Intel inside

[Randall]

Well, they gone and done it after all. I wasn't sure I really believed it when I saw that CNet article over the weekend, but it's official: Apple is switching to Intel processors (http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,67757,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2).

Still leaves a lot of unanswered questions, like which processor -- Itanium? Pentium D? Will OS X run on a generic PC? (Still seems highly unlikely.) And will there be Digital Rights Management (http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,67749,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_1) in the hardware?

Strange times afoot.

Randall

[Wassercrats]

IBM is busy building brains (http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/06/technology/ibm_brain.reut/?cnn=yes) these days.

http://claybuttons.com/ButtonPages/TimeButtons/MeltPlum.jpg http://www.free-training.com/osha/ppe/FOOT/701.GIF

[sheila]

I'm watching the Keynote Address (http://stream.apple.akadns.net/) right now by Steve Jobs at the WWDC today. He demos OS X running on an Intel processor. Pretty slick.

[sheila]

This is insane. They ported Mathematica by Wolfram Research to run under Mac OS X on Intel in five days. See the head of Mathematica speak about it in the Keynote Address.

[sheila]

I lied. they did it in 2 hours. I should have listened to the end before I posted.

[Randall]

This is actually the first time I've seen one of Steve Jobs' keynotes. Turns out that I didn't even know what he sounds like...

I'd heard that an Intel version of OS X existed somewhere. But I had no idea they'd been maintaining all of their software on two platforms for the past five years -- and no one knew about it. That is just insane.

So now the question arises: If I buy a Mac Mini, do I wait a year for the Intel version, or wait a year and a half for OS X Leopard to come out? Decisions, decisions.

Randall

[Randall]

After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."

However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said. Well, that answers the generic PC question. :hrmm:

But if I can install Windows on a Macintel, that would be good enough for me.

Randall

[Jeff]

However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.
Stops reading and begins working happily on my windows software again... oh well. Maybe someday. Wouldn't mind the choice, but don't particularly want to pay 3x more for a nice fruit logo on the outside of the box.

[Randall]

Wouldn't mind the choice, but don't particularly want to pay 3x more for a nice fruit logo on the outside of the box. Of course, it's possible that someone will find a workaround and get the OS installed on vanilla hardware after all.

Maybe. :wink:

Randall

[sheila]

Of course, it's possible that someone will find a workaround and get the OS installed on vanilla hardware after all.

Maybe. :wink:

RandallI'm certain someone will do it, and I doubt that Apple is implying that they will take technical measures to prevent it (or maybe they are meaning this, and I'm misinterpreting?)...

However, I believe they are referring to licensing issues. They will not license their OS to be run on non-Apple hardware. So, if someone does do that, they would be liable to prosecution, I suppose, for violating the software license.

[Randall]

I'm certain someone will do it, and I doubt that Apple is implying that they will take technical measures to prevent it (or maybe they are meaning this, and I'm misinterpreting?)... Oh, but they've been doing that all along. The old Mac ROMs were proprietary (I guess no one ever tried to pull a Compaq and reverse engineer the chips), and I'm assuming that OS X is still tied to the hardware somehow, even though they're using an open standard for the boot code now.

Of course, they didn't have a massive installed base of PowerPC machines out there begging for a Mac OS hack, so the demand just wasn't there. Whole different ballgame when they start putting Pentiums inside -- it should be fun to watch. :winky:

Randall

[Andilinks]

Techdirt brings up an interesting point.

http://techdirt.com/articles/20050607/0148253_F.shtml

[Syneryder]

Yup, Techdirt is right. There's going to be definite Osborne Effect here, for the next 12 months. But if you watch the Keynote Address (about an hour, but worth watching), they've already thought about this:

* Apple has a huge percentage of the MP3 player market. I forget the exact figure, but it's around 80-85%. They give an exact figure in the keynote... but the point is, that market is unlikely to be affected and is a huge revenue raiser for Apple.

* Macintosh sales are through the roof. Using Steve's own words: "The Macintosh took off 9 months ago". They're experiencing 40%+ growth in that market, while PCs are only experiencing 10%. AFAIK, they have the highest growth in the personal computer industry. Steve openly admits that they're taking advantage of that position to pull off the transition.

* They're renting out Intel machines to developers today for $999 a machine. It's a 3.6Ghz Pentium 4 and will be shipping in 2 weeks. That will at least offset some of the losses over that period.

It's going to be a tough 12 months, but even if everything goes wrong, they can ride out that period. The payoff is huge. Just one example: now I can buy a PowerBook and run both Windows & OS X. That's the only reason I didn't buy an Apple laptop last year - now I can write & support software for both platforms, even while I'm travelling. The number of developers for Mac is going to jump, as will sales of Apple laptops (at least).

[DogAndPony]

'Tis truly going to be interesting...

And I pray not destructive. I do think it'll work to bring down the cost of Macs to a degree... But who knows how long that'll take.

