[rescue] Apple to ditch IBM, switch to Intel chips

[Skeezics Boondoggle]

On Fri, 03 Jun 2005, Phil Brutsche wrote:

> Micah R Ledbetter wrote:
> > Does anyone actually believe this? I mean, the article has no  
> > information on the validity of the "sources"; why was this posted on  
> > MacNN and everything?
> > If this happened, I would be so confused...
> 
> Note that nowhere does it say that Apple will switch to P4s and Xeons,
> only that Apple will switch to CPUs made my Intel.
> 
> I think it's more likely that Intel will start producing PPC CPUs for 
> Apple.

We can only hope you're right - switching to Intel as a fab partner for
the PPC could be interesting; not sure how Apple could pull that off given
that it was created in partnership with IBM & Motorola - you'd think
they'd have something to say about that?  But assuming that Apple has the
IP rights and could get Intel to fab the PPC and ramp up production
volumes without perverting the architecture, then maybe it's a win.  But
I'm not so convinced of that; if any company can go toe-to-toe with Intel
on process tech, it's gotta be IBM.  I'm hoping this is just another
stupid rumor, blown out of proportion...

But alas, if the switching of architectures is in fact the plan, this time
there's an ugly precedent:  NeXT built some very cool hardware.  Then it
became a software company.  Then it became a development tools company.  
Then it went brok... er, acquired Apple.  Which makes some very cool
hardware...

Ah, well.  Tell us, Mr. Jobs, are ya gonna veer Apple off of 1 Infinite
Loop and take a drive into oblivion down Taligent Lane?  Or BeOS
Boulevard?  I was so relieved when NeXTSTEP Court met up with Mac OS X
Parkway, but tell me - was that was another dead end?


So maybe it really is just a rehash of the old rumors.  I mean, we've all
heard that idiotic notion floated before, many times.  And every time
someone wails "Apple should switch to x86!" (right up there with "Sun
should switch to x86!") they seem to forget the simplest question:  Okay,
so why would you then buy Apple- (or Sun-) branded hardware, when for $6
and a puddle of spit you can cobble some whizzy super "fast" system from a
mail-order outfit or Joe's Commodity Crap Emporium down at the strip mall?

Right.  You wouldn't.  Nobody would.

*Maybe* you'd spend $9 and get the system that barely meets the
"compatibility list" requirements in order to pay Apple their $99 to run
their whizzy OS - which, of course, would have to cost a lot more if
software were to become the entire income stream.  Remember when NeXTSTEP
Developer cost $4999?  Oh yeah.  THAT was a milestone in BRILLIANCY.  
(Even MonkeyBoy Ballmer got that one right:  Developers!  Developers!  
Developers!  Developers!)

But it'd be great, for a while, and you and the 13 other people on the
planet running MacOSX86 would feel all happy and superior to the suckers
running Linux, or Windows, even though they have better driver support...
and software support... and... And, well, eventually you'd sigh, your
advocacy spent, your spirit broken, resigned to the dejected resignation
of all PC users, and just give it up, saying to yourself It Was Fun While
It Lasted...

-- Chris