Apple Abandons IBM, Will Use Intel Chips

Follow up on an earlier post concerning Apple's switch to Intel chips.

----------------------------------------------------

washingtonpost.com

Apple Abandons IBM, Will Use Intel Chips

By Mike Musgrove
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 7, 2005; D05

Apple Computer Inc. said yesterday that it will stop using processors
built by IBM in favor of Intel chips, which could help the company cut
prices and offer more products but undercut Apple's reputation for going
against the grain of the rest of the computer industry.

Intel has been so associated with Apple's arch-enemy Microsoft, whose
Windows operating system runs mostly on computers with Intel-equipped
computers, that the term "Wintel" was coined as shorthand for such
computers.

The chip switch for Apple's Mac computers "probably looks scary to most
traditional Mac enthusiasts who have always shown disdain for the 'Intel
Inside' logo," said Lou Dunham, a co-owner of the Bethesda shop MacUpgrades.

But Apple chief executive Steve Jobs said at a San Francisco software
conference yesterday that his company is dropping IBM's PowerPC products
because Intel's lineup of forthcoming chips holds more promise. He said
Apple did not know how to build the products it plans with chips planned
by IBM.

Since Apple's Macs and Windows PCs have always used different types of
processors, it has sometimes been tricky to compare their performance.
Some Mac users said the move may broaden the appeal of Apple products by
making it easier for shoppers to compare performance with PCs.

Jobs said the transition to Intel-built chips will begin next year and
be complete by 2007. Apple has been developing a version of its
operating system that will work on Intel processors ever since the
company was fine-tuning the first version of Mac OS X, its current
operating system, five years ago, he said.

In a written statement, Paul S. Otellini, president and chief executive
of Intel, lauded Apple as "the world's most innovative personal computer
company." IBM did not respond to calls for comment.

The Apple switch tightens Intel's dominance of the computer processor
business; it already has more than 80 percent of the market. Apple's
share of the personal computer market is in the single digits, so small
that some analysts and industry watchers think the effect of the switch
will be negligible to the bottom lines of IBM and Intel.

Even so, Paul Saffo, director of the Silicon Valley think-tank Institute
for the Future, said that Apple's products hold such cachet that the
switch could be a boon to Intel.

"It is enormous prestige to say your chips go into an Apple, even though
the numbers are small," he said.

William Gorman, technology analyst for PNC Advisors, said the switch is
potentially positive for Apple because Intel's size may allow it to
offer lower prices and quicker product availability. "Intel has a record
of more consistent reliability and availability than IBM," he said.

In establishing a relationship with Intel, Apple will have access to a
wider range of products, Gorman said. Many have speculated that the
Cupertino, Calif.- based computer maker has a video version of its
popular iPod digital music player in the works, for example. Intel makes
chips designed for that type of gadget.

Rumors that Apple would switch to Intel have been around for years, but
some Mac users wondered yesterday if Apple is running the risk of
alienating its core fans, the Mac users who obsessively pore over every
move the company makes.

Mount Pleasant Mac enthusiast Bill Morocco said he initially found the
news "kind of creepy" because he likes the fact that his Mac PowerBook
is different from other systems. But he also admitted that he doesn't
spend much time thinking about what kind of chip Apple puts in its
computers.

"I do video editing and the best way to do that is with a Mac," he said.
"I never think about the chip being built differently."

With recent hits like iPod on his hands, Jobs has inspired great credit
with Wall Street analysts and Mac fans. Even if the move appears to move
the company a step closer to the Wintel platform, some Apple aficionados
figure by now that whatever Jobs does with the company must be right.

"If Apple deems it a smart move to make this transition, I'm all in
favor of it," Phil Shapiro, a Mac enthusiast in Arlington, wrote in an
e-mail yesterday. "Steve Jobs -- and his board of directors -- are very
smart. Their wisdom becomes revealed to us over time."
© 2005 The Washington Post Company

"Sparky Spartacus" wrote in message
...
Follow up on an earlier post concerning Apple's switch to Intel chips.