Makes me wonder how much Apple will charge in licensing fees when/if they start licensing clones again.

All I have to say is... I'm glad I've been putting off that upgrade.

(Or should I hold back and allow early adopters to deal with first-run problems..?)

:rasberry:

[sheila]

For those of us geeky enough to be aware of this announcement, I can see someone who had been planning a purchase of a PowerBook holding off for a year to 18 months for a MacIntel computer. Or for someone who is making the transition from Windows to a Mac, I can see that prompting them to hold off until MacIntel computers are available.

And I have no doubt that this is going to result in a decrease in sales for the Macs.

But I bet you a lot of people are largely unaware and it makes NO DIFFERENCE to most endusers what chip their computer is using inside. (I'm talking about folks like my parents, or my sister who uses her computer for word processing and other office tasks, but not for development of any type.) As long as the computer runs well, has appropriate software available, and they are able to get their job done, that is all that matters.

One podcast I was listening to today from Wizards of Technology (http://www.wizardsoftechnology.com/ ) said, he watched the news on Monday night, and this wasn't even mentioned at all. So "the common people" have no idea, I'm sure.

I feel pretty confident that as a PowerPC Mac owner, Apple will be providing support for my machine for years to come, and that there will continue to be software available to meet my needs, even after Apple has completely switched over and is selling only Intel processor machines.

Overall, unless you were considering a laptop or are switching from Windows to Mac and really feel that having the Intel chip is going to provide backward compatibility for you for some particular application that is not available on Mac and has a proprietary data format, or are a developer and want to be able to develop on both platforms...then I just don't see a good reason to hold off on a Mac purchase that had been planned prior to this announcement.

I see a lot of FUD in the blogs and other articles. Of course, this will deter some people from purchasing Macs they had planned to purchase. Too bad. I'm sure Jobs knew this was an inevitability when he decided to go forward with this change.

I wonder that Bob doesn't have the right idea, with letting the early adopters deal with first-run problems? hmmmm...

BTW, for those who do purchase "dead end" PPC macs during this next year or two, I bet that eventually you will be able to get a really good deal on some of them. If the sales slow down, I would expect specials to be offered to move out the merchandise.

[DogAndPony]

Overall, unless you were considering ... backward compatibility for you for some particular application ... then I just don't see a good reason to hold off on a Mac purchase...For those of us desperately clinging to a couple of OS9 apps, that would be the case, since OS9 would reportedly not be supported. Pathetic, but true. Then again, I'm sure I'll have myself weaned by then.

No, really. :dopey: I see a lot of FUD in the blogs and other articles.As always. And these are probably the same guys who swore that the last major architecture change -- from 680x0 chips to PowerPC -- would kill the Mac.I wonder that Bob doesn't have the right idea, with letting the early adopters deal with first-run problems? hmmmm...If I can afford an upgrade, I don't know if I'll be able to resist. :EG: But since I'm in major need of a new desktop machine rather than a laptop, then...BTW, for those who do purchase "dead end" PPC macs during this next year or two, I bet that eventually you will be able to get a really good deal on some of them. If the sales slow down, I would expect specials to be offered to move out the merchandise....that would definitely be my hope!

Hypothetical sweet spot: PPC Macs go for 1/2 price, and I upgrade soon. Then the Intel chips (and possible close availability) cut the price of MacIntels by half compared with the PPCs, so I can also afford a second machine, getting two for the price of one.

["Wake up, Bobby! Time to go to school!" ... "Oh, Mooooom... I was having a really good dream..."]

:wink:

[Andilinks]

It begins a crystalization of the timetable on my transition which I had put on hold when I decided to switch states and climates instead of OS's. One big change at a time is enough.

Should I wait for a bargain on the last of the Motorolas or wait just a bit longer for the first of the Intel Macs? It will be one or the other depending on how things play out for them and for me...

Andi

[CDarklock]

I've noticed a trend lately where an awful lot of very smart people in the IT and development communities are suddenly jumping ship for Macs.

This would be noteworthy enough if they were just leaving Windows boxes, but some of them are dumping *Linux* for the Mac.

This makes me wonder if maybe the Mac SE on my desk should be replaced.

[Syneryder]

I've been reading that developers have already got Windows XP working on the new machines - it's all Intel chipsets (including the graphics), so it's just like installing on a PC. The machines have a Phoenix BIOS at the moment. The graphics chipset is likely to change to an ATI chipset in a year or so though. There's more at www.xlr8yourmac.com.

Of course, things like the BIOS may change before going out to consumers too.

[Randall]

I've noticed a trend lately where an awful lot of very smart people in the IT and development communities are suddenly jumping ship for Macs. It's certainly been on my mind ever since I decided to end my Windows fix-it career. I don't feel like I need to be a PC owner anymore, and Linux still feels too much like a DIY project for my tastes. There's going to be definite Osborne Effect here, for the next 12 months. That was the first thing I thought of when he said the switchover wouldn't even start for another year.

