To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2009-02-19
That's when I really started to detest Apple. I'd been a Mac advocate for a while, and I fully bought the whole, "the RISC PPC is really much faster, in terms of operations dispatched, despite it's lower clock-speed." When they switched to x86, the message was, "look how much faster these x86 chips are! THEIR CLOCK SPEEDS ARE SO MUCH HIGHER!" They switched messages without missing a beat. Their blatant display of self-righteous, unashamed self-contradiction and hypocrisy lost them one hard-core Mac advocate.
Member since:2006-11-26
This was exactly my point, but you stated it much more clearly than I.
I bought into the PPC being faster argument too, and maybe it was true at some point. But when the PPC speeds started to stall, and IBM was unable/unwilling to deliver the G5 in a laptop package, moving to x86 made great sense. I just didn't like the spooky switch in messages, and everyone's complacency about it.
Member since:2007-07-27
they didn't. the message was "intel chips are more power efficient", which was true as apple didn't switch to the p4 but to the core architecture. the clock speed of the last imac g5 was a bit higher than that of the first intel imac.
Member since:2006-01-25
Member since:
2005-07-06
I think it's understandable why people reacted the way they reacted. After all, Apple itself had to eat its own words, too. They more or less successfully camouflaged it by trying to spin it into a positive light marketing wise by showing some pretty graphs. But they definitely did a 180 degree turnaround.
P.S why am i unable to see more than a handful of comments when there are 336?