Apple and Intel sitting in a tree…


With Steve Jobs confirming today that Apple will switch from the IBM PowerPC to the Intel microprocessor over the next two years die-hard Apple fans are crying foul.   It’s almost as if Jobs has betrayed the faithful and it’s pretty amusing to watch the reaction across the web. I think it’s a great move for consumers that can be summed up in two words:

Dual Boot


Ron Keller

Hi, been reading your site for awhile and find it extremely useful.

Well, this development changes things alot. I was going to buy a Mac Mini (I’ve been wanting an OSX machine thats a little better than my G3 AIO for awhile now) but I’ll probably save my nickels and dimes and buy an Intel based Powerbook when they become available. Being able to emulate Windows within OSX at near full speed would be ideal but I’ll take dual boot. Note to Apple: If you produce a 12.1″ tablet PC with this capability and a decent 3D card with at least 64mb I’ll drop the idea of putting a 6-pack on my New Yorker to get it :-D

Perry Reed

Dual boot is nice, but I think Apple can do better. With wine and/or mono, it ought to be possible to run Windows apps fairly well within OS X itself. And Jobs could take the next step of providing Aqua-style widgets to make the Win apps look like the Mac ones.

As for OS X running on non-Macs, Apple has said no way. I’m sure they’ll use some sort of hardware-based scheme to prevent it, too… and I give the hacker community about a month after launch before they break it.


I’d rather use emulation myself.

Dual boot is so annoying and VMWare rocks.


Dual boot is a very nice concept – ask any Linux user who also has the sporadic need to use Windows software. With a Longhorn/OS X dual boot combo, it’s possible to imagine a two-mode machine: the Windows partition could be used for various kinds of off-line work and non-online gaming, and the secure OS would be booted up whenever there was a need for going online. ;-)


Apple wouldn’t have todo that, OEMs of the various components would do that, just like they do for Win boxes.


Making an operating system work on every PC with disparate video cards, processors, etc would take far too much resources. Keeping the OS tied to a smaller subset would be much more easier to do.
Why the didn’t go AMD is a bigger question…


If Windows will run on a Mac then I would be surprised if it didn’t work the other way around. If Apple doesn’t take advantage of this by licensing the Mac OS on X86 boxes they are crazy.

Kunal Kundaje

According to Apple, Windows will probably be able to run on x86 Macs, but the x86 version of OS X will NOT run on non-Apple x86 machines.
So it’s dual-boot only if you buy an x86 Mac…for now, that is. ;)

Paul Phillips

Does this mean we’re going to be able to easily run Mac software on windows PCs then?

Comments are closed.