted: Mac OSX may end up being the ultimate Trojan Horse virus to infect the PC world. In less than 24 months I imagine Microsoft may be out of the OS business. Kind of like Neo and Mr Anderson. images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/gallery/1127201/photo_05.jpg No there's no good games for OSX.

But now that it's running on x86, it won't be that hard to port games. Plus, there's always dual-booting.

There's only two compelling reasons to run Msoft, for the games and for the Msoft business apps. If Apple can hack up a decent emulator or virtual pc for the business apps, Windows is dead.

Quoted: But now that it's running on x86, it won't be that hard to port games. Plus, there's always dual-booting. There's only two compelling reasons to run Msoft, for the games and for the Msoft business apps. If Apple can hack up a decent emulator or virtual pc for the business apps, Windows is dead.

1. Game and Application companies aren't porting to Linux-X86 which is now an arguably larger market the OSX. They can't justify the extra development cost for the tiny market increase.

2. OSX will never make inroads on to the corporate deskop. Corporations have too much time and $ invested in the Wintel platform and in legacy applications to ever justify an expensive switch.

Looks like they rock. The laptop is competitively priced--there's a premium of perhaps a few hundred bucks for nice design and the iLife apps, which are clearly worth it, if for nothing else avoiding all the virus crap on windows.

I expect that the pirates will have OSX for generic intel boxes rigged up in fairly short order, and there shouldn't be any problem running XP on the Apple hardware.

Quoted: Quoted: But now that it's running on x86, it won't be that hard to port games. Plus, there's always dual-booting. There's only two compelling reasons to run Msoft, for the games and for the Msoft business apps. If Apple can hack up a decent emulator or virtual pc for the business apps, Windows is dead. 1. Game and Application companies aren't porting to Linux-X86 which is now an arguably larger market the OSX. They can't justify the extra development cost for the tiny market increase. 2. OSX will never make inroads on to the corporate deskop. Corporations have too much time and $ invested in the Wintel platform and in legacy applications to ever justify an expensive switch.

Doom 3, America's Army,  UK2k4 or 5, just to name a few recent that, out of the box, ran on linux. The linux market is a market of people who get most of their stuff for free. The Apple market is a bunch of people that pay a premium for a good product. Vastly different.

I'm not saying OSX will necessarily make inroads on the corporate desktop. But for guys that work with windows and Corporate apps it'll make it easier to switch their personal machines or laptops. I've been off linux for months because I have a job where I need to work with a whole bunch of Msoft apps. Get me a good way to run them in virtual PC inside of OSX, and you might have a deal.

Coming from the software side, fast hardware is great, nifty etc but software is the name of the game; without software, a computer is a boat anchor whether it is a multi-million dollar mainframe or desktop.  For everytime software title that runs on an Apple machine, expect 10-20 competing versions for the Windows/Intel platform.

Quoted: Coming from the software side, fast hardware is great, nifty etc but software is the name of the game; without software, a computer is a boat anchor whether it is a multi-million dollar mainframe or desktop.  For everytime software title that runs on an Apple machine, expect 10-20 competing versions for the Windows/Intel platform.

The software is the killer app for Apple: OSX and iLife do 90% of what home users need day to day and do it infinitely better than in windows.

Quoted: I guess you could say that the war is nearly over.   Apple switches to Intel.

How is it over when Microsoft recently switched to PowerPC's?  Does Microsoft even make anything now that has a CPU that doesn't use a PowerPC CPU?z

Quoted: Coming from the software side, fast hardware is great, nifty etc but software is the name of the game; without software, a computer is a boat anchor whether it is a multi-million dollar mainframe or desktop.  For everytime software title that runs on an Apple machine, expect 10-20 competing versions for the Windows/Intel platform.

mainframes are boat anchors reguardless.
 <--- the opensystems admin

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Mac OSX may end up being the ultimate Trojan Horse virus to infect the PC world. In less than 24 months I imagine Microsoft may be out of the OS business. Kind of like Neo and Mr Anderson. images.rottentomatoes.com/images/movie/gallery/1127201/photo_05.jpg No there's no good games for OSX. But now that it's running on x86, it won't be that hard to port games. Plus, there's always dual-booting. There's only two compelling reasons to run Msoft, for the games and for the Msoft business apps. If Apple can hack up a decent emulator or virtual pc for the business apps, Windows is dead.

