In your opinion, how has the Intel transition gone?

[fryke]

But if I break that down, all you're really saying is: Apple once made better-quality (and much more expensive) hardware, and their new lower prices aren't low enough, they should increase quality while bringing down prices even more.

But _that_ I'd have to call iWhining. ... But who knows. It's the day of the MWSF '07 keynote. 30 years of Apple. Maybe we *will* see the 599 USD MacBook with Core2Duo processor and highend graphics chip? :P Let's get our expectations _really_ high, so we *know* we're going to be let down. I'm already writing up my angry comments so I can post on macnews.net.tc right after the keynote ends.

[ebykm]

But _that_ I'd have to call iWhining. ...

But if I break that down, all you're really saying is: Apple once made better-quality (and much more expensive) hardware, and their new lower prices aren't low enough, they should increase quality while bringing down prices even more.

yay, either make better quality expensive Pro hardware or lower the prices of base models (mini, imac & macbook). Well, if possible Pro hardware @ current imac pricing.

I'm already writing up my angry comments so I can post on macnews.net.tc right after the keynote ends.

you got it brother, i'ma proud of you

[rubaiyat]

"But the most anticipated part of Intel transition was price reduction on par with dell, hp, ibm, etc...., in reality which didn't happen as most of us expected and some hardware issues."

On my list of expected consequences of the Intel upgrade, in the Macworld forums, was that there would be no price reduction despite virtually every Mac user then repeating it ad nauseum as if it were fact.

The reason is three fold.

As has been pointed out, the new Intel chips are not cheaper than the old G5s. Second Apple's prices are due to a persistent fat profit margin, which it can get due to its isolation from direct PC competition and the sacrificial loyalty of its customers. Thirdly because Apple refuses to use the cheaper Intel and AMD chips because they are not cutting edge enough and might reveal the inherent slowness of the OSX system itself.

The other prediction I made was the Mac would be side tracked as not core to Apple's business and that the iPod would take over. This has happened. Apple is even removing the word "computer" from its name.

I also predicted either a fall in the Mac's market share or no substantial gain as Macs lost their distinctiveness. This hasn't happened but the gains the Mac has made have not made any major impact on Windows because they come off such a low base. Apple has not addressed its poor position outside the USA where its relative expensiveness and public invisibility have made it not even an option for the booming, but price sensitive, markets of China and India.

The full impact of Leopard vs Vista have yet to be felt. We will really get a clearer picture later this year and it all will depend on the relative disappointment and satisfaction both sides will feel with their respective upgrades.

I put my money on Leopard being a let down not because it won't be good but because it will change some things even further away from the Macs original simplicity and clean design without meeting the pent-up expectations of substantial radical innovations. Vista will be a let down but Windows users will get used to it and it will give them enough to not make them want to switch.

I then also predicted a bleeding of Mac software away from the Mac platform due to the possibility of easily launching the Windows versions on the same machine. This may not eventuate as the switch between Mac OSX and Windows still requires the purchase of Windows and is not as easy nor as quick as anticipated.

However there are still elements of this to be played out. We will find out how well Boot Camp, Parallels and WINE solve the switching problem once Leopard is released and Vista has been out for a while.

Another prediction was that the Mac would lose any hope of being the fastest PC because it would be using identical hardware to the Windows PCs. This was obvious and is exacerbated by Apple tying itself to Intel's offerings whereas PC manufacturers allow themselves the option of AMD as well.

The only hope was OSX might prove to be a better OS using 64 bit processing and multiple chips/cores. This is still to be played out.

The last prediction was that Steve Jobs has hedged his bets and left the possibility of eventually Macs booting off Windows as a store option and perhaps even abandoning the line all together just as the Apple line was abandoned when the Mac came along. Anyone psychicly atuned to the Steve's inner thoughts?

Now I have been quite explicit, definitely more than Nostrodamus, and definitely more than the hedged bets by many other posters or volte faces they commit relying on the short memories of many other forum dwellers. So I stand ready to be strung up on my own words at some future date.