Panther works very well on the Compaq Deskpro 286 we've got holding a door open at work. It looks a bit odd on a green screen, and the lack of a mouse is sometimes troublesome, but it's gonna be SMOKIN' when I put that 486sx chip in there. woo, I say, hoo.

Its about time the pc zealots discover what apple can give. Imagine how much benefit Apple can gain from 90 % consumers. No doubt the acceptance of quicktime, ipod, and itunes indicates it will be successful. The success of Linux indicates that there is a market and intel users are aching to try a new direction.

OK maybe to avoid jeopardizing Macintosh sales, Apple can simply a create a new OS for intel based computers; or maximized the development of Darwin; or make its presence in Linux platform (Aside from Red Hat Linux what else fo they got). Either way its high time Apple shoud take a bite of the greater market share, bring its name back to the record books and regain the respect it deserve.

Again do not wait for Microsoft to get the upper hand nor even Linux to catch up .

Mac OS X could be ported to Intel (it's a lot more work than Steve makes it sound, but it certainly could be done) ... OR ... XP (or XP Embedded) could easily be ported to ... the G5 ...

Think about THAT why doncha?

XBOX 2 will be using an IBM PowerPC processor (probably a hybrid 980 design). Like the original XBOX this will also be running a cut down version of Windows.

However no version of Windows will ever be able to run natively on a Mac as Apple has locked the platform down just as Microsoft has done with XBOX.

Mention windoze to any computer user globally and no matter what brand their using they will think of microsoft. Mention Apple to any 90% of the computer users globally and most of them will either dispise it or will simply say its a "red fruit".
Now imagine if you at could least gain 30 % share of that market, how much profit, simple promotion and investors Apple can gain.

PC zealots?

The Mac world holds most of the zealots. I don't think PC users would give a damn what processor powers their machine, as long as it has the best price to performance ratio. A couple of years ago AMD was starting to threaten Intel by taking about 20% of the desktop processor market - this proves that PC users are flexible about which processor they use.

I really don't understand why so many Mac users are so in love with PowerPC. If Apple would just finally bite the bullet and move to x86 architecture we would have faster, cheaper Macs. We'd also have cheaper, easier processor upgrades, more cooling solutions, the list goes on...

And if anyone tries to tell me that a 2.0Ghz G5 (processor, not entire computer) is faster than a 3.2 GHz Pentium is smoking some damn good s*** and I demand you give me some...

of having people telling me how bad apple is. How Apple is soooo slow. Apple always crashes. How expensive it is to own an Apple. Apple is incompatible with their hardware and sodtware. All they remember of Apple here in asia is how much financial lose it got in 1998. To them its IBM and windows who were the pioneers.

Its about time...

And will these pc users be enlightended? If Apple will continue to remain in its small little island content in its mediocre success... never for a thousand years.

Apple made that mistake way back in the GUI war.
Wake up Apple. Its time.

My eMac 1Ghz is perfectly capable of holding its own against my Barton 2500 (1.83Ghz??) upstairs - both systems have comparable specs (the Barton is a little better - eMac: 1GB Ram, Radeon 7500 vs. 1.5GB, gf4 4200). Without comparable software it's difficult to judge, but the eMac is certainly ahead in some benchmarks that I've run. Not to mention the fact that it's cured my 'creeping upgrade' urge by being unupgradeable - I spend less now than I used to :) Apple is cheaper!

How many people still think clock speed is directly proportional to ips across architectures.

First, Apple will probably never base their machines on x86.
Secondly, even if they did switch to x86, OS X will never, never, never run on any hardware that Apple has not produced-- so surrender the fantasy of running OS X on some homebuilt x86 shitbox. The major selling point of the Mac is the "it just works" factor-- the tight integration between Apple software and Apple hardware. They won't be able to deliver that if they suddenly have to support hundreds of varieties of commodity hardware flying out of factories in East Bumblefuck, Asia. Microsoft has blown through umpteen billion dollars over damn near twenty years in their attempt to do it, and they still haven't got it right. And if you think Dell would offer OS X as a preload option on their machines, think again. Microsoft would revoke their Windows license in a heartbeat and try to put them out of business.