Not when their productsa cost almost 50% more on average and are nowhere in the realm of value like you get when you self build a PC, Still way too limited for the $$$$ they want for em.

Quoted: Not when their productsa cost almost 50% more on average and are nowhere in the realm of value like you get when you self build a PC, Still way too limited for the $$$$ they want for em.

If you're more concerned about bang for the buck and you're building your own machines then you're not the target market.  

I built my linux box myself, but the last thing I want to do when I get home is screw around with another PC problem.  I get more than enough of that at work.  I bought a Mac a few years ago and it works great.  

Honestly, if I can get something like VMware running on OSX so I can shell out to run XP when I need to, I would!

That day might come.

I'm a PC guy but I want something that is easy to use and not have to worry about virus this or spyware that.

i have a 15 inch powerbook G4 and it has been acting real bad lately..it crashes everytime i open safari and sometimes when itunes is running

I'd be perfectly happy to see Microsoft turn over Windows to Apple and tell them to "Fix it!" and see Apple do that. Windows that works right and runs fast and doesn't crap out. That'd be ideal.

 Its Here and Its called OSX

Quoted: Honestly, if I can get something like VMware running on OSX so I can shell out to run XP when I need to, I would! That day might come. I'm a PC guy but I want something that is easy to use and not have to worry about virus this or spyware that.

It's called Virtual PC and it works quite well.

How different/similar is the new Apple Intel CPU from the PC Intel/AMD CPUs? is it based on the x86 instruction set?

if so, can we use the new Apple OS on our PCs? Steve Jobs can find a way to stick it to the man (Gates) with an Apple OS for PCs...

Quoted: How different/similar is the new Apple Intel CPU from the PC Intel/AMD CPUs? is it based on the x86 instruction set? if so, can we use the new Apple OS on our PCs? Steve Jobs can find a way to stick it to the man (Gates) with an Apple OS for PCs...

Folks were able to crack the Developer release of Mac OSX for Intel and install in on standard Intel Based PC's ...

Apple has added measures into the OS itself that make it only possible to run on their specific motherboard ... some sort of special chip on the motherboard supposedly.  I'm sure soon or later it will be cracked.  

However,  Windows XP will install and run just fine on an Apple Macintosh now ....  So it isn't Microsoft getting screwed ... it is Sony, Dell, Gateway, HP, etc ....

Quoted: How different/similar is the new Apple Intel CPU from the PC Intel/AMD CPUs? is it based on the x86 instruction set? if so, can we use the new Apple OS on our PCs? Steve Jobs can find a way to stick it to the man (Gates) with an Apple OS for PCs...

reviews.zdnet.co.uk/software/os/0,39024180,39235916,00.htm

The answer is yes, sort of...but not with Apple's blessing.

The other way makes more sense:

Apple PC w/ XP playing the latest games.

::drools uncontrollably::

I might just have to get one of these in a few months or so to replace the old iBook (5 years old, and still running strong, if a little slower then the new stuff)

I just bought a new iMac in Sept....kinda mad that I could have waited a few months for a intel dual core....*mumbles*


And anyone who talks of such heresy as installing XP on a mac as the main os should be hung then dragged behind a truck then shot then burned then tossed into the river.....

Quoted: Quoted: Coming from the software side, fast hardware is great, nifty etc but software is the name of the game; without software, a computer is a boat anchor whether it is a multi-million dollar mainframe or desktop.  For everytime software title that runs on an Apple machine, expect 10-20 competing versions for the Windows/Intel platform. The software is the killer app for Apple: OSX and iLife do 90% of what home users need day to day and do it infinitely better than in windows.

Yea right...

And Apple only does it "better" for 1 1/2 to 3 times the price... until Apple can produce a sub $500 PC with monitor, mouse, and keyboard they are going to suffer from the problem they have always had... overpriced hardware.