But I think Sheila's right -- as long as Rosetta and the Universal Binaries work as advertised, most people won't even notice. I'm going to wait until the developers start chiming in to decide whether to buy now or hold off until next year.

Randall

[Andilinks]

The general public was not bright enough to see it (aided by Apple pricing blunders) during the 88-92 period when it should have happened but it is finally happening!

yay! yay! yay!!!

A genuine outburst of joy.

Andi (who also has an SE --8mhz, 4mb ram, 40mb hd--in storage)

Oh wait, that was the Classic. The SE is: clock speed, unknown; 1 mb ram expanded to 2, no hd expanded to 20mb external.

[sheila]

For those of us desperately clinging to a couple of OS9 apps, that would be the case, since OS9 would reportedly not be supported. Pathetic, but true. Then again, I'm sure I'll have myself weaned by then.
Yeah, and I said I'd have all my data files moved off of my old Windows hard drive by end of April.
/me checks calendar...

Oops!

Ok, by the end of June for SURE. :P

Hypothetical sweet spot: PPC Macs go for 1/2 price, and I upgrade soon. Then the Intel chips (and possible close availability) cut the price of MacIntels by half compared with the PPCs, so I can also afford a second machine, getting two for the price of one.
Oh, lordy, what ARE you smoking? Must be some good stuff.

Should I wait for a bargain on the last of the Motorolas or wait just a bit longer for the first of the Intel Macs? It will be one or the other depending on how things play out for them and for me...


Depends on which machine you're planning to get. Overall, I'd think that getting one of the PPCs before they are gone is not a bad plan at all. Personally, I'm planning to wait until the Intels have been out for at least a year before I even think about picking one of them up (possibly a laptop to replace my IBM Thinkpad, which will be 4 years old by then...). Anyhow, here is an article at Arstechnica (http://arstechnica.com/columns/mac/mac-20050608.ars) and at the bottom of the first page the author gives the best conjecture of Intel chip deployment schedule in Macs that I've seen yet, if that is of any help to you?

If you value Walt Mossberg's opinion, he says (http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/ptech-20050609.html)
Should people hold off buying a Mac that uses the IBM PowerPC processor, which Apple will soon abandon, and wait for the new Intel Macs?

No. If you need a new computer and the Mac was the right choice for you last week, it's still the right choice. Today's PowerPC Macs are, in my view, the best consumer computers on the market, and Apple plans to roll out additional PowerPC models this year.

Plus, all new software for the Mac will continue to run on PowerPC models for at least a few more years, the likely life of any Mac you buy now. That's because Apple has created a tool for software developers that easily creates "universal" programs capable of being run on either the PowerPC or Intel models.

Walt also doesn't expect the prices on Macs to fall very much either. Hrrm.

[DogAndPony]

Oh, lordy, what ARE you smoking? Must be some good stuff.The frightening thing is... I don't have to smoke anything to have that sort of delusion. :kewl: Walt also doesn't expect the prices on Macs to fall very much either. Hrrm.Yeah, I don't think they will, either. At least, not for the first few years. :hrmm:

[Randall]

Anyhow, here is an article at Arstechnica (http://arstechnica.com/columns/mac/mac-20050608.ars) and at the bottom of the first page the author gives the best conjecture of Intel chip deployment schedule in Macs that I've seen yet, if that is of any help to you? There's also an interesting New York Times (http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/06/12/business/apple.php) article about the Apple-IBM divorce.

As far as the AMD vs Intel question goes, it's been pointed out that the deal with Intel isn't exclusive. We might see a mix of Intel and AMD chips, a la HP. Walt also doesn't expect the prices on Macs to fall very much either. Hrrm. That seems to be the consensus so far, but of course it's all speculation -- a whole year will go by before we see an actual Macintel machine for sale.

Randall

[Andilinks]

Overall, I'd think that getting one of the PPCs before they are gone is not a bad plan at all. Personally, I'm planning to wait until the Intels have been out for at least a year before I even think about picking one of them up Hmmm... Since smoothly transferring data and programs is my greatest concern I think waiting for the Intel might be better. I don't like to buy the first few off the assembly line so that means 18-24 months.

In the mean time a two year old eMachine desktop and two month old Gateway laptop might get me there. Maybe not, there may be yet another winbox between now and then, 2.3 ghz is starting to feel pokey.

Andi

[Randall]

Hmmm... Since smoothly transferring data and programs is my greatest concern I think waiting for the Intel might be better. I don't like to buy the first few off the assembly line so that means 18-24 months. The thing you have to keep in mind is that from a user point of view, the (in)compatibility of Macs and PCs has little to do with the hardware anymore. It's the OS, filesystem, networking protocols and availability of device drivers that make the difference. Switching from PowerPC to Pentium isn't going to change any of that.

Randall

[sheila]

Maybe not, there may be yet another winbox between now and then, 2.3 ghz is starting to feel pokey.
Yikes. What are you doing with that box? My Thinkpad is "only" 1.6 Mghz, and it feels just fine to me. Perhaps you don't have enough RAM? (I like to think you're sufficiently aware to not have spyware and other junk slowing your machine down...)

