catdriver writes "AppleInsider has an article guessing about Apple's new Intel portable offerings in early 2006. 'With the initiation of the Intel Power Mac project last month, all five of Apple's Intel Macintosh projects are now said to be underway and moving at an exhaustive, yet fruitful pace. It should come as no surprise that Apple chief executive Steve Jobs is reportedly leading the charge, with his heart set on making 2006 the next 1984.' With Mac OS X for x86 now catching up to its PPC sibling, is Apple ready to take the plunge?" Intel PowerBook Rumor Mill Log in/Create an Account | Top | 315 comments | Search Discussion Display Options Threshold: -1: 315 comments 0: 309 comments 1: 255 comments 2: 188 comments 3: 52 comments 4: 36 comments 5: 26 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way. Apple Intel Switch (Score:5, Informative) by BWJones (18351) * on Sunday November 06, @11:32AM (#13963113) (http://prometheus.med.utah.edu/~bwjones/ | Last Journal: Sunday November 06, @12:29AM) I am sure that there have been some issues, that I have written [utah.edu] about before, notably the porting of hand coded Altivec instruction sets to equivalent Intel specific instructions. However, the code bases between Intel and PPC have been pretty close to one another going back to the NeXTstep days. You do remember that NeXTstep ran on Intel, right? At any rate, the next step, no pun intended :-), should be interesting indeed. I am hoping for additional professional plans that Intel specific chips should allow, particularly at the subnotebook (or even Newton formfactor) level. I have been travelling more and even the 12in Powerbook, which has been the best laptop I've ever owned, is starting to be cumbersome. [ Reply to ThisRe:Apple Intel Switch by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @11:41AMRe:Apple Intel Switch by Golias (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @05:13PMRe:Apple Intel Switch by Desecrater82 (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @11:41AM Altivec (Score:5, Informative) by 0xC0FFEE (763100) on Sunday November 06, @11:57AM (#13963244) "Altivec programs" really aren't coded against Altivec instructions directly. For example, for doing a vector add, you'd use vec_madd() which, if you have Altivec, maps to the vmaddfp altivec instruction. If you move to SSE, you'd probably code against the same vec_madd() but the compiler would generate the correct instruction for SSE. So, if you've followed Apple's instructions, conversion should be relatively easy. Furthermore, most people simply use Apple's higher level libraries (ie, vecLib, etc) that embeds most of what numerical people would need (like blas or lapack).Most importantly, Altivec, while really fast, only support single precision computations. This is sufficient for improving multimedia playback, applying image filters on photos or compressing music, but lacking for high-precision computations. SSE supports double precision, a big improvement for the scientific market. [ Reply to This | Parent Re:Altivec (Score:5, Informative) by Pius II. (525191) <PiusII@g m x . de> on Sunday November 06, @01:17PM (#13963645) That's very very dependant on your actual code. The gcc intrinsics mostly cover stuff that is also nicely optimized in Accelerate.framework: vector operations. But there are a few Altivec instructions which are impossible to map to SSE, yet they are widely used (IIRC, shifting by a variable amount is one of them). If you heavily depended on such instructions, you're basically SOL. And Altivec is really fast. Keep in mind that OSX86 still uses the brain-damaged 32-bit mode, so the algorithms will be totally register-starved. That may be less relevant if you've designed for the architecture in the first place, but porting specialized assembly from an architecture with, what, >64 registers (r0-r31, f0-f31, plus Altivec), to one with 8 sounds like pure hell to me. Good thing I always used the frameworks (actually I just figured that Apple would be better at optimizing than me :-) ). [ Reply to This | Parent Re:Altivec (Score:5, Informative) by jizmonkey (594430) on Sunday November 06, @02:41PM (#13964093) porting specialized assembly from an architecture with, what, >64 registers (r0-r31, f0-f31, plus Altivec), to one with 8 sounds like pure hell to me. If you're going to count the FPU and SIMD registers on the PowerPC, you need to do the same for Intel. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Altivec by ravyne (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @04:12PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Altivec by 0xC0FFEE (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @04:33PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Altivec by Jeremy Erwin (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @01:53PMRe:Altivec by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @02:47PM Re:Altivec (Score:5, Funny) by Reaperducer (871695) on Sunday November 06, @06:06PM (#13965391) (http://www.tokyoarchitecture.info/) I'm sorry, sir. You seem very intelligent and well informed. We'll have to revoke your Slashdot posting permit. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Altivec by martinX (Score:2) Monday November 07, @12:12AMRe:Altivec by mederjo (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @08:15PM Re:Apple Intel Switch (Score:5, Funny) by mattkime (8466) on Sunday November 06, @12:44PM (#13963479) >>I have been travelling more and even the 12in Powerbook, which has been the best laptop I've ever owned, is starting to be cumbersome.You must be a true geek...most people get STRONGER as they lug something around. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Apple Intel Switch by yppiz (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @01:06PMRe:Apple Intel Switch by Hadlock (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @03:22PMRe:Apple Intel Switch by sjf (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @03:56PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Apple Intel Switch by be_kul (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @12:48PMRe:Apple Intel Switch by EntropyEngine (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @12:56PMRe:Apple Intel Switch by bhtooefr (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @09:07PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. 1984? (Score:5, Funny) by Bananatree3 (872975) * on Sunday November 06, @11:33AM (#13963116) (http://forums.krazyletter.com/) with his heart set on making 2006 the next 1984.' Hmm, I wonder what Orwell would think about that. [ Reply to This Re:1984? (Score:5, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 06, @11:36AM (#13963129) What they meant was that 2006 will be like 1984 but won't be like 1984. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:1984? by Halfbaked Plan (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @01:26PM Re:1984? (Score:5, Funny) by tsa (15680) on Sunday November 06, @02:54PM (#13964178) (http://home.wanadoo.nl/r.w.tjerkstra) How dare you speak like that on /.? Apple != M$, therefore Apple == Good (TM). You should be modded down, you.., you... Halfbaked Plan! [ Reply to This | ParentRe:1984? by Lars T. (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @06:03PMRe:1984? by Halfbaked Plan (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @10:32PMRe:1984? by Baricom (Score:3) Sunday November 06, @11:31PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:1984? by Midnight Thunder (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @11:42AMIt's a reference to the Mac commercial. by Spy der Mann (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @11:44AM Re:It's a reference to the Mac commercial. (Score:5, Funny) by MooseByte (751829) on Sunday November 06, @12:46PM (#13963487) "You know, the girl with the sledgehammer breaking that giant screen with Big Brother in it. Only this time around the girl is the stoner chick [ellenfeiss.net] from the Switch campaign.She wanders into the room looking dazed, sees the giant talking face on the screen, then cocks her head like a confused cocker spaniel while trying to use her iPod as a remote to change the channel.Eventually she wanders out a side exit. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:It's a reference to the Mac commercial. by nbert (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @08:34PMRe:It's a reference to the Mac commercial. by Midnight Thunder (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @01:33PMRe:It's a reference to the Mac commercial. by Wolfkin (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @03:24PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.1 reply beneath your current threshold.I'm not worried. by game kid (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @11:44AMRe:1984? by marcello_dl (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @12:04PMRe:1984? by Kroc (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @02:45PMRe:1984? by marcello_dl (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @05:09PMRe:1984? by AgNO3 (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @12:23PM Re:1984? (Score:5, Funny) by 3770 (560838) on Sunday November 06, @01:04PM (#13963576) (http://vsxgen.sourceforge.net/) Hmm, I wonder what Orwell would think about that.My guess is "double plus good"! [ Reply to This | ParentRe:1984? by fireklar (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @09:17PMRe:1984? by Paul Slocum (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @02:52PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:1984? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @03:10PMRe:1984? by ZorinLynx (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @02:06PMRe:1984? by shmlco (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @02:32PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. As long as it's faster than my P-P-P-Powerbook (Score:1) by saskboy (600063) on Sunday November 06, @11:39AM (#13963143) (http://www.abandonedstuff.com/ | Last Journal: Friday October 28, @08:52PM) http://www.zug.com/pranks/powerbook/ [zug.com]I've been considering a laptop as my next upgrade, since it will use less power, have wireless built in, and be quieter than my desktop with 3 hard drives in it. It will work better as my entertainment center, if it has a TV capture device in it. And I need to upgrade my P-P-P-Powerbook anyway, the screen is cracked. [ Reply to ThisRe:As long as it's faster than my P-P-P-Powerbook by TubeSteak (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @12:00PMRe:As long as it's faster than my P-P-P-Powerbook by saskboy (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @12:15PMRe:As long as it's faster than my P-P-P-Powerbook by lemaymd (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @01:32PMRe:As long as it's faster than my P-P-P-Powerbook by coolgeek (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @01:47PM Re:As long as it's faster than my P-P-P-Powerbook (Score:4, Funny) by BandwidthHog (257320) <whatwouldbryando@ironicallyenough.com> on Sunday November 06, @04:48PM (#13964931) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/thelifeofbryan/ | Last Journal: Sunday October 02, @12:05PM) Yeah!And really, who needs system-wide spell check anyway? [ Reply to This | ParentRe:As long as it's faster than my P-P-P-Powerbook