steve jobs turns to the dark side

[easuter]

lots of apple users now hate jobs for addopting the intel platform.

http://www.maclive.net/sid/137

lol!

[Weedman]

Now that's cool.

For me, I don't really care. It just means that apple will have a downturn in profits, imo. It also means that there is an operating system war on 1 arch, x86.

[a12ctic]

it was pretty retarded of them, the PPC owns intel's any day

[easuter]

PPC owns intel's any day

yep. what i realy dont like seeing is that intels turning into a monopoly.

[a12ctic]

acualy, imo intel is losing a lot of power, amd is giving them hell, thats why their releasing all these fake benchmarks of conroe lol, i think the market is acualy about 50/50 now.

[DThor]

http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/09...samd/index.php

While the article isn't necessarily the final say on the subject, it does have some good points, IMHO.

I don't think there was anything retarded about it at all. And as someone who works in the field with heavy floating point operations, believe me, the difference between PPC and Intel wasn't just an Intel con job(although they excel at that), the fact was PPC was *always* playing catchup and you were paying more for it. I saw the extra cost as a fashion statement.

DT

[easuter]

PPC *always* playing catchup

intel seems to like doing that too:

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=8961

correct me if i'm wrong, but intel hasnt yet released a 64bit processor for mobile devices has it...amd turion is already flying

[a12ctic]

although that article may have been true a few months ago, amd is really closing that gap with am2, dual core desktop chips in 65 watts, and im pretty sure the dual core laptop chip only takes 50 watts, their single core chips are UNDER 35 watts now, pretty low wattage imo

edit: just so you know, the inq is the most untrustable source on the internet for rumers.

[DThor]

Well, I'm not saying it was the right call with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, but in the big scale of things and with foresight and a year ago...it made sense to switch at the time. There was a lot of politics going on at the time, too(IBM was playing silly beggars with Apple). The article I linked to made an excellent case to not go AMD. Whether or not Intels plentiful screwups + AMD multicore ends up equalling Intel's death remains to be seen. Everything is going down the mobile route, and AMD has some serious catchup to do there. It's like suggesting Linux being so awesome and Vista and the upcoming $700 MS Office suck so much and cost so much means MS is dying. Ain't gonna happen.

I will be curious to see how Intel comes out the other side, though.

DT

[a12ctic]

just so you guys know, i dont know how caught up on hardware you guys are, but amd's next gen chips are all made to be super energy efficeint, with single cores using as low as 25watts, and dual cores using as little as 45 watts