If anybody can screw this up Apple can and they had a good first step this week. Coming out first with a $1300 iMac makes no damn sense… Apple should have come out of the box with a $500 machine targeted at the low end PC market but instead they come out with a iMac 90% of PC buyers will never take a look at due to its price.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Coming from the software side, fast hardware is great, nifty etc but software is the name of the game; without software, a computer is a boat anchor whether it is a multi-million dollar mainframe or desktop.  For everytime software title that runs on an Apple machine, expect 10-20 competing versions for the Windows/Intel platform. The software is the killer app for Apple: OSX and iLife do 90% of what home users need day to day and do it infinitely better than in windows. Yea right... And Apple only does "better" it for 2-3 times the price... until Apple can produce a sub $500 PC with monitor, mouse, and keyboard they are going to suffer from the problem they have always had... overpriced hardware. If anybody can screw this up Apple can and they had a good first step this week. Coming out first with a $1300 iMac makes no damn sense… Apple should have come out of the box with a $500 machine targeted at the low end PC market but instead they come out with a iMac 90% of PC buyers will never take a look at due to its price.

Sigh....the bottom feeders. Let me spell it out in layman's terms:

$500 PC = harbor freight

Apple = Craftsman

Some people pay for quality, others won't. The first time your system goes tits up and you spend five hours fixing it, expect to see a lot of people running for the Mac.

By the way, you can get a Mac Mini + shitty CRT + mouse + kbd for ~600.  Or you can get a crappy dell that has so much ad crap on it preinstalled that you won't be able to do anything. Sure, you can get a $4k mac. You can also get a $4k Dell XPS gaming machine, too. Why not compare apples to apples (terribly unintended pun). Apple laptops are feature for feature as competitive if not more than their PC counterparts. Haven't priced desktops in a while, though.

The same armchair CEO's said apple wouldn't succeed until they released a $99 ipod. Then when they released the shuffle complained it had no LCD.

Quoted: Sigh....the bottom feeders. Let me spell it out in layman's terms: $500 PC = harbor freight Apple = Craftsman Some people pay for quality, others won't. The first time your system goes tits up and you spend five hours fixing it, expect to see a lot of people running for the Mac. By the way, you can get a Mac Mini + shitty CRT + mouse + kbd for ~600.  Or you can get a crappy dell that has so much ad crap on it preinstalled that you won't be able to do anything. Sure, you can get a $4k mac. You can also get a $4k Dell XPS gaming machine, too. Why not compare apples to apples (terribly unintended pun). Apple laptops are feature for feature as competitive if not more than their PC counterparts. Haven't priced desktops in a while, though. The same armchair CEO's said apple wouldn't succeed until they released a $99 ipod. Then when they released the shuffle complained it had no LCD.

That is the prefect plan… if Apple wants to continue at 3% market share.

Quoted: Quoted: Sigh....the bottom feeders. Let me spell it out in layman's terms: $500 PC = harbor freight Apple = Craftsman Some people pay for quality, others won't. The first time your system goes tits up and you spend five hours fixing it, expect to see a lot of people running for the Mac. By the way, you can get a Mac Mini + shitty CRT + mouse + kbd for ~600.  Or you can get a crappy dell that has so much ad crap on it preinstalled that you won't be able to do anything. Sure, you can get a $4k mac. You can also get a $4k Dell XPS gaming machine, too. Why not compare apples to apples (terribly unintended pun). Apple laptops are feature for feature as competitive if not more than their PC counterparts. Haven't priced desktops in a while, though. The same armchair CEO's said apple wouldn't succeed until they released a $99 ipod. Then when they released the shuffle complained it had no LCD. That is the prefect plan… if Apple wants to continue at 3% market share.

Market share only serves a purpose if it leads to profit.

Take HP for instance, the number 2 PC manufacturer in terms of market share. Fourth quarter 2005 they made $200m on $7.1b in revenue. A pathetic 2.8% profit margin. But hey, they have a 30 odd % market share.

Dell is the #1 in market share and profit. I think it was also the only PC maker that made more profit than Apple last year.

$500 econoboxes do very little for a company, providing almost non existent profit margins. These systems are a low profit commodity. I'm sure Steve Jobs and Apple will be happy to leave the not for profit $500 econoboxes to others and instead try to give people a taste at that price with things like the mac mini, where they can still sustain good profits.

Then take a look at one of the other largest PC producers, Gateway. Made a $15m profit on revenues of over $1b in their last quarter (might have been the one before).

While Apple only has about 4 to 5% of the OS market share, Apple is in the top 10 in terms of annual market share in terms of units sold.

4 to 5% of annual market share is very respectable in any industry, especially when you are also one of the most profitable in that industry. I always find it amusing when people consider Apples position to be a bad thing. Obviously it would be nice for Apple to have a higher market share, but their business is very strong as it is and getting stronger, while most PC makers are struggling since they produce and sell undifferentiated commodities.

