In response to my recent entry on Apple's decision to switch to Intel processors, we received a thoughtful note from a reader, who kindly granted us permission to post his comments.
Apple on Intel? What's the real fuss? Ninety percent of people who purchase Macs don't even know what the motherboard looks like--and don't care, as long as it works.
What are the Mac user's questions?
- Is it simple to use?
- Does it work every time?
- Can I get the job done with it?
They don't want the frustrations of Windows and its archaic dependencies of C:\>. They're busy using the right tool for the job, and getting work done.
You don't think Apple can sell a new version of "iMac" with an Intel chipset in it? Apple can't design an extra cool case which doesn't need a screwdriver to open it? Apple can't make gorgeous displays which people replace their TVs with? Apple won't provide their stupendous support by real human beings? VMWare won't recompile to support an OS X image? Hmm, they might not have to!
I have a separate hard drive at home just waiting for the OS X release for Intel, and I can't wait to migrate. For me, the biggest win will be that it will open up more applications to migrate to "Mac" without the hardware investment that multi-OS supporters have had to spend/support in the past. I wouldn't be surprised if a few conversion tools come out to rewrite Windows code into OS X (and other BSD-based Unix flavors) windowing formats to help ease the conversion process.
Maybe the chipset (like so many others; Alpha, for instance) has reached its twilight. But the vision of how things should work, the human interface, lives on at Apple.
(Name withheld by request.)
So device software optimizers, what do you think? The real deal, or mere Apple proselytizing? Share your thoughts by clicking on the "Talk Back" link below or e-mailing me at firstname.lastname@example.org. I'll post all serious replies in a future Blog entry.