Posted on 07/06/2005 11:43:55 AM PDT by Panerai
It's rare that one gets to watch grand strategy played out right before one's eyes. Apple's decision to switch from IBM to Intel as its microprocessor supplier is one of those moments in corporate history.
Apple, particularly after the home-run it hit with the iPod, is seen as a threat by Sony and Microsoft. Both companies have tapped IBM as their supplier for next-generation game consoles, a market that is bigger than personal computing and booming. That gave them far greater leverage than Apple in guiding IBM's PowerPC road map, a situation that Apple couldn't tolerate.
At the same time, Intel saw itself being reduced to a supplier of commodity chips for products built to run Microsoft's Windows operating system, with little prospect of the kind of product differentiation that justifies higher margins. Intel's Itanium effort collapsed in the face of AMD's 64-bit, x86-compatible Opteron. With Apple as a customer, Intel no longer has to wait for approval from Redmond to innovate.
(Excerpt) Read more at it-director.com ...
Yet another Mac/Intel ping
Windows will eventually be run as a virus on a Mac/Intel platform.......
I thought Apple used Motorola to manufacture their chips.
The Power PC was a joint effort between IBM, Apple and Motorola though mostly based on IBM's architecture.
I remember the joint architecture agreement, but I though Motorola was the "supplier" (to use the author's word). IBM doesn't build or supply chips do they?
Does this mean I'll be able to use some future version of OS X on my computers?
LOL
Currently, IBM does supply the PowerPC G5 chips for most of Apple's desktop computers - the PowerMac and the iMac.
Freescale, which was spun-off from Motorola's semiconductor divison, supplys the PowerPC G4 chips for Apple's portable computers, and the eMac and the Mac mini.
I think you were referring to Apple boxes, but I remember reading some time ago that IBM manufactured more chips than anyone. Dunno the specs on this..
LOL!
Freescale, which was spun-off from Motorola's semiconductor divison, supplys the PowerPC G4 chips for Apple's portable computers, and the eMac and the Mac mini.
I guess I misunderstood IBM's role in the G5. Since I'm not a Mac user I don't keep up with Apple's business decisions. Thanks for the info.
Yikes... but that would only apply to executable files that access hardware directly, right? Wouldn't apply to viruses that rely on the Windows API, even if they shared the same processor platform with Apple. Right?
No, according to Apple. They have no plans to license OSX. You'd still have to buy a Mac to run it.
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
"Intel's Itanium effort collapsed in the face of AMD's 64-bit, x86-compatible Opteron."
IOW, Apple will eventually switch to AMD -- unless they get smart and dump Steve Jobs instead.
I'm not so sure about that. Intel must have something in the pipeline that Apple likes, possibly the Yonah chip (dual core Pentium M.) Yonah is going to be introduced in January 2006, which fits in perfectly with Apple's transition timeline.
Dell has talked about giving buyers the option to have OSX loaded on their Dell systems.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
Dell said they would be willing to sexx OSX, they dont however have any choice over Apple allowing them to do so..
That sounds right. Jobs was harping on thermal efficiency, so he definitely couldn't have been talking about a P4. I was a bit shocked at the announcement, wondering why anybody would go for the dead-end P4 architecture, but then I thought about how the Pentium M is doing. The first thing I see happening is dumping the G4 for the Mac Mini.
BTW, I have a 1.6 GHz Pentium M in my laptop, and it's pretty peppy. It's the first Intel chip I've really liked since the Pentium Pro.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.