Apple Macworld Announcements

[lecter]

Internet

Which kinda makes their new software product "iWeb" sound a bit silly

[Jammrock]

Internet

Which kinda makes their new software product "iWeb" sound a bit silly

I always thought it meant "idiot".

[ALBPM]

I always thought it meant "idiot".

Didn't Al Gore invent the "iWeb".....ROFL!!!!

[Fluff]

What ever happened to the power of 64bit?

Still only 1 mouse button.

[Wombat]

The MacBook Pro is nice, but so, soooo expensive

It's not that expensive, at least not here. Maybe within $200 of a PC laptop, and includes a lot more software, the camera, etc.

[Wombat]

Still only 1 mouse button.

And so what? i *wish* all PC software could be operated with one mouse button. Mac apps take advantage of extra buttons, though. It's just not mandatory.

[Helevitia]

Other than a speed boost, what other benefits do Intel MACs have? I mean, what will get the masses to switch? I've always been interested in getting a MAC, but like everyone else, It didn't seem feasible. So I am interested in hearing what you all think now that MACs will be based on Intel chips? Does this change the playing field enough?

[Wombat]

Other than a speed boost, what other benefits do Intel MACs have?

They'll probably do better as laptops for power reasons. They can run Windows or Linux if needed.

[az]

I heard on TV today that you can install Windows on the intel macs, is that true?

[Jammrock]

I heard on TV today that you can install Windows on the intel macs, is that true?

It's a standard Intel laptop, but with the Apple design. I don't see why not. You'd just have to use a Partition Magic-like boot disc to make space on the HDD for the Windows, and then use a boot manager that supports Windows/Mac, like lilo.

[Jessterw]

Other than a speed boost, what other benefits do Intel MACs have? I mean, what will get the masses to switch? I've always been interested in getting a MAC, but like everyone else, It didn't seem feasible. So I am interested in hearing what you all think now that MACs will be based on Intel chips? Does this change the playing field enough?

The speed boost is the primary benefit over the PowerPC based-Macs. As said before, portable systems will see the largest gain, but even the desktops will get a nice boost. Remember, the biggest problem with the G5 was the amount of heat the b*stard put off. The Intel chips Apple will be using won't have nearly as much a problem in that area, thus MacBooks, Mac Minis, and iMacs will be able to include more power in a smaller space with less worries re cooling. There are going to be other benefits, but we'll have to wait and see what else Apple rolls out in a few months.

I love my iBook and I can't imagine having to use something other than OS X on a daily basis. It's largely personal preference, but there is truth to the hype (you just have to swat away the zealots). Apple will never compete directly on price, but I think we'll see less of a price difference than before.

As far as a level playing field... it's rather hard to gauge that at the moment. Windows is about to hit a transition period, which will be very telling of their continued market dominance.

Edit: As far as Windows on a Intel Mac box, it'd take some doing, at least with Windows XP. XP only supports booting from a BIOS-based system, while the new Macs use EFI. There will surely be workarounds, but someone's got to make them first.

[az]

What I like from what I've heard about OSX and iStuff is that it seems all integrated with one another. I'd probably even forego using Opera for web and mail, and use iTunes instead of Winamp (of course I wouldn't use Winamp on a mac...).

I hope they use the opportunity to lower their european prices to a more competitive level. I would consider buying one if I had the money (and I don't care if they're PPC, x86, Alpha, StrongARM or Elbrus based, as long as they're satisfyingly fast, reasonably priced, and run the software I want. To me personally, this Intel deal is mainly important because it gives Apple a clear future in terms of hardware to build on, is probably cheaper, and might set the ground for or already include more than just PCs: Handheld hardware (XScale) etc. I'd really like to see an Apple iPhonePodNewton. Size and capacity of an ipod, large screen, voice recognition, 200 EUR ).

[az]

About Windows: From what I've read, Vista will be much more like OSX than XP is, not just optically. Though I think Microsoft cannot provide such an integrated system of OS and apps, because they wouldn't be allowed to. And integration is what's really missing, IMO: There should be absolutely no need to have more than one address book on your home machine, PDA, mobile and landline phone, laptop, office computer, and accessible from the net for when you're at a foreign PC, for instance.

[Nowhere]

What ever happened to the power of 64bit?

Still only 1 mouse button.

Uhmm...no. Ever heard of Mighty Mouse?

[Jessterw]

Az:

OS X applications, not just the iLife/Work ones, are generally very well integrated. One address book and various other supporting apps help tie everything together. OS X is also decently nice about allowing you to change from the primary Apple apps in favour of others Mail > Thunderbird, Safari > Firefox, etc. The iLife apps are an exception as they are pretty well tied together, for obvious reasons. The nice thing is the way many of these apps support plugins and are scriptable (love Automator).

Windows can't by reason of law, Linux tries, but OS X succeeds in providing a cohesive environment of applications that, well, just work. Note, not saying MS couldn't pull off the same within their own apps, but the Mac developer community is far more concerned with such things than Windows devs are. I've been on all three sides, so I'm not just a Mac zealot

That said, OS X does have its share of problems, though I can't think of any that have been show stoppers. Finder would be that standout, and only because it just plain sucks.