SI
SI
discoversearch

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: BillHoo who wrote (18599)9/28/1998 11:56:00 AM
From: Linda Kaplan  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 213185
 
At least our "AAPL is 40!" party has been validated. I'm not really celebrating till AAPL is 50, though.

Linda



To: BillHoo who wrote (18599)9/28/1998 3:02:00 PM
From: HerbVic  Respond to of 213185
 
Right Bill,

Point being that there are a number of ways that it could be done, and done in such a way as to make the brand of processor [for the owner of such a system] totally transparent to the computer user/consumer. That would have to be a market coup if there was no price/performance penalty.

OS X at this point would be an OS manager. It will already have the capacity to direct the user to any of a number of strong operating systems. That there would be no performance penalty would make OS X on such a platform THE QUID PRO QUO CHOICE for scientific and engineering applications. (Perhaps OS X will already address this adequately without the need for a hardware patch to Pentium instructions.)

Another factor is the leap to Merced that the Intel world is bound to see as necessary eventually. The legacy applications of Windows XX and DOS X.X will face being orphaned unless a suitable emulator presents itself. This is a point of weakness in the Intel strategy that would strengthen demand for a Power PC w Pentium capability.

Of course the future is ripe with possibilities for speculation. This just seems so obvious, it's hard to believe that it is not going to be exploited.

HerbVic