Apple is a hardware company, period. Their software is just a selling point for their hardware. Look at iTunes and the iTunes Music Store as another example-- iTunes is a free download, and they barely make a profit on the sale of iTMS music. The whole thing is set up to sell iPods, and ideally induce some satisifed iPod buyers to switch to the Mac.

to x86, and you still have to buy Apple hardware to run OS X, I think it'll lower the price. You might see $799 iBooks at 2 GHz.

"The Mac world holds most of the zealots." Hahaha. The Mac does have a lot of fans who love their computers, but a true zealot requires conversion by the sword. I know of no admins who require you to switch to the Mac, but there's a list as long as I-95 of PC admins who, simply on a dim whim, require Mac users to switch to a lesser tool like the PC. Who's are real zealots? Hands down: PC users

Road maps?
Road maps?

We don't need no steenkin Road maps..

When we Mac Users were using Mac OS 9 we were enlighted. Then Steve Jackass (who is yet another incompetant freak democrat which is one of the reasons Apple is a failure) degraded and ruined the OS with the NeXT pollution. Now using a Mac is the same as using Windows. An ugly hidious experience.

You have a closed mind and never even tried MacOS X earnestly. You fear change. Grow up and get over it. MacOS X has made most users much more productive than they were in MacOS 9. Those who took the time to learn the new OS benefitted. You could do the same.

"I really don't understand why so many Mac users are so in love with PowerPC. If Apple would just finally bite the bullet and move to x86 architecture we would have faster, cheaper Macs. We'd also have cheaper, easier processor upgrades, more cooling solutions, the list goes on..."

Oooh yea, more cooling solutions. Too bad a stock PC heatsink/fan runs just fine. No need for the super copper coor piezioelectric cooler. Have been using stock stuff for 10 years no issues.
Yea, we could also get the LED fans and cathode tubes to rice out our PC's. Yeah, that's oh so cool. Please.


"And if anyone tries to tell me that a 2.0Ghz G5 (processor, not entire computer) is faster than a 3.2 GHz Pentium is smoking some damn good s*** and I demand you give me some..."

PS: It is. Has to do with the architecture more than the speed. Same way the last batch of P3's at 1.1 Ghz would wipe the floor with the P4 1.4 Ghz.

The reverse could also be said. NeXTstep was ruined with all that ancient Mac OS pollution.

I stopped using Classic Mac OS during the System 7 days because I was sick and tired of Extension conflicts, bombs, more reboots than Windoze, pathetic cooperative multitasking, and "virtual memory" that was a joke. I'd been a Mac user since the Lisa 7/7 days. However, I moved to Solaris because of stability (and a refusal to use a M$ product) and then to OpenStep. Now I'm full circle back to Mac OS X.

Steve pretty much saved Apple with OS X. Under the leadership of Scully, Spindler, and Amellio, Apple managed to make big plans for Pink, Copeland, Gershwin, etc. However, no OS was ever released with any sort of stability because Apple's engineers couldn't get NuKernel out the door.

Bring in Steve and Avie and all the sudden we have a great, workable OS with modern features that's a joy to use and a joy to program for (compared to MPW). If that's pollution, I say bring on the toxic waste.

It's about the whole experience.
True plug'n'play through predictability of the hardware. One of Micro$hit's main problems is that anyone can build a Wintel crapbox for next to nothing and there's just no way you can test you OS on all possible hardware configurations.
And then, if you're really honest to yourself, not one single Intel (or AMD for that matter) powered box is even close to the deign league current Macs are in.
I don't want a cheap a** computer, I want s*** beast with an productive system on it. That's exactly what I do have now: PowerBook G4 w/ 10.3. I'm happy. Are you?