[Andilinks]

Perhaps you don't have enough RAM? 512, yeah I should upgrade. I do run three anti-spyware programs. Still it seems slow. Maybe my brain's clock speed is too fast... Or maybe I'm just impatient.

Andi

[kitchin]

I've been reading that developers have already got Windows XP working on the new machines - it's all Intel chipsets (including the graphics), so it's just like installing on a PC. The machines have a Phoenix BIOS at the moment. The graphics chipset is likely to change to an ATI chipset in a year or so though. There's more at www.xlr8yourmac.com.

Of course, things like the BIOS may change before going out to consumers too.
And did I read a headline on Slashdot that the Mac-on-Intel OS X code has leaked and people have successfully installed it on vanilla Wintel boxes? Yep, here it is:
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/12/130234&tid=179
but in this case, not only did I not RTFA, I did not even RTF-/.Discussion, so YMMV. ;)

[sheila]

512, yeah I should upgrade. I do run three anti-spyware programs. Still it seems slow. Maybe my brain's clock speed is too fast... Or maybe I'm just impatient.
Well, I'm impatient too...so I doubt that is it. ;)

If you have 3 anti-spyware programs constantly running in resident memory, then I wouldn't be surprised that 512 MB is insufficient RAM for your laptop. I also have 512 MB of RAM and turned off all the anti-spyware stuff I was running on that machine, because it *did* make it run slow.

With our hardware firewall/router and my anti-virus program, I figure that's enough stuff running in the background for that machine. I don't do the amount of web browsing, especially on unknown web sites, that you do. So I can understand your extra precautions.

You might want to analyze whether your computer is being slowed down due to lack of RAM or lack of CPU.

[sheila]

http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/12/130234&tid=179
but in this case, not only did I not RTFA, I did not even RTF-/.Discussion, so YMMV. ;)
You really only need to read this comment to understand the whole thing:
http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=152451&cid=12796187

[kitchin]

You really only need to read this comment to understand the whole thing:
http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=152451&cid=12796187
:QTbarb: :biggrin:

[Randall]

You might want to analyze whether your computer is being slowed down due to lack of RAM or lack of CPU. It does strike me as odd that a 512MB/2.6Ghz machine should feel slow, but I've learned not to make assumptions when it comes to Andi and PCs. :rasberry:

Randall

[Randall]

As expected, OS X for Intel won't install on unauthorized machines. A security chip in the developer systems appears to be responsible for that: Much ado over Apple-Intel developer box (http://news.com.com/Much+ado+over+Apple-Intel+developer+box/2100-1016_3-5819211.html?tag=st.pop).

Should be interesting to watch if someone finds a way around the TPM.

Randall

[Jeff]

As expected, OS X for Intel won't install on unauthorized machines. A security chip in the developer systems appears to be responsible for that: Much ado over Apple-Intel developer box (http://news.com.com/Much+ado+over+Apple-Intel+developer+box/2100-1016_3-5819211.html?tag=st.pop).

Should be interesting to watch if someone finds a way around the TPM.

Randall
Hopefully Microsoft doesn't get any ideas from Apple on how to build their monopoly :EG:

Seems like a blunder on apple's part, but hey, what do I know.

--"lots of people are interesting in giving our OS a try and will likely get hooked."
----"holy smokes, can we keep them from doing it?"
--"we sure can"
----"phew! great! that was a close one!"

[DogAndPony]

As expected, OS X for Intel won't install on unauthorized machines. A security chip in the developer systems appears to be responsible for that: Much ado over Apple-Intel developer box (http://news.com.com/Much+ado+over+Apple-Intel+developer+box/2100-1016_3-5819211.html?tag=st.pop).This sounds like a real mountain-from-molehill thing to me. I mean, how is it that anyone is surprised by this? Non-Mac machines have never been able to run the Mac OS. Why do people think that Apple would suddenly allow the entire world to run it now?

Sounds to me like a by-product of the irrational sense of entitlement developing in the twenty-something-and-below crowd, as partly demonstrated by the concept that stealing music and using pirated software is everyone's right.

On the other hand, it sounds like the gripers are assuming that the TPM requirement will be included with the release version of the OS. What part of "beta version of proprietary software meant only for developers" are these guys missing? Apple's been burned before by idiots who sign up for the ADC and then distribute copies of the OS pre-release. Are the flamers saying that Apple no longer has the right to protect proprietary information?

Either way, these people are making some bizarre assumptions.Should be interesting to watch if someone finds a way around the TPM.Yeah, that could happen...