----------------------------------------------------

washingtonpost.com

Apple Abandons IBM, Will Use Intel Chips

By Mike Musgrove
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 7, 2005; D05

Apple Computer Inc. said yesterday that it will stop using processors
built by IBM in favor of Intel chips, which could help the company cut
prices and offer more products but undercut Apple's reputation for going
against the grain of the rest of the computer industry.

Intel has been so associated with Apple's arch-enemy Microsoft, whose
Windows operating system runs mostly on computers with Intel-equipped
computers, that the term "Wintel" was coined as shorthand for such
computers.

The chip switch for Apple's Mac computers "probably looks scary to most
traditional Mac enthusiasts who have always shown disdain for the 'Intel
Inside' logo," said Lou Dunham, a co-owner of the Bethesda shop
MacUpgrades.

This is glorious. It's like the leading Democrats suddenly saying they're
going to start being Republicans. This will drive Mac fanatics positively
ape****.

But Apple chief executive Steve Jobs said at a San Francisco software
conference yesterday that his company is dropping IBM's PowerPC products
because Intel's lineup of forthcoming chips holds more promise. He said
Apple did not know how to build the products it plans with chips planned
by IBM.

There used to be a saying, "You won't get fired for buying IBM." That
hasn't been the case for many years.

Since Apple's Macs and Windows PCs have always used different types of
processors, it has sometimes been tricky to compare their performance.
Some Mac users said the move may broaden the appeal of Apple products by
making it easier for shoppers to compare performance with PCs.

It'll do the exact opposite, and may even help AMD.

Pagan

snip

Pagan wrote:
"Sparky Spartacus" wrote in message
...
Follow up on an earlier post concerning Apple's switch to Intel chips.

----------------------------------------------------

washingtonpost.com

Apple Abandons IBM, Will Use Intel Chips

By Mike Musgrove
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, June 7, 2005; D05

Apple Computer Inc. said yesterday that it will stop using processors
built by IBM in favor of Intel chips, which could help the company cut
prices and offer more products but undercut Apple's reputation for going
against the grain of the rest of the computer industry.

Intel has been so associated with Apple's arch-enemy Microsoft, whose
Windows operating system runs mostly on computers with Intel-equipped
computers, that the term "Wintel" was coined as shorthand for such
computers.

The chip switch for Apple's Mac computers "probably looks scary to most
traditional Mac enthusiasts who have always shown disdain for the 'Intel
Inside' logo," said Lou Dunham, a co-owner of the Bethesda shop
MacUpgrades.

This is glorious. It's like the leading Democrats suddenly saying they're
going to start being Republicans. This will drive Mac fanatics positively
ape****.

But Apple chief executive Steve Jobs said at a San Francisco software
conference yesterday that his company is dropping IBM's PowerPC products
because Intel's lineup of forthcoming chips holds more promise. He said
Apple did not know how to build the products it plans with chips planned
by IBM.

There used to be a saying, "You won't get fired for buying IBM." That
hasn't been the case for many years.

Since Apple's Macs and Windows PCs have always used different types of
processors, it has sometimes been tricky to compare their performance.
Some Mac users said the move may broaden the appeal of Apple products by
making it easier for shoppers to compare performance with PCs.

It'll do the exact opposite, and may even help AMD.

Pagan

snip

OS9 - OSX was a far more radical change for Apple. This cpu change
is Apple's headache and shouldn't even concern the customer if Apple
gets it right.

Take the Folger's challenge. Secretly swap Bill's AMD XP whatever for
an Intel M processor. Did Bill notice the difference? Oh hell no.
Of course, Bill may be running some ZD benchmark 24/7 or may have
an atomic clock nearby, but that's rare.

50% of Apple's customers won't even notice (assuming they roll it out
OSX as a hardware port).