Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 29th Jan 2006 16:12 UTC
"The buzzwords for the 2006 technology outlook fly thick and fast in nerd circles: high-definition DVD. A la carte TV shows from the Internet. Windows Vista. Most of these goodies will take time to reach the masses. One, however, has already arrived, six months ahead of schedule: Apple Computer's switch to Intel chips for its Macintosh computers."
Thread beginning with comment 90688
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2005-12-28
Okay, so if you want to be nitpicky, he actually said "The operating system, Mac OS X 10.4.4, has indeed been rejiggered to speak Intellese," and "rejiggered" is substantially different from "rewrite." A person could rejigger a door jamb for it to swing smoothly and close tightly, but that wouldn't constitute rewriting the door. I'd say the average non-techie would get "rejigger" over rewriting software, and if their understanding is that basic, they're probably not too worried about the rate of ports.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-07-06
I don't know about that. His "simplification" is so inaccurate as to be misleading. Apple didn't have to "rewrite" OS X in "intellease". They had to port it. That's a very substantial difference, and a very important distinction to make. What he says gives people the idea that moving OS X apps to Intel is going to be an "enormous mountain of work", which it really isn't. If they think it is, they might hold off on buying an Intel Mac, expecting ports to come very slowly. I think it would have been much better to just say "OS X has already been running on Intel machines for the last five years, and Apple has just unveiled them now". That's both more accurate, and easier to understand.