But since Apple has the right to protect the pre-release OS... And they have the right to say what machines the software runs on, even after the release -- and they always have -- why do people think that Apple will radically change their business model just because they changed chip vendors? Or more to the point, do people think that Apple will sit still and let hackers defeat the TPM... without getting their butts sued? If so, they haven't been paying attention. :confuz:

And where have all these flamers been since 1984? They're probably the same ones who have been flaming the Mac OS as a "toy", saying they'd never use anything but Windows. Suddenly, they simply MUST run the Mac OS! They will die without it! :clown:

It's not as if they don't have anything better to do... If people want to get spitting mad about something, let them aim their ire at Dubya and the war, or the famine in Niger.

Silly, silly people. :dunno:

[Randall]

Or more to the point, do people think that Apple will sit still and let hackers defeat the TPM... without getting their butts sued? That's what I meant by "interesting." :wink: Microsoft seems content to keep non-techies from circumventing Windows Product Activation (which to me is more intrusive than an Apple-only hardware restriction). They just shrug and tighten the controls on Windows Update. Microsoft product manager Chandler Myrick says that the company is aware of these attempts to work around Product Activation, but he believes that relatively few Windows XP upgraders will locate and use them. "One of the primary goals for WPA was just to reduce casual copying," Myrick says. "And we think that even though these circumventions are available, WPA is going to do what we intended it to do for the vast majority of users." Apple is more likely to take a hard line and disable the hacked systems. (OTOH, Microsoft doesn't have anything like Apple's Family Pack (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore?productLearnMore=M9640Z/A), which would make WPA a little easier to swallow.)

Randall

[DogAndPony]

That's what I meant by "interesting." :wink: Microsoft seems content to keep non-techies from circumventing Windows Product Activation (which to me is more intrusive than an Apple-only hardware restriction). They just shrug and tighten the controls on Windows Update.Next thing you know, MS will start making boxen, and forcing people to use Windoze only on their machines. Heheheh... Apple is more likely to take a hard line and disable the hacked systems.Yeah, if history is any guide...(OTOH, Microsoft doesn't have anything like Apple's Family Pack (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore?productLearnMore=M9640Z/A), which would make WPA a little easier to swallow.)Maybe they think they don't need it, since they Rule The World™. :EG:

[Randall]

Maybe they think they don't need it, since they Rule The World™. :EG: That's would be my guess. You can get additional XP licenses at a slight discount, but volume discounts start at a much higher level, as I recall. And if you compare the price for the XP Pro upgrade -- since that's a better comparison than the Home Edition -- it's a 5:1 difference.

Meanwhile, the presence of the TPM chip seems to be in dispute: Palladium Not in Apple Dev Kits (http://www.ofb.biz/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=380&mode=&order=0&thold=0).

The controversy really centers around the chip more than Apple's hardware policy, because it could be used to lock down the system -- no Linux, no Windows, no unapproved software, etc. -- to a degree that makes the iPod look like an open platform. We wouldn't want that to happen.

Randall

[sheila]

The controversy really centers around the chip more than Apple's hardware policy, because it could be used to lock down the system -- no Linux, no Windows, no unapproved software, etc.
Yeah, except that Jobs said at WWDC that Apple would take no measures to prevent the installation of other OS's on the new MacIntels.

Besides, you can install Linux on the current Macs that use PPC chip. That's what Linus Torvalds is currently using, last I heard (a few months back).

[Randall]

Yeah, except that Jobs said at WWDC that Apple would take no measures to prevent the installation of other OS's on the new MacIntels. I think it a was a VP who said that, but yeah. Paranoid geeks get a little bit crazed over these things. Apologies to boB, but I don't think it was Joe Music Downloader who was complaining about the alleged TPM chip.

Randall

[MichaelC]

The controversy really centers around the chip more than Apple's hardware policy, because it could be used to lock down the system -- no Linux, no Windows, no unapproved software, etc. -- to a degree that makes the iPod look like an open platform. I wouldn't call this "controversy" so much as "idle conjecture." :wink:

Really, the bottom line is that the only thing changing in Macs will be the processor. Most of the other components in a Mac are either already "generic" (drives, video, CardBus/PCI slots, USB, etc.) or created by Apple itself. (The days of NuBus slots and ADB connections were forever ago in computer years, and ADC is finally gone with the last rev of the PowerMac G5.)

Except for the possible exception of being able to install/run Windows without having to purchase Virtual PC, a Mac will still be a Mac, more or less the way we know it today.

MC

[Andilinks]

...a Mac will still be a Mac, more or less the way we know it today.Unfortunate because its market share will also remain what it is with perhaps a tiny boost from the iPod halo.

[MichaelC]

Unfortunate because its market share will also remain what it is with perhaps a tiny boost from the iPod halo.

Well, it's already been getting a large boost from the "iPod halo," so you're expecting sales to slow down...?

[Andilinks]

...a large boost from the "iPod halo,"This would be a relative and subjective "boost."

Yes, it is a large boost relative to total Mac sales, but relative to the Mac vs. Wintel marketshare the boost is miniscule. In order to impact that market share Mac will have to offer more than it has in the past and it looks like the "Intel inside" difference will not turn that tide.

