Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Artslaw who wrote (34150)	7/23/2002 3:18:20 PM
From: Doren	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213182

Steve, You are missing the point, OSX on x86 would have more options not less: It would just cost more (have to pay Microsoft and Apple) Nope. Apple would just be selling the same well built Apple boxes with nice cases, superior power supplies, and better connectivity. A dual boot partition would/could be optional or even added value. No need to abandon PPC actually at this point. Just like Linux can run on both platforms. and would again only be useful to Apple users who want to run some Microsoft applications. Nope again. It would be useful to Gamers, Web Designers who want to test their systems on Windows, People who work in Windows environments but use Macs at home, Code Warriors, and a lot more. Dell would get it's butt kicked because users would have this huge advantage of having OSX on x86 architecture, while Dell boxes would be limited to the Windows crap. If I switch it'll be because of processor speed, otherwise OXS is very preferable to XP and the Windows monopoly. You can bet there are Millions of Windows users out there who made the decision to buy a Wintel machine for marginal reasons like they use one at work, who otherwise would be willing to spend a few hundred bucks more for a Mac. As a matter of fact Window became the dominant system because people used them at work. Dual boot obliterates that advantage and turns it into a liability.

To: Artslaw who wrote (34150)	7/24/2002 4:03:06 AM
From: Cogito	Respond to of 213182

>>Someone proposed a dual boot XP/OS X machine. This is a terrible idea (IMHO). It would just cost more (have to pay Microsoft and Apple), and would again only be useful to Apple users who want to run some Microsoft applications. (Any really good application would have been ported to PC already, so all the PC user gets is another OS to learn--hardly a great selling point! And whatever "advantages" Apple had would be gone since they would be sharing the same hardware. Forget dual boot!<< Steven - You miss the point. Apple could sell x86 computers and only load OS X on them. Then any user who needed to run Windows programs, for whatever reason (including lots of web designers, network admins, gamers, etc.) would be able to buy a copy of Windows and install it. Maybe they'd download a special installation/driver pack from Apple to make it go smoothly, or maybe that pack could be included by Microsoft. Or maybe having Windows pre-loaded could be an option. Then Joe and Joan Sixpack who really would like to buy a Mac but have thus far been afraid of being out of step with their friends' Windows boxes, could have their Mac and eat it, too. Any really good application would already be ported to Windows? Not the ones Apple itself writes. Apple has shown time and time again that they can deliver apps that surpass anything available for Windows. iTunes, iMove, iPhoto are all far easier and more pleasant to use than their Windows competition. Also, to say that if Apple ran on x86 they would no longer have any advantages over Wintel is once again to fail to appreciate what a difference an OS makes. By the way, I've seen Windows running inside of Linux on x86 machines, and it's not slow. At least, it's not significantly slower than Windows always is. - Allen