by emmetropia (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @08:46PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.1 reply beneath your current threshold.1 reply beneath your current threshold. Yawn - more unsubstantiated speculation (Score:4, Insightful) by pv2b (231846) on Sunday November 06, @11:40AM (#13963146) So what does this article say really? Apple's Intel based laptops "may" come out in April-May next year? Yawn.It's not even a wild-ass guess that may become true, nor rampant speculation on something unlikely and unannounced. We all know Intel Powerbooks are coming, just not precisely when. This is just another educated guess within that timeframe.Wake me when they have something substantive. Though by the time they have anything substantive, it'll be just a few days before the release or at the release anyway. [ Reply to This MOD PARENT DOWN (Score:5, Funny) by pv2b (231846) on Sunday November 06, @11:56AM (#13963232) Insightful?! Wtf! How about bleeding-frigging-obvious. Don't waste your mod points on this crap I wrote. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:MOD PARENT DOWN (OT) by fohat (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @12:07PMRe:MOD PARENT DOWN (OT) by pv2b (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @12:30PMRe:MOD PARENT DOWN (OT) by ak3ldama (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @01:24PMRe:MOD PARENT DOWN by Helios1182 (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @01:00PMRe:MOD PARENT DOWN by ElitistWhiner (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @01:49PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Yawn - more unsubstantiated speculation by earnest murderer (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @12:07PMRe:Yawn - more unsubstantiated speculation by pv2b (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @12:36PMRe:Yawn - more unsubstantiated speculation by earnest murderer (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @12:59PM Re:Yawn - more unsubstantiated speculation (Score:5, Funny) by bradbeattie (908320) <bradbeattie@alumni.uwat e r l o o . ca> on Sunday November 06, @01:23PM (#13963673) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BradBeattie) Tell me about it. Next thing you know, people will be spreading rumours about some kind of video iPod. Pfft. Lunatics. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Yawn - more unsubstantiated speculation by SeaFox (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @02:32PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Yawn - more unsubstantiated speculation by pv2b (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @12:46PMRe:Yawn - more unsubstantiated speculation by pv2b (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @10:12PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.1 reply beneath your current threshold. More than a month (Score:1, Redundant) by neuro.slug (628600) <neuro__@nOspaM.hotmail.com> on Sunday November 06, @11:46AM (#13963188) IIRC, Apple's been working on Macintels and OS X86 for years now. They just managed to keep it really, really quiet. [ Reply to This1 reply beneath your current threshold. Apple wants to use the dual-core "Yonah", not... (Score:5, Informative) by Harry Balls (799916) * on Sunday November 06, @11:46AM (#13963190) ...the current "Pentium M Dothan".Yonah is scheduled to arrive in January 2006, and will be followed in Q3/2006 by "Merom".Most "Yonah" models are dual core, but a low-end model with only one core will be available. Apple will most likely opt to use the dual core "Yonah". Merom will add 64 bits - yes, Yonah is 32 bits only. [ Reply to ThisYonah.. Merom.. Dothan... by phozz bare (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @05:00PMRe:Yonah.. Merom.. Dothan... by noy (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @09:49PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.4 replies beneath your current threshold. Should anyone be surprised? (Score:5, Insightful) by UnknowingFool (672806) on Sunday November 06, @11:47AM (#13963195) "With OS X86 10.4.3 now catching up to its PPC sibling, is Apple ready to take the plunge?"It has been speculated in many places that one of the main reasons Intel was chosen over AMD was mobile CPUs. Notebooks is one area where Apple is far behind PCs in terms of perceived performance. While servers and desktops have received new generations of PowerPC chips, the notebooks still use G4s. Although they've been updated, they're still G4s. It would stand to reason that this would be a main area of focus for Steve Jobs and Apple once the change had been made. [ Reply to This Re:Should anyone be surprised? (Score:5, Interesting) by antifoidulus (807088) on Sunday November 06, @12:57PM (#13963533) (http://slashdot.org???? | Last Journal: Friday March 11, @09:17PM) Not to mention supply problems. Its one thing to go on newegg and order the latest and greatest AMD CPU. It's another thing entirely to use over a million per quarter. I just don't think AMD has the production capacity to keep Apple as well as it's current customers happy. Intel has much more production capacity than AMD does right now... [ Reply to This | Parent Re:Should anyone be surprised? (Score:5, Insightful) by MythosTraecer (141226) on Sunday November 06, @01:38PM (#13963747) Agreed. When Apple announced that it was not only going with x86, but with Intel x86, it was obvious to me why: supply issues. Supply issues were the cause of endless problems between Motorola and Apple. And the same issue cropped up with IBM: even though the PowerPC 970/G5 is a wonderfully powerful processor (and 64-bit to boot), IBM cannot deliver them in the quantities Apple wants. Obviously, the AMD Athlon 64/Opteron technology is the obvious choice for 64-bit computing at this point, but AMD's supply track record is no better than IBM's or Moto's. Apple can't deal with switching to another vendor and continuing to have supply problems again. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:Should anyone be surprised? by nutshell42 (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @07:49PMRe:Should anyone be surprised? by ottffssent (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @02:24PMRe:Should anyone be surprised? by xjerky (Score:3) Sunday November 06, @04:09PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:Should anyone be surprised? by 1336.5 (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @04:53PMMotherboards too ... by Agarax (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @02:16PM could backfire (Score:4, Interesting) by CDPatten (907182) on Sunday November 06, @11:49AM (#13963205) I personally don't like OSX, but LOVE the Apple hardware. I would be interested in purchasing a Titanium (x86) and putting Windows and Linux on it. I odn't believe I'm alone with that opinion either.First glance you may say, good for apple, they still get the money. However, what that starts to do is move mindshare for apple to a premium hardware supplier, not a platform supplier.I believe there are many people that will consider doing this, and I think this could hurt OSX. This move could put Apple (overtime) going Head to Head with Dell not MS. [ Reply to ThisRe:could backfire by Hackeron (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @12:07PMRe:could backfire by nine-times (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @12:08PMRe:could backfire by crawling_chaos (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @12:09PMRe:could backfire by Halfbaked Plan (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @02:01PMRe:could backfire by xjerky (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @04:13PM I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful) by jtdubs (61885) on Sunday November 06, @12:13PM (#13963309) So, we have a few groups of people here:1. Current OS X users.They will almost invariable switch to the new Intel-based macs. I would say that most of them don't even know or care what chipset they are running on.2. New OS X users.These are people who will now be enticed to switch, because of the Intel move, that otherwise wouldn't have been. Perhaps they were waiting for the extra performance that Apple can offer in a laptop now that they have Intel processors. Perhaps they like that they can recompile their x86 specific programs on Macs now. (Yay! SBCL w/ Threading on OS X!? Dare I dream!?!?)3. New Mac Hardware users (but not OS X)This is the group you seem to be in. You want the Mac hardware, but don't care for the OS. I can't say I agree with you, but that's beside the point.So, Apple will have all the people they have now (group 1), some new folks (group 2) and some additional hardware sales to people who are going to install Linux or Windows or BSD or something on the box (group 3).Do you seiously believe that group 3 is big enough compared to the combined sizes of groups 1 and 2 that it will do anything other than add more to Apple's bottom-line? You aren't going to affect Apple's image unless group 3 is BIG or astonishingly well publisized.Besides, even if group 3 were very large, we are talking about people who are buying the Hardware for the Hardware's sake. Because it's high-quality, attractive hardware. This could NEVER put them into direct competition with Dell. Dell is all about volumes. High volumes at low prices. Apple is EXACTLY the opposite. If Apple were buying the cheapest parts at the highest volumes to crank out machines as quickly and cheaply as possible, then group 3 wouldn't exist.Well, those are my thoughts. You know the drill. Grain of sand and what-not.Justin Dubs [ Reply to This | ParentRe:I don't understand by nine-times (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @12:32PMRe:I don't understand by ipjohnson (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @01:22PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:I don't understand by Halfbaked Plan (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @02:06PMRe:I don't understand by jsebrech (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @04:05PMRe:I don't understand by unother (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @07:51PMRe:I don't understand by connorbd (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @04:58PMRe:I don't understand by Khyber (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @01:42PMRe:I don't understand by Phil1 (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @02:53PMRe:I don't understand by c0bw3b (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @03:39PMRe:I don't understand by Khyber (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @04:31PM1 reply beneath your current threshold.1 reply beneath your current threshold.Re:I don't understand by JulesLt (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @03:36PMRe:I don't understand by jsebrech (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @04:07PMRe:I don't understand by constantnormal (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @04:19PMRe:your sig by martinX (Score:2) Monday November 07, @12:21AM2 replies beneath your current threshold.Re:could backfire (bwa ha ha ha ha) by inchhigh (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @12:21PMRe:could backfire - but it probably won't by motulist (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @12:22PM1 