Re: Intel Based Macs...?

In article <uce-A47BDB.17585627102005@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Gregory Weston <uce@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> In article <271020050825077144%invalid@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Donald L McDaniel <invalid@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > I don't think you understood what I wrote.
> > >
> > > I'm not talking about a PC-on-a-card for providing Windows compatibility
> > > (although stuff like that has been developed in the past.) I'm talking
> > > about a board with an Intel processor and necessary support circuitry to
> > > enable a PPC PowerMac to boot the Intel version of Mac OS.
> > >
> > > When enabled, this card would (ideally) turn the whole system into the
> > > equivalent of an Intel Mac, not a PC.
> >
> > So let me get this right: you want to produce a computer which has TWO
> > logic boards on it, one which can boot Windows, and one which can boot
> > OS X.
>
> No. Read better. David said: "I'm talking about a board with an Intel
> processor and necessary support circuitry to enable a PPC PowerMac to
> boot the Intel version of Mac OS." See it there? Just two sentences
> before your reply?
>
>
> > IOW, the only thing different about the new MacTel machine will be the
> > OS provided with it: OS X/Intel rather than OS X/PPC. To run PPC apps
> > on the new MacTel, all that would be necessary is for the various
> > developers to re-compile their source code for OS X/Intel.
>
> Which may or ay not be a simple task depending on what tools/language
> they used to create it and how careful they were about potential
> platform-centric issues.
>
> > In the meantime, Apple has provided Rosetta to enable PPC apps to run
> > on a MacTel.
>
> Most. Not all. Some things really will need to be recompiled.
>
> > Microsoft has already publically stated that they will not stop anyone
> > from putting Windows on a MacTel machine, and it has already been
> > established that Windows will install and run as-is out of the box on a
> > MacTel with no hardware changes.
>
> Careful. It has been established that Windows will install on the
> developer transition systems.
>
>
> > As I have previously stated, a single MacTel logic board WILL be able
> > to run PPC apps in native mode(with the help of Rosetta) with little or
> > no reduction in speed, contrary to your statement above. Apparently,
> > you just don't see the value of your OS of choice, while I, a former
> > "Winnut", do see the promise and value of OS X/Intel.
>
> Snort. That's funny. That's _really_ funny. I'll let David tell you why
> if he chooses, but trust me: it's funny.

Evidently you fail to believe the rhetoric of your Great Leader, Mr.
Jobs (or you fail to read any of his "Propaganda"). And let's call it
what it truly is. I mean, let's stop pussyfooting around with words
like "advertising campaign", or "marketing hype". We both know there
is a Culture-war being fought through the Press and the Marketplace
(and yes, the Government, the EU, and the U.N. are all getting in a few
whacks from time to time, too). On one side is the MacCulture, and on
the other side is the WinCulture. Both sides have pulled away from
each other, and are each circling around their Bonfires of Vanities,
powered by the CPUs and logic boards each side venerates as their Lodge
Poles and Trophy Rack.

But, look!

Behold, The Great Elitist, the Father of all Mac Elitists, the Mighty
Chief Jobs has now spoken: "Macs from this day forward shall be
Intel-based (but not cheap, ugly, unelitist IBM clones), until the
Eastern Sky turns red from the Fires of Hell fed by the bones of
Winnuts served up for Breakfast. However, My Intel-based Lodge Pole
shall not be like his Intel-based Lodge Pole, because I have the
Great, Outstanding, Superior, Perfect, and Municifent Law of OS X/Intel
to guide My Way, and the way of My lowly elitist disciples, who
willingly get into debt over and over to My Father's House, the Great
Apple (not to be confused with the other "apple", those silly boys, the
Beatles), to purchase My Lodge Poles. It's almost as if (hint-hint)
these lowly elitist disciples WORSHIP My Lodge Poles as if they were
gods. And well they could be: since I am a god, it only goes to reason
that My Creations, the Great and Mighty Lodge Pole, would be gods,
too".

But some lowly elitists disciples are questioning the Wisdom of the
Mighty Chief Jobs, especially when those delicious Winnuts fall off the
trees with their foolish little arguments. The sight of those Winnuts
sends the lowly elitists disciples into a rage, and they tear through
the Usenet like hungry pigs, eating every thing in sight, including
their own left feet.
..
>
>
> > In conclusion, when one purchases a MacTel, he will automatically get
> > TWO computers for the price of one: A machine which will be able to
> > run OS X natively, and a machine which will be able to run Windows
> > natively. Both using the same logic board.
>
> You're making an assumption here that may not bear out. While both Apple
> and Microsoft have said that they will not act to prevent people from
> running Windows on x86 Macs, neither of them have said they'll go out of
> their way to make sure it's possible, either. I fully expect that
> Apple's going to be an early adopter of new technologies for Intel, and
> I shouldn't be at all surprised to find that some of those adoptions
> bring x86 Mac boxes far enough away from commodity PCs that the
> then-current build of Windows won't actually run on them.

If I am making an "assumption", then so is half the computer world,
including many well-respected industry watchers . The fact is,
Microsoft has stated publically that they won't "go out of their way"
to make it impossible to install Windows on a MacTel. This makes
sense, since Microsoft wants to see Windows able to run on any Intel
machine, and on EVERY Intel machine produced, and they do "go out of
their way" to ensure that this happens.

If Windows won't run out of the box on a production Intel iMac, it
will be because Apple intentionally shuts (by engineering changes to
the logic board) Microsoft out of their boxes.

I doubt that this will be a healthy thing for the business relationship
between Microsoft and Apple.

I mean, why don't both sides just call an end to their mostly lucrative
relationship, and put their long-time partnership out the door with the
cat once and for all.

This seems to be the opinion of some Windows Fanatics and not a few Mac
Fanatics.

However, I think better of both Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. If they are
up to it, Mr. Jobs could use this changeover of platforms as an
opportunity to allow greater interoperability between Windows and OS
X/Intel, and Mr. Gates could rewrite and recompile his Windows code so
that it would run on an Intel Mac. which could be nothing but good for
the health of the computer sector, and the economy in general.

I mean, both Windows and OS X/Intel users would work smarter, faster,
better organized, and better connected to other users, taking advantage
of the best features of both OSes, if Windows and OS X/Intel were
easily connected. Imagine: A version of Windows for OS X/Intel, which
would run as a native OS X/Intel app.

As a result of this, they would get their work done quicker, leaving
more time for themselves for other uses. This would lead to their
increased happiness and peace.

After all, isn't that what it is all about? Being happy and at peace?

Chapter II at another time, perhaps.

--
Donald L. McDaniel
Please reply to the original thread.
=======================
.