Apple Dumps IBM/ Does Apple Have A Secret Plan?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seydou Bangoura
  • Start date Start date
S

Seydou Bangoura

As part of a college assignment, my colleague and I were asked to do
research on Apple switching to the Intel microprocessor. Here is a
result of our findings
http://www.mochima.com/net/apple_intel

In brief, we found that there is a lot of speculation in regards to the
implications of the switch. It could hurt sales until the Apple Intel
machines are made available. It may also hurt Apple's share price on
the Stock Market. In either case it could cause severe damage to Apple
in the short term and long term.

Although we agree on some aspects of this switch, we fundamentally
disagree on Apple's direction. I believe that the switch is the first
step of a master plan of putting their operating system, OS X on
Windows machines even though Apple vehemently denies this. Whereas my
colleague Robert believes that Apple's decision is actually much more
about moving away from IBM, rather than switching to Intel. This is due
to the fact that Apple's dependency on IBM has been hurting Apple and
the entire Macintosh community for quite some time.

Which viewpoint do you agree with, if any? Please provide appropriate
criticisms and arguments, as this assignment will be evaluated based on
the quality of discussion and feedback.

Seydou Bangoura
Robert Sones
 
Seydou Bangoura said:
Which viewpoint do you agree with, if any? Please provide appropriate
criticisms and arguments, as this assignment will be evaluated based on
the quality of discussion and feedback.
Click to expand...

What did "Deep Throat" say? "Follow the money." Where does Apple make
its money?
 
Seydou said:
I believe that the switch is the first step of a master plan of
putting their operating system, OS X on Windows machines even though
Apple vehemently denies this.
Click to expand...

What's a "Windows machine" ?

How do you "put" an OS on a "Windows machine" ?
 
Seydou Bangoura said:
this assignment will be evaluated based on
the quality of discussion and feedback.
Click to expand...

So you're soliciting opinions on USEnet? LOL!

I'lll give you a D- right now...

LMAO!
 
What's a "Windows machine" ?

How do you "put" an OS on a "Windows machine" ?
Click to expand...

Its hardware not software where they make their money. 50% of computer
sales are laptops. They can't put G5 chips in laptops due to heat so in
the near future laptop sales were going to be hurt. Macs are reliable at
least partly because they only have to configure the software to a few
configurations that they control so there are fewer conflicts. I can't
see them wanting to try to make it compatible to everything out there,
that is a nightmare.
 
Seydou said:
Which viewpoint do you agree with, if any? Please provide appropriate
criticisms and arguments, as this assignment will be evaluated based on
the quality of discussion and feedback.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm. Did your instructor tell you if you were expected to get all
your feedback from your original post, or if you were expected to
engage in a dialoge to elicit comment?

Trying to craft an original post to

a. Get in all your points and have them heard.
b. Elicit intelligent comment.

is sometimes just about impossible. One strategy is to hold back one
or more points and/or supporting arguments until they arise naturally
in an exchange. That way, the point or the argument will be framed not
only by the outline of your thought, but by the outline of the
discussion thread. Just as in chess, it pays to think more than one
move ahead.

RM
 
RobertS said:
Do have a better solution to offer? This is all new to both of us.
Click to expand...

Stick to your own agenda. Don't respond to abusive posts (which the
previous one was) unless you have some reason for thinking the exchange
can be salvaged (you know the poster, for example, and the abusiveness
is part of the act or you know the poster and the abusiveness seems
like an aberration).

There are some very bright people on usenet, some of whom are eager to
be helpful or to exchange knowledge, information, or opinions. There
are also not-so-bright people and pure trolls.

RM
 
<What's a "Windows machine" ?

I'm glad you pointed that out Grumble. That was one of our concerns
when we were writing this paper. What term do you use for a computer
that runs Windows? You can't use the term IBM compatible or IBM clone
anymore. Does anyone have any suggestions?

<How do you "put" an OS on a "Windows machine"?

