This article by Tim Bajarin of PC Magazine Online explores how the Mac - with its ability to run two operating systems - may be very appealing to IT managers in the future. As the Mac platform with Intel matures, I believe that's exactly what will happen. Read it here or below: By Tim Bajarin This week I had an interesting discussion with an IT Behind this IT manager's thinking is that the Mac now uses Intel processors, just like Dell, HP, and most other PC makers. And thanks to Apple's Boot Camp, most Macs can also run Microsoft Windows. When Apple announced Boot Camp last year, this IT manager downloaded it for use on one of the Macs in his company's graphics department. He also loaded a clean version of Windows XP. What he found is that Boot Camp indeed let him run Windows on a plain-vanilla Mac. But he did not like that in order to run it, he had to power down the Mac and its OS X operating system and reboot Windows XP as a separate session. He did some research and found that another company called The first version of the Parallels software did not work that well, but I have been testing a recent version that is much easier to use. In my talk with this IT manager, he stated that Parallels' new software is the reason he has seriously begun considering Macs. Although he is not thinking of tossing out all of the company's Now that is a forward-thinking IT manager! Apple itself has not really pushed a mainstream enterprise strategy and seems content to keep its current IT customers in the advertising, graphics, and engineering departments happy. I do think that the Mac's new ability to run Windows as well as OS X has to be viewed as a potential disruptive force within IT departments. At the very least, it should get Apple broader attention within traditional Windows-only IT operations.
PC Magazine
The traditional IT market is, for the most part, owned by Microsoft and various Windows PC makers, such as HP, Dell, Toshiba, and Lenovo. Surprisingly, Apple also has a solid foothold in IT, primarily in advertising, graphics, and marketing. This is where the Mac has found its home ever since it burst onto the scene, settling comfortably into the graphics and desktop-publishing niche. Beyond these areas, however, Apple has had very little luck in the broader enterprise marketplace.
Will Macs take on the Enterprise?
Apple Better Off with "Intel Inside"
Well, it's true. Apple is moving to Intel. Who would have ever imagined it? Actually, the move to Intel technology makes a lot of sense for Apple, which since the introduction of OS X has moved its core architecture to previously PC-only territory. It will be interesting to see how the "establishment PC" crowd will feel about Apple now.
Few argue that Apple has one of the most stable and robust operating systems out there today. Windows still rules the day, of course, but OS X with its rock-solid stability and immunity to many viruses has got it noticed outside creative and scientific circles in recent years.
What's still missing is OS X's robustness in the enterprise. Windows has such a head start, one wonders if Apple could ever catch up. But again, who would have foreseen the Mac GUI running on top of UNIX powered by Intel chips?
Moving to Intel means Apple will finally produce a world class laptop with world class power-saving features and extended battery life. My G4 Powerbook running OS X is a great machine, but it's no match for my office HP laptop with its P4M. Battery life on the PC extends easily to 4 or 5 hours, while the Powerbook stuggles to run 2 to 3 hours...especially when pushed by intense computing.
Scalability is another factor I'm certain Steve Jobs considered in deciding to switch. It is very possible you could see OS X running on your iPod, cell phone or PDA in the very near future.
Long gone are the days of Apple's legendary hardware/software integration. It just isn't as necessary today as it was in the early days of computing.
Will Apple's move to Intel mean we can buy any piece of hardware off the shelf to run OS X? I doubt that is Jobs' intention, but I figure if he tries to prohibit it someone will reverse engineer around it and make it possible.
I continue to be very optimistic about Apple's future. I figure the move to Intel will be the last straw for some of the Apple faithful, but those losses will be easily replaced by appealing to a new and larger market that never would have considered an Apple without "Intel Inside."
Tim Yarbrough
MacDoor Editor
Apple Moving to Intel: Say It Ain't So!
CNet's report yesterday that Apple is ready is switch to Intel chips is interesting, to say the least. What this move - if true - would mean to the loyal Apple fan base is unclear. After all, the Macintosh experience has always been about the user interface, not the chip that powers the screen. However, the anti-Big Brother mentality Steve Jobs has fostered at the company for years has meant Apple usually looked for non-PC alternatives which meant for years using Motorla chips and since the mid-1990s, chips powered by IBM technology.
Personally, I think it would give Apple a big advantage to use the chip set "the rest of the world uses," which potentially will result in lower computer hardware prices and increased compatibility.
Time will tell. I can't wait to see if the news is true.
Tim Yarbrough
MacDoor Editor
Different May Not That Bad After All!
A funny thing is happening on the way to world PC domination. Many journalists covering the computing industry are writing that fewer PC manufacturers may be a good thing and that Apple has a real chance of becoming a relevant computing platform once again (as if Mac users had to be told that). I've noted some significant news stories covering the computer industry the past several weeks.
It all started when Hewlett-Packard bought Compaq a few weeks ago and someone forgot to tell HP that a merger of the two PC box manufacturers wasn't necessarily a good thing. Stocks dropped and the PC press jumped in with both feet. What I liked most about the whole debacle is what they said about Apple:
"Dell sells online and through catalogues, its primary customers are companies and businessmen," writes Charles Haddad in his Byte of the Apple column. "Although Apple's online sales are growing smartly, the company still sells largely through retail outlets. Its customers are home users, students and artists. And that pits Apple directly against HP and Compaq, which dominate the consumer market for PCs ... If HP and Compaq wed, odds are good that one of these well-known consumer brands in PC retailing will disappear. That thinning of the marketing clutter should help elevate Apple's already lustrous brand name among consumers."
