Replies to post #51938 on Apple Inc (AAPL)

[Tex]

re moving to Intel Macs

So - add it up. You have a lack of demand, and not enough compelling reasons to take a gamble on what so far is an unproven architecture. I expect that version 1.5 and version 2.0 of the MacBook Pro will add additional speed and functionality unavailable in this first version. In fact, Apple announced this week that the first round will be even faster than originally announced. I don't see that as an accident. And this doesn't even take into account the migration of applications by developers of PowerPC apps to a Universal binary that runs equally fast on PowerPC and Intel architectures. I think I can wait until Adobe, Microsoft, and all the smaller developers I depend on for the apps that I use are ready.

I think the use of the iMac to launch it was the right choice. The iMac demographic is one that uses Apple-supplied apps primarily, hasn't got critical professional needs that depend on, e.g., Quark or Photoshop, and is interested in friendliness over spec details. Sure, there are corner cases, but this does describe the demographic Apple has chased with the iMac. I suspect the new machine cooks, compared to my current one. Just thinking about the bus speed difference makes me blink a bit. I am seriously torn about whether I should buy an Intel notebook, given the huge leap it offers over my 6yo Pizmo. But then, the 6yo Pizmo is solid as a rock, and does what I need in the notebook ... so ....

I think there's definitely a market segment that's into Apple's pitch for the new machines. However, Apple was right not to discount the old models right off the bat: there is an apples-to-oranges comparison going on, and people with a specific reason to prefer the PPC were made to pay for it. Apple has committed to the x86 switch, so Apple had no reason to "coddle" folks who didn't want to buy into the new architecture immediately. However, if Apple executes as promised, Apple should not fear losing these folks.

I already know some upgrades spurred by the MacIntels, and even though I'm basically happy with my machines, I keep thinking about it ....

Take care,
--Tex.

P.S. As for waiting for MS-Office/Mac to go x86 native, I heard MSFT's rep loud and clear that MSFT was working to make sure its products ran well under Rosetta, so I'm not holding my breath. With the Office suite costing $14 at the Univ. Texas bookstore, though, I think I can afford an upgrade if I need to. Of course, there's OpenOffice/J, and it's the right price every time you upgrade ....