A little bit of sarcasm doesn't hurt. Yes, our terminolgy in regards to
a "Windows Machine" was poor. But as stated in our paper Apple could
possibly "put" their operating system on a "A PC that has traditionally
run Windows" if they unlocked their OS from their hardware.

Seydou Bangoura
 
Seydou said:
<What's a "Windows machine" ?

I'm glad you pointed that out Grumble. That was one of our concerns
when we were writing this paper. What term do you use for a computer
that runs Windows? You can't use the term IBM compatible or IBM clone
anymore. Does anyone have any suggestions?
Click to expand...

Shouldn't you know that from your course? :-)

To aggravate even further the issue, Windows (certain versions of
Windows, at least) run on a variety of hardware that goes beyond
the PC/Intel architecture.

So no, saying a "machine that traditionally runs Windows" doesn't
solve the problem.

I think the term "PC" (or "PC architecture") reflects what you were
trying to say -- saying Intel, or x86 architecture may be misleading
nowadays, given that AMD jumped in with their AMD64 architecture,
which fits with the PC.

Carlos
--
 
RobertS said:
Do have a better solution to offer? This is all new to both of us.
Click to expand...

If the desired result of your project is reliability then you would be
far better off conducting a scientifc, statistically valid poll.

You say that you will be evaluated on the quality of discussion and
feedback. While it is *possible* to get that from USEnet, the
likelihood is low, and you have no valid way of discerning what is and
is not "quality". Hence my (sarcastic) reply.

Take an afternoon and search through the threads that have been posted
since the Macintel announcement and winnow the wheat from the chaff.
There's a hell of a lot more chaff...

djb
 
Take an afternoon and search through the threads that have been posted
since the Macintel announcement and winnow the wheat from the chaff.
There's a hell of a lot more chaff...

djb
Click to expand...

It true there is a lot of chaff out there, but their usenet experience
should be interesting, if not educational.

Norm
 
RobertS said:
Do have a better solution to offer? This is all new to both of us.
Click to expand...

This is not a terrible way to get feedback, but you have no way to judge
_who_ is giving the feedback.

I do Java and Database consulting for biotech firms, and I use a Mac
laptop to do it. From where I sit, this is going to be a pretty easy
transistion, and promises to give me some real speed benefits when it
comes time to get a new laptop. Especially since it promises to offer
real speed boosts under VPC - a major benefit when you do occasionally
have to run Access for something.

My attitude is very different from someone maintaining a school lab with
hundreds of machines, some too puny to run MacOS X. For them, they may
expect a rougher transition, as they may be using OS 9.

Judging my response against that of someone who does not do what I do is
tough if you have nothing but usenet to judge.

As an alternative, try to write an article interesting enough to be
mentioned on java.net, oreilly.net, or one of the other aggregators.

I might also suggest a bit of massaging of your text to make it clearer
why you are saying what you are saying, and to add a bit more analysis
and support for your contentions. At this point, much of what you have
said is just a restatement of other web sites, along with some slightly
fuzzy text assigning motives. For example, "It is Jobs belief that" is
making a statement of SJ's opinions, and we do not really know them.
What we _do_ know is what he said on stage, so say "At WWDC 2005, he
said ...", then follow it with "At this point, Apple is shipping a 1.67
GHz powerbook, which competes with Intel products at 3.something GHz.
Benchmarks indicate that the gap is narrower than this might indicate
<reference here>, but the gap between desktop and laptop Macintosh
speeds is widening. <timeline here>"

This then gives people something specific to argue with. Essentially,
without that, and without hard, practical statements to back those
arguments up, people will not see things worth debating. (In other
words, while you 'agree on some aspects of the switch', the previous
paragraph consists only of potential problems, all of which have been
debated already.)

Take it for what you paid for it.

Scott
 
Seydou Bangoura said:
Which viewpoint do you agree with, if any?
Click to expand...

Apple is a hardware business, it makes profits selling as many things as
possible by whetever means it can (bundle sexy new applications etc.).

The non-delivery of a laptop G5 processor by IBM was hurting sales and,
by the sound of it, Apple had little confidence in supplies or upgrades
going ahead.