HAte on them if you have to but those things give me a boner.

I now know what my new laptop will be to replace my aging, Ibook.

1.83 Mhz?   My cell phone has more CPU power than that, and I'm talking about the old one I have out on a shelf in the garage that has it's own bag attached to it.

If apple wanted to increase it's market share, which it isn't(increasing their sales by 5% while the overall PC market increased by 13% means they are growing slower than everyone else and thus LOSING market share), there is a simple solution.  Price their product only 10% over competitor's PCs, make them offered with windows XP or OSX, and continue with the hip type of marketing, no PC bashing or BS performance claims.  And don't forget their profit numbers haven't been fixed yet like most of the larger PC companies.  Apple still provides stock options to the executives which don't have to show as expenses, while Dell, Microsoft, etc. have stopped options and moved to stock which shows as expenses in their annual report.  Meaning, after compensating for the stock options to execs, that small profit they made might not even really exist.

Apple has style and simplicity, that's the reason for their ipod success, their itunes success, and what computer market success they have attained.  The problem is that they need to make them more robust to compete head on with PCs.  More robust=less simplicity.  They should make themselves into two companies, an OS company and a PC company.  Market their style, and compete head to head with everyone else, and then market their OS and compete with Windows.  The PC platform is no longer a wintel dominated arena.  Don't get me wrong, Windows is a Microsoft monopoly that still causes some negative things for the consumer, but for a PC user to go Apple is like going back in time to the proprietary IBM PC days.  Currently you can buy PC products and processors from various companies and run multiple OSes on them.  Standards are designated by forums, sometimes competing, but they quickly work out which standard will stay.  And then manufacturers just adhere to the standards.  This is a very pro-consumer type of competitive model, and some day Apple needs to join it.  I know people that think some of the Apples look cool, but because they can't run all of their software on them and use all of their non-mainstream peripherals, it just isn't an option.  Then there is the fact you can buy a lot more PC for the $ than you can with an Apple.

The prices between Mac's and WIndoze PC's has never been closer ... especially Laptops where Apple can use beat name brands in performance, features and price ...

Oh ... and here are DELL's and Apple's top of the line Desktops ...  Note that Apple uses two Dual-Core processors  (which they advertise as a QUAD PROCESSOR)... DELL uses a Single Dual-Core processor ...  Of course these are IBM PowerPC processors so the performance will go up and price go down once they switch to Intel ...

Power Mac G5 Quad:
Two dual-core 2.5GHz PowerPC G5 processors
1.25GHz frontside bus per processor
1MB L2 cache per core
512MB of 533MHz DDR2 SDRAM (PC2-4200)
250GB Serial ATA hard drive
16x SuperDrive (double-layer)
NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GT with 256MB GDDR SDRAM

$3650.00

Dell XPS 600:
Pentium® Extreme Edition Dual Core w/ HT Tech (3.20GHz, 800FSB)
256MB Nvidia GeForce 7800 GTX
1GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz- 2 DIMMs
250GB Serial ATA Hard Drive (7200RPM)
Single Drive: 16X CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) w/double layer write capability

$3,028.00

I'm a long time Mac user (Macman37) but I still don't know what to make of this. Innovation is fine, naturally.

I guess it's the computing experience that makes me come back. I can't stand Windows - even XP, which is like "Bizarro OSX"...

FWIW (replying to an earlier post about Macs taking proprietary video cards) Macs have been using regular video cards for years now... I put a Radeon in my old Blue and White G3.

My FireWire Powerbook will celebrate its 6th anniversary this March... I suppose when it finally goes tangu uniform I could replace it with one of these new Intel Macs but need to research the software first. Hopefully my apps will work on both the G5 desktop as well as the Intel based ones...

I've got one of these on order at work, and we've talked extensively with our Apple guys about these machines.  Here's what we know:

Apps need to be ported to the new intel chips, or they need to run an emulator.  In english, until updated versions of software come out, your apps may not exactly run faster.  Perhaps the opposite.  I have no idea what this looks like, but I'm thinking about the "classic" can of worms and not liking the odds.

The OS is ready to go, most likely iLife too.  When running intel native software, they're apparently INCREDIBLE.

I don't know if this means XP on Apples or OS X on Dells.