I believe it would be fantastic if Apple released a "long-term" x86 beta of OS X, which would minimize their responsibilities (supporting x86 hardware would be a serious impact on apple at moment). This beta would be totally public for people to "try mac" on their current hardware, without making what they consider an expensive commitment - just feeding curiousity. This beta, after something like 10 mos, would then be available for x86 at normal cost - but Apple would also be making incredible hardware, so the remaining users would possible now buy apple hardware. So if 40% of current MS users try Mac, and even 10% remain with OS X, and 5% of those buy Mac hardware, that's a great increase - and potential user percentage are actually much higher I think.

Secondly, even if they did switch to x86, OS X will never, never, never run on any hardware that Apple has not produced-- so surrender the fantasy of running OS X on some homebuilt x86 shitbox.

Actually, recalling an article I read previously, the main problem with this thought is that, since OS X is based on Darwin, and Darwin is open-source (and currently runs on X86), then it would be (relatively) easy to hack in what was missing in order to run OS X on a non-Apple box.

Apple is a hardware company, they aren't giving that up just to sell more copies of OS X to the populace.

XBOX 2 will be using an IBM PowerPC processor (probably a hybrid 980 design). Like the original XBOX this will also be running a cut down version of Windows.

However no version of Windows will ever be able to run natively on a Mac as Apple has locked the platform down just as Microsoft has done with XBOX.

Ummm, not true. Currently, several flavors of Linux runs on the Mac. There's no reason then that Windows couldn't run on the platform. In fact, they once had a version for the PPC architecture. The problem is there'd be little native software for it (PPC compiled, not x86 compiled), so it would be kind of pointless.

"There's no reason then that Windows couldn't run on the platform. In fact, they once had a version for the PPC architecture. The problem is there'd be little native software for it (PPC compiled, not x86 compiled), so it would be kind of pointless."

Back in the NT4 days, they had NT4 PPC (PowerPC), but it sucked real bad, as few apps were natively compiled for it, and those that ran Intel code needed a slow emulation layer.

I think the first 2 posts were the funniest things I have read in a long time. (The trollslayer comment was pretty hilarious too)

hopefully once the new xbox comes out, hackers can drop in osx in it... they can do amazing s***.

Note that Jobs says that Apple is staying with PPC in Macs and there are absolutely no plans of switching processors, BUT he does not say that OS X will not be released for Intel.

I think that selling OS X for Intel to Windows users who are stuck on Intel hardware is a good idea. There are a lot of people out there that really want to switch to Mac, but just simply can not afford to buy all new hardware and all new software all at once. They have too much money already invested in their Intel hardware and software. By offerring OS X for Intel, Apple would enable them to make a more gradual switch to the Mac platform. First they buy OS X for Intel and start getting OS X software, then when they have the money to buy new hardware, they buy a PPC Mac from Apple.

"I believe it would be fantastic if Apple released a "long-term" x86 beta of OS X, which would minimize their responsibilities (supporting x86 hardware would be a serious impact on apple at moment). This beta would be totally public for people to "try mac" on their current hardware, without making what they consider an expensive commitment - just feeding curiousity. This beta, after something like 10 mos, would then be available for x86 at normal cost - but Apple would also be making incredible hardware, so the remaining users would possible now buy apple hardware. So if 40% of current MS users try Mac, and even 10% remain with OS X, and 5% of those buy Mac hardware, that's a great increase - and potential user percentage are actually much higher I think."



I like that plan.

One addition -- under no circumstances should Apple OEM license the Intel version of OS X to any PC manufacturers. Anyone wanting to buy OS X to install on an Intel PC would have to pay retail. We do not want to have someone like Dell selling cheap c*** Intel PCs with OS X and claim to be competive with quality PPC Macs.

OS X for Intel is not about Apple switching from PPC to Intel; that is not going to happen.

OS X for Intel is about enabling Intel PC users to switch to the Mac platform.

Apple is a hardware company and thus they want as many people as posible to be running on Apple hardware. The costs prohibit many Intel PC users from making a binary switch from Windows Intel PC to OS X PPC Mac and thus they continue to use Wintel PCs. As their investment in Wintel continues to grow, the more they are trapped on that platform. Apple needs to throw them a rope to help pull these users out of the hole that they have dug for themselves. That rope is OS X for Intel.

