NYTimes posted a no-frills article explaining the reasons behind the switch, citing IBM’s inability to produce faster, lower power CPUs for Apple leaving no choice to Apple but to switch to Intel.
What’s really behind the Apple-Intel Alliance
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Apple’s been doing some very good things lately; Darwin, launchd, and Webcore. It seems to me that Darwin will get a big shot in the arm from Apple using Intel, particularly for those of us who want to take advantage of these things.
It could attract a lot more attention from the open source community, even though Apple will continue to keep Aqua confined to OSX, leaving the rest of us to use KDE, Gnome, or such. I think I’d be okay with that.
wonder what woz thinks of this move anyway?
To bad apple is keeping OS X hardlocked, might be alot easier to compete with MS with a OS that can run on any PC.
I think that this has been addressed many times before. If this were to happen, support and development costs would go up so much that quality would suffer. OS X for x86 would suck almost as bad as Windows has always sucked, and indeed continues to suck.
You can have a great OS X experience. Just buy an Apple.
Solaris for x86 has along history of suckage, too. You can have a great Solaris experience: Buy Sun.