The AP is now also reporting this story, with the usual disclaimers:

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/050605/apple_chips.html?.v=4

And Reuters too....

http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/050605/tech_...ntel.html?.v=1

Tomorrow should be an interesting day...

Looks like they're all reporting the same "root" story though. But 2007 for inel based powermacs? If they are changing, I don't think anyone can wait that long for new macs. If they are changing, it's got to be tomorrow with new hardware available by the end of this year.

I mean, really, it doesn't matter what processor or hardware Apple use as long as compatibility is ensured, no matter whether you're using old generation or new generation hardware, and that Apple do everything to make the move as absolutely seamless as possible.

Personally, I think that if a move to intel hardware could be made seamless, then they could move to ANY hardware seamlessly. Then, Apple could practically pick a new processor every week and all software would still work fine, and they'd be hardware agnostic (as long as it's made by Apple - I don't think they'll give that one up again.).

As is said, interesting times.....

It's not about what new thingt that gets introduced that matters, but HOW the introduction is made.

Graeme

Since they're saying the mini will be the first Intel machine, I wonder if Steve is planning a dual boot system? Get a copy of Windows, install, choose your OS. No more virtual PC. A cheap machine like that might be very popular.

Guess we'll find out tomorrow...

Doesn't matter to me at all. I was hoping Apple would go to the new cell based architecture and blow everyone away. If they go to the intel/amd core they become just another linux/bsd clone. No reason at all to pay those premiums.

And sorry Boyd, I rarely read area 51, didn't mean to cause problems.

Joe, I'm hoping that noone would have to pay the premiums. With the move to Intel, maybe the cost of a machine could come down?

I was hoping that they'd add cell to their lineup too - make the graphics stuff so much more insanely fast.

Aaron

Heh, anybody got a good recipe for crow to share with Graeme? ;-)

Yes, it's official: http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html

From some of the analysis I heard it sounds like laptops were a big factor in this decision. A 1.67ghz G4 just really doesn't cut it anymore. Should be interesting times ahead, this could certainly hurt sales while people are waiting for the new machines. But I'm sure the decision wasn't made lightly. I heard an interview with Rob Enderle, and he feels this could signal the beginning of Apple's shift from a hardware to a software company. Part of his logic was quotes from Steve Jobs, who has evidently stated the goal of becoming richer than Bill Gates, and a high margin business like software is more likely to help him accomplish that.

Over at the MacWorld forums someone summarized a conversation with an Apple VP at the WWDC. He said that Apple had no intention of supporting MS Windows on the Mac, but there wouldn't be anything about the hardware which would preclude it, and he was sure someone would in fact do it. OTOH, he said they were going to insure that MacOS could only run on Apple hardware.

But Boyd, it sounds like Apple are doing whatever it takes to make the move seamless, which is what I said they'd have to do. Again, I'll re-iterate that it doesn't matter what chips Apple run on, as long as when they buy a program for a "mac" it works on their mac, and us developers don't have to do much work to allow them to do so.

Sounds like interesting times are ahead though. I guess this is as a good time as any, but Apple are going to have to be really careful about viruses and spyware from now on, as if they're going to go after the big boys, they're going to face big boys problems....

Graeme

So is this going to ge tmoved out of area 51 and into the news section?


I'm still confused about how al of this will work out though. It seems like in theory (according to other sites) you will be able to run OSX and Windows on a Mac with the intel switch but, apple still has no plans of letting you run osx on your home pc. I.E. it's sort of a one way street. Which of course seems odd and to me that it is only a matter of time before someone figures out how to run osx on a sony laptop (though i'm sure die hard fans on both sides would say "Why would you do that?") Should be interesting times ahead either way.

Another thread is already going in the news section:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=45738

Seems like we should leave this one alone, so we can all speculate on what happens next... :-)

The "one way street" is consistent with Steve Jobs' philosophy. Remember, before he came back to rescue Apple they had licensed several other companies to make Mac clones (E-machines comes to mind). Steve pulled the plug on that whole program. Keeping tight control over the hardware has always been a big thing for him.

I'm sure people will find work-arounds to run OSX on the PC, but Apple has been merciless with their lawyers to protect their interests (ask the poor guy who leaked the story about the Mac mini ;-)

Of course in the long term one does have to wonder if they'll abandon hardware completely (see my previous post) and concentrate on software which has the potential to be much more profitable.