Apple switching to Intel, Job's biggest mistake?

He managed to develop the most popular Mp3 player, and gain an awesome market share. He succeeded in making a hit out of a premium music site in the P2P era. He also developed a modern, user-friendly operating system, with extraordinary graphics. Unfortunately, the only things not going just as planned were the desktop computers' sales. Will Jobs and Apple succeed to increase their sales with Intel-based Macs? That remains to be seen…


Looking back on the development of the Mac OS X based on Darwin, it was inevitable that, by means of a hack or port, the Mac OS X would eventually be installed on a PC. But perhaps that was the purpose all along, to design an alternate operating system for the computers in Windows's market.....

But why hasn't this happened earlier? Because Apple is a hardware manufacturer, and the hardware sales are not generated only by design or by megaflops, but also by the user interface.

Leaving behind the WWDC 2005 moment, the future of personal computers is rather hard to predict.

If we are to be pessimists, we could expect a major decline in Apple's computers sales, thus ending their history. This doesn't mean that iPod, iTunes and who knows what other smart devices which may appear along the way to "Digital Home" market domination will also disappear.

The alternate future that makes me think Jobs is a visionary, risking it all on one shot, looks something like this:

After the wave of sadness engulfing the traditional Mac users, we shall witness an important increase of PPC-based machines, just because they're the last of their kind. Also, Apple has been the main subject to be discussed by millions this week, a fact that will attract quite a lot of customers towards the company from Cupertino.
These sales will bring in enough cash to sponsor a consistent development of new computers based on Intel processors, which will have enough Gigahertz and DDRs to attract traditional PC users, but with better components and without compatibility problems. The design will also be very important, but we know Apple's no rookie in this area.

In the same time, Mac OS X etc, or whatever its name will be after running out of dangerous felines, will become cross-platform or better said, hardware-independent. Thus, everybody will be able to try the Mac OS X and probably Aqua will bedazzle a lot of people, especially because it has none of the problems that Windows does (spyware, security breaches, etc.).

Being quite sure of their choice regarding the operating system, users will just have to choose between a Mac and a PC having roughly the same performances, with the exception that Macs are subjected to a higher level of control regarding their quality and compatibility. In this case, the only difference between the two systems will be... their design.

In this way, Jobs is trying to attract two types of buyers in the same time. First, the PC users, who will have Aqua as a better alternative to Windows, and then the Apple customers (most of them former Apple owners returning to their first love).

I think the competition will be fierce, Microsoft's Longhorn, Linux and also closed-source OS' based on Nix will attack Apple's solutions.

Anyhow, Jobs is now also forced to satisfy traditional users, who'll stop their criticism regarding Apple only when the Intel-based computer will be a technological marvel with extraordinary performances.


The success or failure of the shift towards Intel and OSX for x86, depend on just one thing: just how much is Apple willing to give up on hardware, and shift towards software.
If a financial-emotional equilibrium is not maintained between the two, everything will go down in flames...
If it continues to roll out the superb systems it manufactures nowadays, everything will be OK.
But if the final result is just an Apple motherboard, made by Intel, the adequate processor will also perish.
The same can be said about the compatibility between OSX and the x86 platform. If a minimum level of decency is to be maintained in this matter, if you'll need some well-performing hardware for running the OSX, a certain Intel processor and an ATI Radeon video card, or an NVidia GeForce one, things might be acceptable. But if this issue goes too far, that is, OSX will be able to run on PCChips motherboards and S3Virge 2MB video cards, with CMI 8738 sound, than the situation will be desperate. The OSX will level itself with the current hardware, and not the opposite.

It's a question of weeks before the Asians will clone the Apple hardware the same way they did with iPod Shuffle. And, seeing their numbers, what's a lawsuit from Apple to them anyway?

It was to be expected that the OSX will be ported onto Intel. It's based on FreeBSD, remember?
The same FreeBSD which is available on several platforms. You add some blue, make some icons jump around, and that's it.
What amazed me was the fact that there were absolutely no rumors regarding this subject for 5 years.
Has Apple rented a hangar in Area 51?

Written by Softpedia Mac User Forum moderated by alexrom_007 and Centris