Shocked and Awed - Andy Reitz (blog)

In addition, Apple will provide emulation of PPC binaries in Tiger/x86, to ensure a smooth transition. This is really important, because people aren't going to run out and upgrade all of their applications right away. In addition, it is important to ensure that using Tiger/x86 is still a "mac-like" experience. If users need to contemplate as to wether or not they need to download the "PPC" or "x86" version of an application -- then Apple will have lost. But with Rosetta and universal (or "fat") binaries, even grandma will be able to survive this transition.

But there are still a lot of details that Apple hasn't covered. They didn't say if they were going to use an Intel chipset or not (but hinted that it would be so). They also didn't cover if Tiger/x86 would be 64-bit (using the x86-64 instruction set), but it probably will be 64 bit. They also didn't talk about their dual-processor strategy. My guess is that they will follow Intel's lead. Intel is pumping dual core CPU's for the mass market, and keeping SMP in the server space (with the Xeon). While we could see a Xeon-based PowerMac, I'm not so sure that is likely (Xeon's are quite expensive). And of course, they didn't talk at all about how they would keep people from running MacOS X on non-Apple hardware.

Phil Schiller did say "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac". Note that he didn't say that Apple wouldn't support this. His wording is that Apple would prevent running Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware. So, it could be that Apple will leverage some sort of Intel DRM after all, as I wrote about on Saturday. But at this point, it is all speculation as to Apple's exact plans.

All-in-all, I'm not so sure that this is a good move for Apple. I think it is somewhat prescient that there is no mention of this switch on the main page of Apple.com - I had to dig in order to find the press release, in fact. I think that Apple is going to have a very hard time selling x86-based macs, purely from a psychological perspective. I mean, picture it -- you'll be able to go to your favorite computer store, and make an apples-to-apples (no pun intended) comparison between an Apple box and a Wintel box. These two hypothetical machines will have the same CPU, RAM, Graphics Card, HD, etc. And they will also have two very different prices. So it will be evident, to all consumers, just how much the "Apple tax" is. And I don't think that people are going to go for it. Hell, I think that I am going to have a hard time going for it. In the laptop space, Apple still has a strong chance -- design matters quite a bit more in laptops than it does in desktops.

So, is this "the end" for Apple? Probably not, but it could spell doom for their hardware business. It is too early to tell. What I do know is that I have pretty mixed feelings about this switch, and that Steve Jobs has huge balls.

-Andy.

So, Apple did it. They announced that they are switching the Mac platform to Intel processors capable of running the x86 instruction set. Apple knows how to do these sorts of transitions, and as such, I really cannot fault their plan for making this transition. As of today, they already have a build of Tiger running on x86 where \"almost everything works\". In addition, they have a new version of Xcode, which supports building applications that can run on Tiger/x86. This means that pretty-much as of now, developers can start porting their code over to the new platform.\n\nIn addition, Apple will provide emulation of PPC binaries in Tiger/x86, to ensure a smooth transition. This is really important, because people aren't going to run out and upgrade all of their applications right away. In addition, it is important to ensure that using Tiger/x86 is still a \"mac-like\" experience. If users need to contemplate as to wether or not they need to download the \"PPC\" or \"x86\" version of an application -- then Apple will have lost. But with Rosetta and universal (or \"fat\") binaries, even grandma will be able to survive this transition.\n\nBut there are still a lot of details that Apple hasn't covered. They didn't say if they were going to use an Intel chipset or not (but hinted that it would be so). They also didn't cover if Tiger/x86 would be 64-bit (using the x86-64 instruction set), but it probably will be 64 bit. They also didn't talk about their dual-processor strategy. My guess is that they will follow Intel's lead. Intel is pumping dual core CPU's for the mass market, and keeping SMP in the server space (with the Xeon). While we could see a Xeon-based PowerMac, I'm not so sure that is likely (Xeon's are quite expensive). And of course, they didn't talk at all about how they would keep people from running MacOS X on non-Apple hardware.\n\nPhil Schiller did say \"We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac\". Note that he didn't say that Apple wouldn't support this. His wording is that Apple would prevent running Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware. So, it could be that Apple will leverage some sort of Intel DRM after all, as I wrote about on Saturday. But at this point, it is all speculation as to Apple's exact plans.\n\nAll-in-all, I'm not so sure that this is a good move for Apple. I think it is somewhat prescient that there is no mention of this switch on the main page of Apple.com - I had to dig in order to find the press release, in fact. I think that Apple is going to have a very hard time selling x86-based macs, purely from a psychological perspective. I mean, picture it -- you'll be able to go to your favorite computer store, and make an apples-to-apples (no pun intended) comparison between an Apple box and a Wintel box. These two hypothetical machines will have the same CPU, RAM, Graphics Card, HD, etc. And they will also have two very different prices. So it will be evident, to all consumers, just how much the \"Apple tax\" is. And I don't think that people are going to go for it. Hell, I think that I am going to have a hard time going for it. In the laptop space, Apple still has a strong chance -- design matters quite a bit more in laptops than it does in desktops.\n\nSo, is this \"the end\" for Apple? Probably not, but it could spell doom for their hardware business. It is too early to tell. What I do know is that I have pretty mixed feelings about this switch, and that Steve Jobs has huge balls.\n\n-Andy.