Still, every advance in Mac's market share is positive. It's just not exciting yet.

Andi

[Randall]

I wouldn't call this "controversy" so much as "idle conjecture." :wink: But that's how a lot of these controversies start. Remember the big hue and cry over the Pentium III serial number (http://support.intel.com/support/processors/pentiumiii/sb/CS-007579.htm)? (The TPM makes privacy people nervous for the same reason, because it has a unique ID.) Microsoft has been burned several times in this area, and lately Google has been setting off alarm bells for some people. In most if not all of these cases, it was the potential for abuse that got people riled up, rather than an actual violation of privacy.

So even if Apple didn't use the alleged TPM chip, the very fact that it was there would still be enough to cause a riot. :dunno: Still, every advance in Mac's market share is positive. It's just not exciting yet. Well, the Mini sitting on my desk has got me pretty excited. :winky:

Randall

# Another tick in the switcher column

[sheila]

Well, the Mini sitting on my desk has got me pretty excited. :winky:

Randall

# Another tick in the switcher column
Yes, when are you going to actually tell us about that?
I've been trying to be patient and let you "get used to it" despite your subtle comments like, "I can verify on Mac blah blah" or changing your forum title to "Multiplatform blah blah" but, by nature I'm an impatient person.

Well, you can let me stew a bit longer I suppose. :P

[Randall]

Yes, when are you going to actually tell us about that? Well, it's heavier than it looks. :winky:

I bought the mid-range model, 1.42GHz CPU and 80GB hard drive. The price seemed reasonable for the upgrade, and it wasn't until I'd already ordered it that I realized the Bluetooth and wireless cards are now standard equipment.

I'm gonna have to install FlashBlock (http://flashblock.mozdev.org/index.html) (even though they haven't worked out all the bugs yet) in Firefox because Flash ads can eat up CPU time like there's no tomorrow. When that happens the fan kicks into high gear, but otherwise I can't hear it with the Dell going whoooosh under the desk.

A few keyboard/mouse glitches that I'm too tired to describe coherently, so I'll summarize: PS/2 to USB conversion may be problematic. I need a new mouse anyway, so I might as well replace both of them with native USB hardware. (My Linksys KVM switch magnified the problems dramatically, BTW. Baaaad news.)

I haven't upgraded the RAM yet, because I want to see how far I can get with the base 512MB first -- and I'm hoping that if I wait long enough the 1GB modules will get cheaper. Even when I'm down to a few MBs of free RAM, there's a lot less beachball activity than I expected.

Randall

[MichaelC]

I haven't upgraded the RAM yet, because I want to see how far I can get with the base 512MB first -- and I'm hoping that if I wait long enough the 1GB modules will get cheaper.C'mon, grab a cheap RAM stick, get out the putty knives (http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/editors/2005/01/macminiinside/index.php) and have at it! :jackham:

[sheila]

Hey, Randall, my Internet connection is too slow tonight for me to say much in response but...
Yeah, keyboard compatibility would probably be something of an issue, I guess. Crunchy Chris runs XP on his Powerbook through Virtual PC, and the other night he asked me about some keyboard issues that I guess he encountered. (I haven't used Virtual PC so have no experience with this problem...yet?)

Flashblockers, eh? I guess I don't get out enough. Is that how allrecipes.com is getting a window popped up on me despite the "block popups" option being selected in Opera? Hmm. It's not doing it tonight. But a few weeks ago when I visited the site, I was really ticked off that it gave me popups despite my selection of "no popups" in the Opera configs.

Yeah, I think you ordered at a good time, right after they had announced "upgrades" to their mini lineup.

Well, I'm sure you'll keep us posted from time to time. ;)

[Randall]

Well, it's heavier than it looks. I should have said that it's heavier than it looks on web sites (like the one MichaelC posted). It's also a little bigger than I expected, so it probably weighs what something of that size should weigh. Or not. I dunno... Yeah, keyboard compatibility would probably be something of an issue, I guess. Crunchy Chris runs XP on his Powerbook through Virtual PC, and the other night he asked me about some keyboard issues that I guess he encountered. In my case there are two separate issues. The mismatch between PC and Mac keyboards is one -- something that Chris would run up against with VirtualPC. The other problems seem to arise from the PS/2-USB conversion, because they also afflict my Dell when I'm using the USB adapter. I don't know if it's the adapter, the keyboard or both.

For example, I can't enter a continuous string of keyboard shortcuts (like Command-z to undo several edits) because the modifier key gets lost. So in a text editor it'll be an Undo or two followed by a string of z's. I'm inclined to blame the USB adapter for this -- it's as if there's only a tiny buffer in the adpater and the modifier key keeps getting pushed out of it.