"Steve pretty much saved Apple with OS X"

Read your history books again. It was Amelio who recognized the importance of a modern OS and pushed for the purchase of NeXT.

Geez! I get the feeling that if Steve pulled down his pants and started squatting out iNuggets, some of you would hail it as the best new product. Open wide!

Anyway, the real reason Apple wont port to Intel is that MS would immediately kill Office and that would do tremendous damage to Apple. Like it or not, Office is important to the Apple platform.

"That's exactly what I do have now: PowerBook G4 w/ 10.3. I'm happy. Are you?"

No, my PB G4 has white spots and 10.3 wiped out my FW800 drive. I don't worry too much about the security vulnerabilities but do wish Apple would be more open about them and patch them sooner.

Stop fooling yourself. Apple is good but still far friom perfection.

"And if anyone tries to tell me that a 2.0Ghz G5 (processor, not entire computer) is faster than a 3.2 GHz Pentium is smoking some damn good s*** and I demand you give me some.."

Yes, I will tell you that. Ever take a computer architecture class?

Let's try an analogy you might be able to understand. My car's engine is running at 2000 RPM's and yours is running at 5000 RPM's so you must be traveling faster down the road?

"Read your history books again. It was Amelio who recognized the importance of a modern OS and pushed for the purchase of NeXT."

Read your history books. I lived through it. Amelio didn't do squat except realize that NuKernel was never going to ship and decided to purchase NeXT. Steve's team at NeXT was the one with the product. I would say that Steve's leadership (along with Avie's technical savvy) was what led to the Carbon framework which is ultimately what saved the Mac OS. Can you imagine what would have happened if developers such as Adobe and Microsoft had to rewrite their apps in the Cocoa framework. I doubt there would be much commercial software available today for Mac OS X. Carbon provided the needed "bridge" for a smooth transition (vs. the yellow/blue box strategy).

Also, I hardly think it was Amelio who first decided that Apple needed a modern OS. Pink was in development long before Amelio took the helm.

And, when Steve left Apple to start NeXT, he and his team created what was at the time (and still is to some extent) one of the most portable, modern, and developer friendly systems around. The original NS frameworks were incredible for their time and have now grown into a robust and mature platform.

... the millions of dollars amelio pissed away that damn near killed apple.

God sakes people, it's a frickin processor. Who the f*** cares if it's Intel or not? If apple tests it and it's faster and cheaper then PowerPC then they should dump IBM and build Intel Macs. It's that simple.

Apple is a friggin moron if they refuse Intel just because it's Intel. And fortunately THEY KNOW THAT, which is why the prepped Panther such that I can be ported to another processor, if they at some point decide PowerPC sucks and they need a switch. Which is the prudent thing to do- prepare for the future, whatever it may be.

All this whining is getting old. For those of you who think Apple computer are expensive, you're wrong. You just don't get paid enough. Try getting a better paying job!

"Yes, I will tell you that. Ever take a computer architecture class?"

I sure did dumbass and you must have fell asleep when the part about efficiency alone cannot make up for the difference in clockspeed.
************
Let's try an analogy you might be able to understand. My car's engine is running at 2000 RPM's and yours is running at 5000 RPM's so you must be traveling faster down the road?

Of course not but that's exception to the rule rather than the norm.
************
Motorola's G4 sucked s***. We know that now that G5 is out. However, when G5 was not out, people would be deep in Steve's Reality Distortion Field where every Mac processor has always been faster than the Intel counterpart, if that is true, then what is the hubbub about G5 then?

The fact is, G4 sucked. G5 is an excellent competitor not only due to its architecture but also due to its clock speed and faster bus.

In my university (Philppines) I was greatly saddened when teachers are proposing to include MS moviemaker as part of faculties computer training --a program for them microsoft so innovatively introduced. As a mac user I felt so bad since I know MS only copied it from Apple. And now microsoft is again taking all the credit. Worse is that I could not explain this because iMovie could never be available in windows.