Charles Haddad of Business Week writes how brilliant he thinks Apple's strategy is to open retail outlets across the country.
"Call me crazy, but I agree with the handful of analysts who believe Apple-branded stores are a stroke of genius," said Haddad. "A place like CompUSA is basically a fast-food joint, except the boxes hold microprocessors rather than hamburgers. Sure, the labeling varies from box to box -- Sony, Compaq , whatever -- but what's inside is pretty much same. Not so with a Mac. It has a unique architecture that not only melds the machine to the operating system but enables users to do just about anything -- from playing graphic-intensive games to editing video -- without adding new parts. It never ceases to amaze me the hassles PC users learned to accept. Games that won't work without special cards. Printers that work with one PC and not another."
No truer words have ever been spoken about a computing platform.
Another Internet writer made the following observation recently (sorry, I didn't get the name or attribution):
"Ironically, Apple now appears to be the most stable company in the business (even though Dell is formidable). HP/Compaq's and IBM's ongoing presence in the desktop market is far from certain. Sony has so many other businesses that it's involvement with PC's need not be permanent. I'd think with the Xbox coming out that Sony (maker of PlayStation) would try to prevent people from using Windows since consoles and PC's are starting to converge. Gateway is in trouble, eMachines has been delisted from the NASDAQ, Micron, Acer, Tandy, NEC and Packard Bell are all gone. The dog-eat-dog world of Wintel is getting down to very few uneaten dogs, and the survivors may have pieces missing. Apple is starting to look awfully smart for marching to the beat of a different drummer."
Do you feel the tide may be turning in Apple's favor? You bet! What's more, Apple has a major change in OS strategy coming that will rattle a few cages. It's OS X and its UNIX based, which makes sense (finally) to all those computer geeks out there who could never embrace what they feel was Apple's proprietary operating system/hardware integration (like Microsoft isn't proprietary the way they "integrate" their technology)! For good or for bad, OS X will be embraced by a wider range of computer users simply because of its UNIX underpinnings.
While OS X will move a lot of folks initially to the Mac platform because of the UNIX attraction, in the end it may be cool and superior hardware that seals the deal. Some say there is no way Apple can build enough computers annually to keep up with say, a 10 percent increase in market share. Make no mistake, Apple has learned the hard way how to outsource product and would be able to keep up with nearly any demand the market has to throw at it.
I haven't said a think about the rumored 1.6 GHz G5 chip from Motorola, mainly because there are conflicting stories on the subject. Actually, I think it's believable because of the way it states Motorola got there – by altering the G5's pipeline structure from its initial seven stages to a total of 10. Thus, Motorola is using a type of microchip slight of hand to get the GHz to comparable Intel levels. The current 867 MHz Motorola G4 is roughly equivalent to Intel's 2 GHz P4 chip. That means a G5 running at the same 867 MHz could be at least twice as fast as the current P4, except for the added pipeline structure which could slow it down somewhat.
For more about the rumored G5 chip, see http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/13626.html.
As you can see, it has been a busy couple of weeks in the Mac world. Hang on, it's only going to get better.
Apple, Be and Bill Gates
If you have been a Macintosh user for long, you know why Apple Computer is such an easy target for criticism. Up until Macintosh clones began appearing, Apple was the sole hardware supplier for the operating system that it invented.
With Mac compatibles now flooding a market that was exclusively Apple's domain, this situation is sure to change. What remains to be seen is if the Mac operating system can stand up to the challenge of multiple vendors building boxes to run it. The PC-compatible market has gone through years of upheaval due to incompatibility issues and the lack of plug-and-play features.
Hopefully, the present Mac architecture is solid enough to answer the challenge until Apple delivers a new operating system.
Though there is still no doubt that Mac is still the easiest to use personal computer, everyone must admit that its lead has been seriously eroded by Windows. The public at large does not see the difference and Apple has essentially acknowledged this in recent months.
As hard as it is to admit, Microsoft has forged ahead on a number of fronts with Windows 95...particularly in the most important arena, public opinion. Getting a modern operating system to market is perhaps Apple's greatest challenge as it competes today's personal computer market.
This situation is ironic as Apple has finally licensed its hardware business. With that out of the way, Apple must keep its technology ahead of the competition. By not delivering on a new (and revolutionary) OS soon, it could seriously hurt the clone market which it so hesitantly started in the first place.
It can be argued at what point Apple should have licensed its OS in the first place. The reality is that licensing the operating system was only part of the problem for Apple. It still takes a special hardware configuration to run the Mac OS. This is where the next generation PowerPC platform holds so much potential. Gone will be Mac's proprietary hardware specs. The new platform is supposed to result in clone manufacturers being able to build cheaper machines. However, it will also usher in an era when the Mac OS will literally be going head-to-head on its own merits with the predominate operating system that the rest of the world uses.
It may be during this time that the realities of Apple not allowing the creation of a healthy clone market years ago will come to haunt it in full form.
Think of it. Had the Apple OS gone head-to-head with Windows 1.0 or even Windows 3.0, there certainly would been a different outcome than competing against Window 95 which is being peddled "as the most Mac-like ever."
Will Apple buy BeOS and merge it into what was to the System 8? Could a second revolution be on the horizon? I only hope Apple gets to Jean-Louis Gassee, Be Inc. founder and former Apple president, before Bill Gates does.