Another problem I run into (not sure if this is Firefox or the USB issue again) is that I can't use Ctrl-left to jump to the begining of a line in text boxes like this one -- it sends the browser a Back button event instead, and I lose everything I was typing. :grr: Ctrl-right works as expected. Flashblockers, eh? I guess I don't get out enough. Is that how allrecipes.com is getting a window popped up on me despite the "block popups" option being selected in Opera? Probably not (I notice Safari's blocker isn't perfect either). FlashBlock merely replaces Flash objects with a button that you can click on to play the animation if you want.

Randall

[Randall]

Well. That didn't take long: Mac Hack Allows OS X on PCs (http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,68501,00.html?tw=rss.TOP).

If it really was that easy to bypass Apple's restrictions, this should keep the idle speculators :wink: busy for quite a while.

Randall

[Jeff]

No one knows exactly why OSx86 appears to be running faster on the PCs than the Mac OS does on today's Macs.
:kewl:

[sheila]

I should have said that it's heavier than it looks on web sites (like the one MichaelC posted). It's also a little bigger than I expected, so it probably weighs what something of that size should weigh.
Wow. You're wilder and crazier than I thought. You bought one site unseen? I at least went to the store before buying a Mac and played around with it. You have more guts than I do. :P

[Randall]

Wow. You're wilder and crazier than I thought. This is may very well be the first time anyone's called me "wild and crazy." :ROFL:

I've done that with monitors, cameras ... even headphones. Spares me from dealing with pushy/clueless salespeople, or driving around aimlessly in search of someone who has the goods in stock.

Needless to say, I do a lot of online research. :winky:

Randall

[Andilinks]

Needless to say, I do a lot of online research.I find ordering online fraught with many of the same uncertainties, but in slow motion as I wait for FedEx to ring my bell or as I curse the voice jail system at customer service.

::: imagining Randall doing Steve Martin's "wild and crazy guy" routine at Best Buy :::

[Andilinks]

Maybe this should be a new thread, but I just found this new pro/con list for anyone comparing Mac to PC.

http://www.russellbeattie.com/notebook/1008631.html

[sheila]

Maybe this should be a new thread, but I just found this new pro/con list for anyone comparing Mac to PC.

http://www.russellbeattie.com/notebook/1008631.html
Dunno, looks mostly like a con list only to me.

Not sure what that guy is doing with his Macs, but most of that stuff does not correspond to my experience at all. I did detest the Macs at the Uni where I work. (The one in my office this year is a G4 400 Mhz running OS X with 128 MB RAM...I did use it this past week for web browsing only...)

My home system is an iMac G5 with 1 GB RAM and it is in no way slow at all. I don't understand his problem reconciling the OS X command line with his Linux experience. It's Bash shell. I find it is mostly the same. ??? My system will easily run 33 days without a reboot, providing I don't install some software or update that requires a reboot in the meantime. I find OS X much more stable than Win2k (I have not regularly used XP).

I wonder how much time he spent educating himself about how to use his Mac and how to maintain it. I bought and read two OReilly books when I got my Mac ("Running Mac OS X Panther" and "Mac OS X Panther for Unix Geeks") plus I hung out around the Apple forums to learn about using my Mac. There are regular maintenance tasks that should be performed to keep the Mac running optimally.

Sounds to me like he has installed a bunch of non-standard software and neglected to perform basic maintenance, which is what is resulting in the slow running machines. Anyhow, certainly not representative of my 8 months on a Mac. I love it. Would buy another if I were in the market for another machine. I just love the Unix underpinnings. For me, it is like having two OS in one without the annoyance of dual boot, as I can access them both at the same time. I don't use a lot of the standard Mac software. I dislike Safari and despise Mail. Nevertheless, the apps I choose and run work very well for me.

My nickle...

[Andilinks]

Dunno, looks mostly like a con list only to me.The pro list is in a paragraph below the numbered list and yes seems overwhelmed by the con list.

But he is a bright guy (I disagree with him a lot, he once banned my IP from his blog, he he he).

He has made what seem to be some good points.

Did you read the comments? You should post there, it does seem to be the most lively PC/Mac discussion I've seen.

Andi

[sheila]

Oh yeah, and what is his problem with installing software and .dmg files? Obviously this is someone who just doesn't "get" it (or is installing the weirdest software in the universe) because installing software on a Mac is WAY EASY. :umm:

Either it comes with an installer (click and it installs it for you) or you click on the .dmg file, it unarchives itself, opens up a folder on your desktop, you see the app icon and drag it to your applications folder. Done.

[sheila]

Andi, I skimmed through the comments. Seen several discussions similar to that before and I think anything I would possibly write has already been said by others.

For someone who is considering switching to Mac, I suppose it might be a good read if you haven't seen one of these types of "discussions" before. But obviously this guy doesn't like using the Mac, so keep that in mind as you read. Overall, many of the comments indicate that others using Macs do not share the same experience as this guy, and since he obviously prefers Windows, maybe he should switch back.

[Randall]

He makes some valid points -- the entire Mac community seems to agree that the Finder is fatally flawed, and given that I've already paid $34 for Path Finder (which is better than Windows Explorer, never mind the Finder), you can put me in the same camp. And there are some awfully confusing UI inconsistencies.

