Crazy like a fox, and the fox is in the proverbial henhouse. If you take the latest Intel announcement at face value, the roadmap for Intel chips is better suited to Apple future products. Well, what are those products? Apple does not like to talk about future products, but we sure do. Read on…
Crazy like a fox, and the fox is in the proverbial henhouse. If you take the latest Intel announcement at face value, the roadmap for Intel chips is better suited to Apple future products. Well, what are those products? Apple does not like to talk about future products, but we sure do.
If Apple makes a computer with an Intel processor inside, this box is going to be more like a PC and less like a PowerMac. What does that do for Apple? Well it could cut costs some. Big deal. It certainly adds to development costs for OS X, so why not just make sure OS X runs on PC?s that are out there already. They will be pretty damn close and I see no reason not to do it once OS X runs on Intel. Those PC boxes are already capable of running multiple OS?s. Windows XP, Windows 2000 and Linux to name a few. If OS X is going to break out and justify its development costs, this is certainly one way to do it. Longhorn is late. Microsoft software is bloated and buggy. Security problems are endless. Why not sell OS X in a big way and capitalize on the monopoly bloat. Switchers will hardly have to switch.
This will make more work for Apple developers. Yes, but less work for Windows software developers. There is plenty of software for the Mac, when you look at major applications like Photography, Desktop Publishing, Office Productivity, but what about all those little specialty applications. Almost never is there a Mac version. Now that might change.
What about running Windows programs on a Mac. Sure, just buy Virtual PC software from Microsoft along with a version of Windows. You run slowly and in emulation. What about just running Windows applications directly in OS X. Not beyond the realm of possibility. Why not just keep the PowerPC chips for servers, where there are fewer issues with software compatibility. Doesn?t IBM look at these chips for servers and don?t they run great on Xserve? Why not use the IBM Cell chip for future appliance type products. Keeping all options open is looking pretty good, and open source development certainly helps.
iTunes and Quicktime software runs on Windows. iPhoto and iMovie will be next. Safari Web browser, why not? Then, just eliminate the need to run Windows. I see this as an effective strategy for gaining market share for OS X. Just cut another deal with HP for desktops running OS X and count the switchers.
Steve Jobs has gotten into the henhouse before. Apple bought his Next OS and let him right in. What did he do? He took over. Then he revamped hardware while the real changes took place to the OS. I have always contended that I like Apple because of the great software and not so much for the hardware. While this move is ostensibly a hardware based decision, don’t you believe it.
Kiss the Classic OS goodbye. Oh, and if Apple does not sue some more John Does and subpoena CNET for this leak, then they are hypocrites!