No business likes to be solely reliant upon another and it's clear that
Apple had worries about this for some years - hence the "just in case"
team and the OSX builds for Intel all along.

And, let's not forget the ego of Steve Jobs - as one of the founders of
personal computing it must piss him off that Bill Gates has been the
winner for so long and at some point he must want to fight for the OS ...

Whatever Apple might be saying now, OSX is going to end up on "Windows
boxes" and be a real alternative for many business users. If Apple can
deliver the ability to run Windows applications under OSX, without any
performance barrier, then there is a huge market they *might* win.

On the other hand, introducing 2 years of uncertainty will harm sales
and Apple will have to rely on its (big) capital reserves to get by.

It *is* a huge gamble but I suspect they had no other real choice.

m-
 
Robert Myers said:
Stick to your own agenda. Don't respond to abusive posts (which the
previous one was) unless you have some reason for thinking the exchange
can be salvaged (you know the poster, for example, and the abusiveness
is part of the act or you know the poster and the abusiveness seems
like an aberration).

There are some very bright people on usenet, some of whom are eager to
be helpful or to exchange knowledge, information, or opinions. There
are also not-so-bright people and pure trolls.

RM
Click to expand...

What category do you put those of us unwilling to engage in speculation
or to provide information in fulfillment of a homework assignment? Are
there additional categories? Arrogant Bastards, perhaps? My suggestion
would be to read the trade press, like Mac World, Electronic News, CNET
News and the mac fanboy sites. You will find all the opinions and spin
you need.

Remember opinions are like ********, everyone's got one.....
 
Del said:
What category do you put those of us unwilling to engage in speculation
or to provide information in fulfillment of a homework assignment?
Click to expand...

You are misinterpreting the purpose of their assignment. They're not
posting here to obtain answers to their homework and then submit them as
if it was their own work.

Researching and preparing an article, then posting, and ideally be part
of the discussion was precisely the assignment. They already completed
the first two items, and are certainly hoping for an opportunity to
complete the third one.
My suggestion
would be to read the trade press, like Mac World, Electronic News, CNET
News and the mac fanboy sites. You will find all the opinions and spin
you need.
Click to expand...

And that's what, IMO, they already did. A healthy public discussion in
usenet groups would ideally have several purposes: 1) corroborate their
conclusions or correct any inaccuracies; 2) teach them a bit more about
the topic at hand, since they may have missed some important aspects in
their research, and it is likely that the experts out there will point
it out; and 3) it should force them to go further in depth to either
defend whatever they said (if being contradicted), or to check if
someone's claim about some of their work being wrong has some merit.

I think it all points to a better learning experience.

Cheers,

Carlos
--
 
Del said:
What category do you put those of us unwilling to engage in speculation
or to provide information in fulfillment of a homework assignment? Are
there additional categories? Arrogant Bastards, perhaps? My suggestion
would be to read the trade press, like Mac World, Electronic News, CNET
News and the mac fanboy sites. You will find all the opinions and spin
you need.
Click to expand...
After your comments about Forbes? Why would an unchallenged opinion
from the internet equivalent of a talking head be more valuable than
opinion on usenet? And Usenet posters are not influenced by the
sensibilities of advertisers.

Usenet has the virtue that it is--to some extent--self-correcting.
Errors usually get pointed out and corrected.
Remember opinions are like ********, everyone's got one.....
Click to expand...
Sometimes Usenet is like sports talk radio--the opinions are worth just
that much, and it's just about as annoying--but not always.

RM
 
Daniel L. Snyder said:
iPods and iTunes Store
Click to expand...

From <http://www.thestreet.com/_tscs/stocks/troywolverton/10229241.html>

"Even with iPod sales booming, sales of Macintosh computers still
brought in $3.1 billion in revenue, or 46% of Apple's total sales, in
the first six months of its fiscal year. In contrast, during that time
period, Apple garnered just $251 million, or less than 4% of its total
revenue, from sales of software, including its Mac OS."
 
Back
Top