Much of the rest of it is just adaption -- either you get comfortable with the differences or you don't. Apps that stay running when all of their windows have been closed is weird, but I'm getting used to it. And I've made some alterations, like removing nearly everything from the Dock because I don't want to see anything there that's not actually running. My Mac desktop is a little more Windows-like now, minus most of the Windows aggravations.

I think maybe his expectations were too high. You can't let that infamous Reality Distortion Field blind you to the fact that no one has got this computer concept "right" just yet, and that we don't have -- maybe never will have -- a level playing field between Windows and the rest of the OS world.

So it's not a simple choice between Coke and Pepsi. You've got to understand your needs (long and short term) and your comfort level. Buying a PC is an easier decision to make, and knowing that millions of other people feel just as helpless as you do can be reassuring to some.

As I get closer to filling in all the "holes" (stuff I can do on the PC but not on the Mac yet) I'll have a good idea whether this was the right choice -- in the short term. Long term, no one can see that far ahead.

Randall

[Andilinks]

I'll run both systems side by side someday and will gravitate naturally toward one or the other... But it is interesting to watch it sort out and learn from other's experience.

[Randall]

Even better, do what I'm doing: Controling the PC from my Mac, using an UltraVNC (http://ultravnc.com) server on the PC and the Chicken of the VNC (http://sourceforge.net/projects/cotvnc/) client (gotta love that name) on the Mac side. I see my Windows desktop in a window on the Mac's, and work with it at as usual. When you're switching OSes just by moving from one window to another, you really get a sense of the differences. :winky:

That and a deep appreciation for muscle memory. I have to remember when to use the Command key (Mac) and when to use Ctrl (PC) for the keyboard shortcuts, and I guess wrong half the time. :confuz:

Randall

[sheila]

He makes some valid points -- the entire Mac community seems to agree that the Finder is fatally flawed,True.
... and given that I've already paid $34 for Path Finder (which is better than Windows Explorer, never mind the Finder), you can put me in the same camp.
I discussed this article with Crunchy Chris earlier (he has a Powerbook) and he also does not like the Finder. It doesn't bother me that much, but sometimes I really wish for a "Windows Commander"--err, I mean "Total Commander" equivalent on Mac. Next month (when I have a bit of change) I will finally have to check out this Finder-replacement app you keep raving about. I looked at it once, but it didn't even seem compelling enough to me to download.

Much of the rest of it is just adaption -- either you get comfortable with the differences or you don't. Apps that stay running when all of their windows have been closed is weird, but I'm getting used to it.
That bugged me a lot at first, but now I've gotten to where I PREFER it, and wish I could do the same on my Thinkpad.

My Mac desktop is a little more Windows-like now, minus most of the Windows aggravations.Out of curiousity, what are some of the "Windows aggravations" that you no longer have to deal with?

I think maybe his expectations were too high. You can't let that infamous Reality Distortion Field blind you to the fact that no one has got this computer concept "right" just yet...
Yep.

Even better, do what I'm doing: Controling the PC from my Mac, using an UltraVNC (http://ultravnc.com) server on the PC and the Chicken of the VNC (http://sourceforge.net/projects/cotvnc/) client (gotta love that name) on the Mac side. I see my Windows desktop in a window on the Mac's, and work with it at as usual. When you're switching OSes just by moving from one window to another, you really get a sense of the differences. :winky: Oh, that's trippy. Can't think of a good excuse to try it out in my case, though. My old PC hard drive is now an external firewire/USB external hard drive, that I can plug into my Mac or my Thinkpad. Nowadays it's mostly just off. I can't recall the last time I turned it on. Several weeks ago, at least.

I have to remember when to use the Command key (Mac) and when to use Ctrl (PC) for the keyboard shortcuts, and I guess wrong half the time. :confuz: I think I am FINALLY getting that one right most of the time now. I seldom use the Thinkpad any more, so it is a real accomplishment that this weekend, when I did use it, I think I guess correctly almost every time on the CTRL key. Whew.

[Randall]

It doesn't bother me that much, but sometimes I really wish for a "Windows Commander"--err, I mean "Total Commander" equivalent on Mac. Next month (when I have a bit of change) I will finally have to check out this Finder-replacement app you keep raving about. I looked at it once, but it didn't even seem compelling enough to me to download. If I recall correctlly, Total Commander was an old-style double-pane file manager like I had in my Amiga days. You won't get that from Path Finder -- it's more of a refined Finder than a reinvention of it. So if the Finder doesn't bother you all that much, Path Finder probably isn't that compelling to look at.

But there are certain subtleties in the interface that hooked me, and lots of customization options. It's worth giving it a test run for a month, or even a week. Out of curiousity, what are some of the "Windows aggravations" that you no longer have to deal with? When I have some free time I'll try to enumerate some of them. For now, let's just say that I have a few gripes with it. :wink:

Randall