Re: Anther contender to the Mac Mini....

Lefty Bigfoot wrote: 
Flint wrote
(in article <O8GcnW-eX741Z47eUSdV9g@xxxxxxx>):


Furthermore, the Turion64 line consumes less/dissapates less power than it's Intel equivelent.



Do you have news that Apple is partnering with AMD? I would find that rather surprising at this juncture.



No, but then Apple has never unequivocally precluded any possible future dealings with AMD either. My point, however, was more towards the idea that Apple's move to x86 only serves to provide further stimulation for competition between AMD and Intel, perhaps even more so for AMD specifically, because now they have an additional market to strive for.


If Jobs has really wanted to shake up the world, he could have picked AMD over Intel. That would have been cool. Of course, knowing how Intel works, it wasn't going to happen, because they'll whisper sweet nothings in your ear with no compunction about truth at all until you see things their way. Look at how they've been keeping Dell on Intel for so long.


Remember, Apple's move was to x86 first, Intel second.


I don't think so. I think they jumped /specifically/ for Intel's processor roadmap, with emphasis on the low-power side.


Intel's roadmap was an inducement, true. But roadmaps are forward looking, and it is what x86 could do for them *right now* with short term competitiveness, and eye towards the likes of Dell.




As long as Apple is in the x86 market, AMD has an addictional incentive. You know, it's the old "We're #2, we try harder" thing, that's all.


It's interesting that Intel is force to try harder because of AMD as well. Competition is good for consumers.


Even if they never land a deal with Apple, we x86 users still benefit from the fact Apple is in the x86 market. That is a *good* thing.


If Apple really wanted to benefit everyone, they would license OS X on Intel hardware. Dvorak keeps insisting that is going to happen, but Jobs will try to make it /look/ like an accident, by pretending to have security features (that aren't very strong), then saying, "well, the market has spoken, people really want this, so we're going to let them have it".

Dvorak seems to be ignoring the very real problem of device driver support for all the various PC peripherals though, but I could see them partnering with a few OEMs to install it on restricted configurations known to work. They would probably make a /lot/ more money off the software (low-cost, high-margin) relative to their own lackluster hardware sales.


I don't see the device driver issue as a real problem for a couple of reasons. First, the perph vendors will most likely develop and distribute OS X drivers themselves as a natural consequence of fear of their competitiors - at least for the less complex external devices.

As for internal PCI-e add-ons, Apple already has support from ATI and NVidia, and the transition to x86 will make that easier for NVidia and ATI.

What Apple may have to consider getting used to is not having quite the iron-fisted control over hardware, but they can still exert a considerable amount of influence by deciding what vendors get on an AHCL (Apple Hardware Compatibility List).



-Rick
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Hot Chips: Intels dual-core Pentium 4 a rush job
    ... AMD is barely breaking even now, ... there's no reason now for Apple to not be within pennies of Dell next year. ... That patience has paid off in *spades*, as Intel *still* doesn't command the marketshare of 64bit desktops. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: OT- Buying new computer, which way to go?
    ... to AMD and Intel. ... on those machines that doesn't mean that it's a problem with the ... know of an Apple laptop processor failure too. ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
  • Re: Hot Chips: Intels dual-core Pentium 4 a rush job
    ... >>> Long term, I see either an Apple takeover of Intel, ... > The vast majority of 64 bit laptops ... > I see are AMD based, and this is the area Jobs wants to address. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: G4 vs. Intel/AMD Performance
    ... Your insistence that Apple made the wrong decision is absurd given that Apple knows more about future processors than you do. ... Intel does not address this in their roadmap until Whitefield in the end of 2007, ... Here is a great 3rd party analysis of the Intel and AMD roadmaps. ... Intel does not have the technology to beat AMD on the desktop/workstation/server through 2008. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Well, hell hath frozen over, Dell takes Opteron
    ... What other OEMs recently adopted AMD? ... Dell didn't even announce that it was becoming an AMD customer till ... Apple announced that they were going Intel, it was God talking to Moses ...
    (comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips)