=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
This E-mail is Sponsored by: Small Dog Electronics
--> Specializing in New & Factory Refurbished Apple computers <--
Surf to <http://www.smalldog.com> Check out our daily specials!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=702
X on x86: Is the Battle for the Desktop Really Over?
By Remy Davison, Insanely Great Mac
July 24th 2002
How much X-appeal would Aqua on x86 have?
"Microsoft won. The OS wars are over"
--- Steve Jobs, MacWorld Boston, 1997.
"We won. Basically every computer now is a Macintosh."
--- Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple.
"It''s just warmed-over Unix and you''ll never get it to run on your machines."
--- Bill Gates to Gil Amelio, 1996.
Quiz: Which of the above quotations turned out to be correct?
Steve Jobs'' comments at MWNY concerning ''options'' for OS X after 2003, have sparked
a number of commentaries on the implications of Apple moving OS X to x86 hardware -
and killing the PowerPC platform.
An article at The Inquirer argues that Apple could seriously hurt Microsoft in
enterprise if it made such a move.
There are at least major schools of thought on this debate. The first argues that
Apple needs PowerPC to keep its hardware and OS unique. This school reasons that Apple
is a hardware company first, not a software developer. It makes its large revenues by
shifting boxes. Moreover, despite the huge clock speed of x86 CPUs, Macs are still
faster with software optimized for AltiVec on G4s, such as Photoshop and Cleaner. But
take away the box sales, and Apple becomes a smaller software player than Adobe.
The second school says Apple has to get out of PPC, the sooner the better. The G5 is
vaporware, Motorola is not interested in PC chip development and Mote lose so much
money they can''t pour enough cash into R&D. By moving to x86 (AMD''s Hammer is the
betting (wo)man''s processor of choice), Apple make their flavor of Unix, plus Mac GUI
integration, a real threat to MS''s Windows dominance in both consumer and enterprise
markets.
There are faults with both sides of the argument, obviously.
First, does anyone seriously believe Jobs would be the Apple CEO to move OS X to x86?
His entire personal history militates against such a move. The man is a hardware guy:
witness iMac I and II; Cube; the original Mac.
Woz, by constrast, is a software and hardware guy, but he''s not at Apple anymore.
Second, if Apple did move to x86, it would be a post-Jobs CEO who would do it (yes, we
do have to conceive of an Apple after Jobs - sometime).
Third, Apple is not about to give up selling boxes. And OS X on x86 would not need a
mere recompile; as I understand it, we''re talking the whole Aqua interface. And what
of the Carbon layer? If it were that easy, someone would have done it already. They
would''ve done it illegally, but they would have done it.
Fourth, the entire Mac advantage of hardware/software integration would be nullified
by such a move...unless the x86 hardware was proprietory via the use of certain ROMs,
for instance.
Any Windows user who really wants OS X, or even Linux user who wants the Aqua GUI has
no choice, really, except to buy a n OS X-capable Mac. But to even suppose for a
minute than OS X-on-x86 would be ''open'' and run on any crud x86 hardware is in the
realm of wishful thinking.
Apart from which, I''m a subscriber to the notion that a lot - by no means all, but a
lot - of people are welded to their platform in the same ways people who own Fords
would never buy a GM product and vice versa. But it goes deeper than auto allegories.
As we''ve said on IGM before, the dominance of Windows developers in software, and the
preponderance of MCSEs in work places guarantees Apple won''t get more than a minor
look in.
True stories: I know several people who work as pretty basic, often non-expert admins.
One of them loves the iPod (but "too expensive"). He agrees with me, helplessly, when
I pile on fact after fact about SCSI, FireWire, software/hardware integration, the
GUI, the power, the glory, etc. etc. He agrees with all this. He accepts it. But he
will never buy an Apple. Why?
"I hate Macs."
It''s absurd and unreasonable response from a normally sane and intelligent
individual. It''s an automatic, irrational and emotional response. He knows and likes
x86. So be it. I never bother to make him switch. His girlfriend runs Mac and he
doesn''t make her switch either.
The bottom line is that Apple will have to make a firm decision on PPC v. x86. But
regardless of what you choose to do, Steve, just don''t expect everyone to turn Aqua.
If you don''t believe me, just ask Kevin (wherever he and the money are now). He
doesn''t think many people will go OS X either.
(Footnote: Actually, for the superstitious, X + 86 would be 1086: the year of the
Doomesday Book. But I''m sure no one at Redmond has heard of it, since it''s not a
Microsoft Press publication).
Post your comments at:
http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=702
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Copyright (c) 2002 Insanely Great Mac. All rights reserved. This article
may not be republished in part or whole without explicit written
permission from Insanely Great Mac.
Brought to you by Insanely Great Mac <http://www.insanely-great.com/>
To SUBSCRIBE - send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with subject
subscribe macnews
To UNSUBSCRIBE - send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with subject
unsubscribe macnews
Subscription problems/questions please email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