From gui, to codec, Apple's innovasion will always fall silent since it will never be available to 90% of the computer users. Instead 90% of the computer user will simply wait for the release of windows latest version since MS being the de facto standard OS will eventually introduced it and then again take all the glory. Microsoft will always dictate the computer trend.

Its more about 90% of the market share and giving them a clear OPTION. Since the processor wars a wall was created between Apple and the majority of the consumers. A mac running intel processors or OS X for intel users or will help break that wall and provide a transition from pc to mac. From there, Apple can now concentrate on marketing the box like the rest of the pc brands.

"All this whining is getting old. For those of you who think Apple computer are expensive, you're wrong. You just don't get paid enough. Try getting a better paying job!"

Your just lucky your not living in a third world country. Here you are lucky if you have a job at all. The commerce (dictated by the rich industrail nations) is dividing information technology away from the poor. Here the price of branded computers like Apple aggravates the situation.

Apple innovating in codec? Where? Did they develop MPEG 1 or 2? Or MP3 or Mpeg-4? Technically WMA and AAC are both close-sourced audio codecs supported by corporations. Of course Apple implemented DRM better than MS - I am not arguing that but the fact is DRM is present in both systems. FWIW, I use AAC with my iPod.

Exactly: Apple makes money by selling _hardware_, folks. Ask Phil Schiller hoe much Apple actually clears on each $0.99 iTunes Store sale.... maybe one or two cents (I hope, if the billion tunes McD's deal is for real): he said it's about selling iPods.

If you offer OS X (or any other OS) for Intel chips, every yutz with a whitebox can run it, and have a terrible user experience with whatever cheap c*** he sticks into the box. (Let's face it: 90% of the user complaints about Windows are caused by bizarre hardware and software.) Give Apple credit for knowing their business model well enough never to move to Intel unless IBM and Moto both get out of the chip fab business. Apple could never compete in a commodity market, could never offer stylish and memorable hardware that's a joy to use as well as look at. The R&D money would disappear in a dog-eat-Dell environment, and there'd be no investment in ever better OS eye candy (and functionality, of course). Apple would dry up and blow away like a sagebrush in the desert.

Say it ain't gonna be so, Steve.

Apple is a hardware company, period. Their software is just a selling point for their hardware. ... The whole thing is set up to sell iPods, and ideally induce some satisifed iPod buyers to switch to the Mac.

True. But remember iPods were enormously successful because they introduced a WINDOWS VERSION. Heck why did you think Apple also rushed to develop iTunes for windows if its so comfortable with Mac market. Because they know somehow that once the idea is out a competitor will eventually develop their own version. It may be cheap but at least they will greatly benefit from the consumers appreciation. The name of the game is understanding what most of your consumer and potential consumer needs. This is why Apple failed the OS, GUI, and iMOvie war. It remained within the grounds of mac users. Apple didnot provide the option for the rest of the 90% of the users to appreciate it, acknowledge Apple and then eventually give them an option to migrate. The door was close for them! And Apple was simply satisfied flaunting it.

If Apple will simply be content on staying it its small little island it will remain a insignificant computer industry, its innovative ideas copied and accredited to competiitors, and eventually die a lonely death.

I think what mac-users should remember is that not all wintel users are zealots. They are also potential mac-user. They are simply content using their pc because they are blinded and trapped. But once a panther enters they're boxes and previews them what they are missing I'm sure they might want to invest on a mac next time.

Yeah Apple maybe just a hardware company, but as long as it remains in targetting the consumers / computer users it must learn not to limit itself only on a specific market share.

Release Panther for intel with specific requirements. If they dont have at least users can install min version of OS X and get a preview (Here compatibility are solved). Otherwise they migtht just "upgrade" by buying additional hardware from Apple using PCI Extreme. Better yet buy a Mac with intel processors!
Still another option is promote Darwin. Its free right?

Its a win-win solution. Ooops! Did I used a the "win" word?

Don't leave us in the dark Stevie....

Stopping Apple fromn entering the corporate and education market from the rest of the world.

If Apple ports panther for intel boxes that means Apple will come out with Mac with intel processors... Does this mean more affordable Macintosh?

