Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 6th Jun 2005 22:01 UTC
Editorial Today's confirmation that Apple is going x86 makes today a historic day in the industry. It may mean that Microsoft might see a few percent decline of their market share the next few years, but what about Linux? If Linux were to lose an equal amount of share it would alter its spread to the desktop, a spread that has been very positive so far.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Underdog Test
by Rohan Beckles on Tue 7th Jun 2005 02:21 UTC

I don't think that x86 is a bad choice given the circumstances. It's not a good business idea to be dependent on one company's (relatively niche-level) CPU _and_ your own niche-level OS for your workstations.

Given the circumstances, apart from the x86 camp, the only alternative would have been the UltraSPARC IV. SPARC is an open CPU blueprint, so different fabs could produce the chips for Apple, as they do for Sun. A good "underdog" candidate.

I don't think that Intel was a wise choice though. Intel have a bad habit of changing their CPU form factors, a bit too often for my liking. I would have picked AMD instead - not only is their CPU architecture fairly stable, not only do they absolutely cane Intel chips, they also have "underdog" kudos.

If however, Apple do decide to switch to AMD afterwards, it wouldn't actually be that bad. Unlike seasoned PC users, Apple bods don't tend to open up their machines too often.

Apple remind me of a small version of SGI - hanging on for dear death as best they can...:-(