AlphaG33k: Because we all know what happens when you ditch x86/32/64 compatibility.Macs have such a HUGE gammut of software available, as long as you are doing:-Audio Editing-Video Editing-Word Processing-Multimedia CreationIf your usage scenario is not here, good luck. Notice how "gaming" and "general purpose computing" don't fall into those categories?
Marine1: Microsoft needs to kill off Office for Mac. Apple uses it as a selling point for their laptops, which are in direct competition to machines being sold with a copy of Windows. Apple has the cash to develop their own office suite. I doubt it'd be any good compared to Office, but that's the idea.
unyon: My concern with this is compatibility, since the ability to run windows OSes on Macs was and is a huge deal for all of those people (including me) for whom occasional dips in the Windows world for specific windows-only app usage or testing is critical.Provided that you can still properly and easily virtualize/emulate windows on a Mac, that isn't a deal-breaker. But it can't be buggy, or it's useless.
Theaetetus: Those. If they really wanted to fight Microsoft, they could start integrating something like WINE into the OSX Kernel, along with better GPU support, so that you could run Windows EXEs seamlessly.
Kit Fister: So I guess my next laptop will be an HP or an Asus...
macdaddy357: Apple should stop worrying so much about hardware and sell Mac OSX to PC users. That would put Microsoft down like a rabid dog.
Gordon Bennett: In 1991 the company abandoned backwards-compatibility by introducing System 7.Is this right? I was using an Amiga at the time so I can't be absolutely certain but I don't recall there being any major issues with backwards compatibility under System 7. Additionally I'm certain that the PPC based Macs could run 680x0 software perfectly well. The only time I can think of them abandoning the older software was with the Intel processors' inability to run OS9 alongside OSX.
Fubini: They could go with in-house chips, but I'm betting that their tech is nowhere close to what Intel produces these days for high-performance CPUs. Unless they're totally content with forsaking the high performance computer market (i.e. their Pro models) they're not going to totally switch away from Intel, because Intel has decades of experience making high-performance chips. For sequentially threaded execution they blow everyone else out of the water.There's also a fundamental contradiction between "thin and light" and "high performance." More performance means more power, and more power means hotter, more cooling, and more battery. All that given, I'm pretty sure that Apple does want to get out of the computing market, and move totally into their iGadgets market for casual computing.
xanadian: Jesus, don't go AMD, Apple... :P
unyon: My concern with this is compatibility
If you like these links, you'll love
More Farking, less working
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2018 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jun 22 2018 07:57:28
Runtime: 0.413 sec (412 ms)