Let the intel-pc users deal with compatibility and configuration issues (which usually what they want). If they want an easier way of doing it just buy a Mac!

I knew it! Panther means crossing into the Dark side! But who cares. We are bringing the light to them.

I knew it! Panther means crossing into the Dark side! But who cares. We are bringing the light to them.

Will intel based Panther be compatible with PC using AMD? Myt brother just bought one.

a greater portion of the market share. Panther will be that bridge. Thats What Apple really needs to stay alive.

f*ck Apple is affraid of. ITMS and iPod shows that it is possible.

People are sick and tired of MS security issues, Long horn is long over due and I heard asia is coming out with their own OS. What does this tell us. Apple need to stop hesitating release panther.

Let the intel-pc users deal with compatibility and configuration issues (which usually what they want). If they want an easier way of doing it just buy a Mac!

a greater portion of the market share. Panther will be that bridge. Thats What Apple really needs to stay alive.

who are interested in using a mac but couldnot because they're dad just bought a new HP computer. Introducing an Apple OS would at least maintain that enthusiasm.

People are sick and tired of MS security issues, Long horn is long over due and Linux is gaining a strong market share. What does this tell us. There is still room for another OS in the intel based market share.

"in the intel based market share. "

Duh... does this include Apple computers?

Of course if Apple is planning to release OS x for intel based computers then definitively Apple must release intel based Mac.

Promoting Darwin is enough.

I would rather use Linux.

Let the intel-pc users deal with compatibility and configuration issues (which usually what they want). If they want an easier way of doing it just buy a Mac!

What makes the box sells are killer apps. Development of killer apps are prioritized where there is a greater market share -- wintel market.

'Fastest Computer' TV Advert Banned

By PA News Reporter


Computer giant Apple has been banned by advertising watchdogs from claiming its latest product is “the world’s fastest, most powerful personal computer”.

The claim was made in a television advert for the Apple PowerMac G5.

But the Independent Television Commission branded the advert “misleading” and banned it from being broadcast.

Eight viewers contacted the ITC to complain that the claim was based on the results of limited tests in which the specification of the computers used was configured to give Apple the best results.
ple said the tests, carried out by an independent third party, were “fair and even”.

But the ITC found that the claim was not supported by independent reviews and that, at best, the G5 was only “generally as fast” as its competitors.

In its advertising complaints report, it ruled: “The ITC considered that there was insufficient evidence to support the claim ‘world’s fastest, most powerful personal computer’.

“Furthermore, it shared one viewer’s doubt that the claim could be substantiated at all because, as evidence for and against the claim had shown, computers were constantly being updated and had many different applications and benchmarks.”

It concluded that “the advertising was misleading and ... should not be re-shown in its current form”.

Not only news like this that makes selling the box even difficult but also it tarnishes Apple's credibility. However if majority of computer users gets a preview of other products in their current pcs --like OS X-- then maybe they'll just simply bypass this.

is to let OS X stay in the Mac and promote Darwin amongst intel/pc users.

After Linux then Darwin. Finally UNIX platform are taking a greater market share.

It has a satanic implications. Its mascot is a little devil.

He's a PLATYPUS you moron!!!

He's a PLATYPUS you moron!!!

and what is he wearing.
Click here to see the devil.

www.opendarwin.org/ en/hexley.php

He looks like one of Donald Duck's nephew! Wearing a cute ca... EeeeK! Your right it is a DEVIL!

I don't want to be converted.

At the rate By the time Darwin is develoiping I bet M$ will come up with its own UNIX version. Put OS X on intel boxes.

Because most education institution knows that 90% of their students will be working with wintel computers. Why limit the student's future then. Apple thus must integrate into the wintel industry and then convert.

90% of the consumers are not yet informed how much Apple has improved, because they are not yet readey to buy a new pc nor let alone migrate... Panther will be Apple's next great promotional tool once it enters in their pc.

In addition to OS X installers wouldn't it be great to provide them with stickers stating "Panther inside...Made by Apple!"

how to become ?