reply beneath your current threshold. no, they just won't offer supp (Score:5, Insightful) by intmainvoid (109559) on Sunday November 06, @12:22PM (#13963365) The problem with that scenario is that Apple won't offer support for Windows on Macs, or Linux on Macs. So that rules out any users who might want support, e.g. business and educational institutions. I can't see many normal home users either forking out for a mac, then forking out again for a copy of windows XP, downloading drivers if needed etc. It might be 1% of users (i.e. you if you're reading this) who have got the time and interest for that. And are you really going to go to all that trouble to install windows???Don't forget as well, that virtual PC will truely *fly* under OS X on intel - it takes away most of the requirements for emulation, so if you need windows stuff, that'll be the way to do it, it won't suck performance wise like it does now. [ Reply to This | ParentRe:could backfire by sockonafish (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @12:36PMRe:could backfire by jayratch (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @08:47PM Re:could backfire (Score:5, Insightful) by iamnotanumber6 (755703) on Sunday November 06, @12:39PM (#13963456) very good points, but i disagree with the "backfire & hurt OSX" conclusion.I personally don't like OSX, but LOVE the Apple hardware. I would be interested in purchasing a Titanium (x86) and putting Windows and Linux on it. I odn't believe I'm alone with that opinion either.First glance you may say, good for apple, they still get the money. However, what that starts to do is move mindshare for apple to a premium hardware supplier, not a platform supplier.I believe there are many people that will consider doing this, and I think this could hurt OSX. This move could put Apple (overtime) going Head to Head with Dell not MS.apple has a much much better chance at competing with dell and gaining market share than they do against microsoft. selling hardware to windows users is a damned good business plan for apple - can you say iPod? profits from OS X are minimal, they give it away with their machines. so, suddenly that other, oh, 95% of computer users are potential apple hardware customers. windows users will switch hardware vendors (eg. dell to hp to apple) at the drop of a hat. but switching operating systems, even if it costs nothing, is a huge investment of one's time in relearning everything and repurchasing applications. so among committed windows users (eg. 80% or more of all computer users), "mindshare for apple" is already zero. this will change that. dramatically.now, literally millions of windows users will pick up apple powerbooks and imacs because the hardware is so #%#$%#$% awesome. at the same time, that gives them free access to OS X, while not forcing them to use it. so that massively opens up the potential market for (higher-margin) apple software products like FinalCut, DVD Studio Pro, etc., which are really top-of-the-line in their class.remember in the 90's, apple headed down that road of trying to compete with microsoft, licencing clone manufacturers of apple hardware. it was suicidal. jobs is smarter than that. look for apple to triple their hardware sales (where they make most of their profit) in the next few years... [ Reply to This | ParentFire by simpl3x (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @12:47PMRe:could backfire by toddestan (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @12:49PMRe:could backfire by localman (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @01:12PMRe:could backfire by freeplatypus (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @01:26PMRe:could backfire by IANAAC (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @01:40PMRe:could backfire by localman (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @11:54PM2 replies beneath your current threshold.Re:could backfire by deared (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @01:23PMRe:could backfire by funkcicle (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @02:38PMRe:could backfire by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @05:38PMIt's about time Apple went head to head with by alfredo (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @04:37PMRe:could backfire by AvantLegion (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @11:04PMRe: Could Backfire? by xjerky (Score:3) Sunday November 06, @05:09PM3 replies beneath your current threshold. Acquisition plans on hold... (Score:2, Interesting) by DrTime (838124) on Sunday November 06, @11:53AM (#13963225) I've no plans to buy PC or Mac hardware until I see the value proposition Apple offers in its future products. I am all Mac PowerPC now, but I keep eyeing those cheap Wintel boxes (today it is $299.00 after mail in rebate for an HP with 15" LCD). Hard to resist a bargain.I don't need new hardware, but if the Mactels allow me to run PC application via Wine or some other software, I'll go for it real fast.What I would really like to is have one drive boot into MacOS and another with an alternative OS. I would like the Apple computer to boot any PC OS. I don't care if Mac OS X never boots on standard PC hardware.Mostly I am just curios as to how Apple will engineer these machines.Change is good. [ Reply to ThisRe:Acquisition plans on hold... by be_kul (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @12:31PMRe:Acquisition plans on hold... by RAMMS+EIN (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @01:48PMRe:Acquisition plans on hold... by be_kul (Score:1) Sunday November 06, @02:11PMRe:Acquisition plans on hold... by RAMMS+EIN (Score:2) Sunday November 06, @02:46PM