Potential new blood for a.c.h.o.? Apple announces change to Intel!

Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel! The end
of the closed box?

Phil Weldon

Phil Weldon wrote:

Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel! The end
of the closed box?

Phil Weldon



Yeah. What's next? Windows on an Apple?

"David Maynard" wrote in message
...
Phil Weldon wrote:

Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel! The
end of the closed box?

Phil Weldon

Yeah. What's next? Windows on an Apple?


OSX on a PC?

Ed

Ed Medlin wrote:

"David Maynard" wrote in message
...

Phil Weldon wrote:


Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel! The
end of the closed box?

Phil Weldon

Yeah. What's next? Windows on an Apple?



OSX on a PC?

Ed



There's been a push for that even before the 'Intel processor' announcement.

Shouldn't be all that incredibly difficult since it's a 'nix variant.

Either Apple solves the problem of preventing OSX from running on PC
compatibles other than Apple boxes, or Apple will be marginalized to
botiqueware.

Phil Weldon

"David Maynard" wrote in message
...
Ed Medlin wrote:

"David Maynard" wrote in message
...

Phil Weldon wrote:


Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel! The
end of the closed box?

Phil Weldon

Yeah. What's next? Windows on an Apple?



OSX on a PC?

Ed

There's been a push for that even before the 'Intel processor'
announcement.

Shouldn't be all that incredibly difficult since it's a 'nix variant.

Phil Weldon wrote:

Either Apple solves the problem of preventing OSX from running on PC
compatibles other than Apple boxes, or Apple will be marginalized to
botiqueware.

Yeah. Or figure a way to make their hardware 'better' than the IBM clone
alternative.

OTOH, Microsoft seems to have done rather well with 'just software'


Phil Weldon

"David Maynard" wrote in message
...

Ed Medlin wrote:


"David Maynard" wrote in message
...


Phil Weldon wrote:



Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel! The
end of the closed box?

Phil Weldon

Yeah. What's next? Windows on an Apple?



OSX on a PC?

Ed

There's been a push for that even before the 'Intel processor'
announcement.

Shouldn't be all that incredibly difficult since it's a 'nix variant.

"Phil Weldon" wrote in message
nk.net...
Either Apple solves the problem of preventing OSX from running on PC
compatibles other than Apple boxes, or Apple will be marginalized to
botiqueware.

Phil Weldon

From my understanding of S. Jobs' comments, OSX will not be able to be run
on typical X86 systems. They are probably going to use the MB as a restraint
IMO. Opinions are like a$$holes though.......everyone has one...:-) That is
about the only way I can think of to prevent it since about everything else
will be the same.

Ed

"David Maynard" wrote in message
...
Ed Medlin wrote:

"David Maynard" wrote in message
...

Phil Weldon wrote:


Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel! The
end of the closed box?

Phil Weldon

Yeah. What's next? Windows on an Apple?



OSX on a PC?

Ed

There's been a push for that even before the 'Intel processor'
announcement.

Shouldn't be all that incredibly difficult since it's a 'nix variant.

"David Maynard" wrote in message
...
Phil Weldon wrote:

Either Apple solves the problem of preventing OSX from running on PC
compatibles other than Apple boxes, or Apple will be marginalized to
botiqueware.

Yeah. Or figure a way to make their hardware 'better' than the IBM clone
alternative.

OTOH, Microsoft seems to have done rather well with 'just software'

I kind of agree David. OSX on an X86 does not seem to me to be a bad move
for Apple. MS wouldn't like it, but what the hell, OSX would be a more
acceptable alternative than Linux IMO. I don't think it would make a huge
impact on Windows sales, but I think would bring more users to it than Linux
just because of the ease of use factor.

Ed


Phil Weldon

"David Maynard" wrote in message
...

Ed Medlin wrote:


"David Maynard" wrote in message
...


Phil Weldon wrote:



Potential new blood for a.c.h.o? Apple announces change to Intel!
The end of the closed box?

Phil Weldon

Yeah. What's next? Windows on an Apple?



OSX on a PC?

Ed

There's been a push for that even before the 'Intel processor'
announcement.

Shouldn't be all that incredibly difficult since it's a 'nix variant.

Ed Medlin wrote:

"David Maynard" wrote in message
...

Phil Weldon wrote:


Either Apple solves the problem of preventing OSX from running on PC
compatibles other than Apple boxes, or Apple will be marginalized to
botiqueware.

Yeah. Or figure a way to make their hardware 'better' than the IBM clone
alternative.

OTOH, Microsoft seems to have done rather well with 'just software'


I kind of agree David. OSX on an X86 does not seem to me to be a bad move
for Apple. MS wouldn't like it, but what the hell, OSX would be a more
acceptable alternative than Linux IMO. I don't think it would make a huge
impact on Windows sales, but I think would bring more users to it than Linux
just because of the ease of use factor.

Ed


I'd think it would have the best chance to compete with windows on the
desktop because, for one, it already has a reputation behind it.

"Ed Medlin" wrote in message...
From my understanding of S. Jobs' comments, OSX will not be able
to be run on typical X86 systems. They are probably going to use the
MB as a restraint IMO.

If that does turn out to be the case it'll be interesting to see how long it
takes the third party community to create a "fix". ;-)

Opinions are like a$$holes though.......everyone has one...:-) That
is about the only way I can think of to prevent it since about
everything else will be the same.

One can't help but wonder how strong Apple will make this "protection". It
could be a thinly disguised attempt to evaluate market demand for a "true"
X86 version of OS-X.
--


Richard Hopkins
Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
(replace nospam with pipex in reply address)

The UK's leading technology reseller www.dabs.com