I think this will put an end to all this war about pc and mac since they're share pretty much the same hardware. HOWEVER APLE KNOWS HOW GOOD, SAFE, FAST AND REALIABLE OS X IS AND THEY KNOW MICROSOFT MUST BE IN FULL ALERT AT THIS POINT.

So non mac users might think os x is garbage since they've never used it before. But the more people use OS X the more Microsoft will loose business and a big change could happen over night (Remember the OS X Sever awards).

Microsoft will pay for everything they've done - expensive software, forcing people to update they computers spending hundreds of $, unreliable software, Hack and Virus friendly. They thought they owned the computer business and whatever they came up with people had to buy it and deal with the problems.

What goes around comes around and Microsoft better make their Office software work flawless because that's the only thing I can see Microsoft hanging on to.

Microsoft is SCREWED!

dose that mean with that software than any pc could run mac progs .that could make a lot of cheap macs .

Wonder how powerful the xbox 360's IBM PowerPC-based CPUs will be...

I just want a dual core based Powerbook that finally and truly hauls a** without setting my house on fire.

Setting house on fire, raising energy costs, and less efficient power saving code--man Intel rocks...(rolling eyes)

So all those Apple folks who told me their computers were faster and their Motorola processors kicked Intel's butt are now liars? Gee, thanks BetaNews, you just settled years of arguments! Although, why the unnamed sources? Are you making it up when you write, "According to one developer..."

Where have you been. Apple hasn't used motorola process since back before for the PowerPC days. They have been using IBM Processors. But if you have read more you would have known that. And you would also know that IBM just wasn't creating fast enough processors with cool operating speeds. Intel can and has been doing it, not counting the 3.8GHz P4 that has serious heat issues. Now when your looking at a 3.6 Dev pc, versus the 2.5 G5 Macs of course there is a huge difference. A 2.5 G5 is faster then a 2.5 Intel. But it all comes down to what are you using it for.

Um, excuse me! Motorola was (is) part of the PowerPC alliance. For a long time, Motorola made the PowerPC chips which were used in Apple computers, while IBM designed the chips.

PowerPC is based on IBM's RISC Power processors, but under the original Pink agreement, would be jointly developed with Motorola for use by Apple.

If Apple could find another company that makes processors faster than Intel who is Microsofts backbone for supplier of PC products, don't you think they would choose that *other* company unless there is an alterior motive? It's all a marketing gimmick to get Microsoft to sweat.

My thoughts are that Steve Jobs waited too long to do this. Microsoft already has the market and unless Microsoft does something completly uncharacteristic and falter, or us people as a whole suddenly decide to switch to a Intel-Apple system, Apple is doomed to forever be a should've could've would've.

Apple vs. PC has always been a good agreement in computer users. There will always be quite biased opinions, often very strong. This move by apple will fuel this more than anything else i think.

FACT - Both machines are good, i hate when people include the words "crap", "sucks" etc when they try to justify there point. Both machines are good, and both systems have programs that are the best in there class, so the machines are both good or they would be talked and referred in the same sentence as you would say acorn, Amiga, Atari etc.

DTP, graphics and media programs have defined the standard and best of lass software, where even the PC has envied. The PC has dominated everywhere else nearly, and even cracked the games market, that although was slow emerging eventually trampled the mighty amigas with the gamers and enthusiasts. You could say the PC triumphed though diversity where the Mac came though by specialism.

Its Good that the Mac is trying to gain ground, because this will push the PC market from its then sole reliance of Intel to the current Intel, Ati or NVIDIA model to go faster. If you like Macs, this obviously is the news you want to hear, because this ultimately will mean you get more varied software and become a more widely excepted format that you currently enjoy.

Software is the only real reason you use a computer, and it obviously defines the computer you use. Your budget and needs directly and undeniably define what you are reading this with. I like games on my computer, I want some good office and graphic programs to do my mundane stuff and take care of my digital camera needs, I want to surf the net, all with the minimum amount of fuss from the Operating system, which usually means its got to be stable and fix itself push come to shove.

For this passage, I could be a student, family man with kids to kill if its broke, the bored housewife, the retired gent with the limp or just the guy next door.

I think this guy owns a pc most of the time, but occasionally they are found and often they have a sporty car.

It’s a good move for apple, and the marketing is helping it along.

But I own a pc, and doubt this will change for the next few years. The though of changing slightly scares me as well, and im quite an enthusiast. This is another reason to add to what apple have to overcome. If the apple becomes any more like a pc, to the point of running PC software, whats the point ?

Apple is big, it sells more computers than anyone else, only collectively do the PC,s outsell. It was a recent report that confirmed apple sold more than the big, dells,ibm,Toshiba s of the pc world.

You pay your money and takes your pick.

The main reason it is a good move by apple is because Intel probably offered Apple scadbooku's (that's a technical term) of $$$ to prevent them from using AMD.

lol

The thing that seems to be overlooked by many tech people is that the majority of appple users want the 'apple' experience and don't know what is inside the box.

What interests me in particular is the Rosetta translation engine. If it really can work this fast, or close to it. As people have seen from pear pc emulation is typicaly slow. I am not sure if it the same sort of thing or not but Rosetta seems to have a huge speed increase over previous translation engines.

We may be getting closer to a time when software doesn't need to be writen for a specific instruction set. And hardware (cpu) doesn't have to be designed for backward compatability.

Will this save the Itanium and it's EPIC instruction set? perhaps that ship has already sailed but the possibility is

damn double post.... sorry :/

OKAY now, all you Mac users, set aside your ego and admit it: We have kick-butt hardware waiting for you here! Aren't you just glad that finally you will be able to have some real POWER!?!!

Who's "we"?

Dude, the other guy had a point. Most mac users could give a rip what's in the box. That's the whole point.

It's not Apple's capitulation; it's IBM's inability to grow with the scale that Intel is. IBM couldn't keep up, and thus, Apple made a solid business decision to use an economy of scale.

While you're looking up what that means, make sure your AOL dial-up settings are correct.

Apple's move was for 3 reasons only: DRM & positioning towards general distribution in multimedia, while also maintaining its customary high price point. That is why it ported over to the MOST INFERIOR PROCESSOR(slowest & least power & heat efficient) platform among the majors. Allow me to explain each:

1. Get Itunes/IPods/music/movies into everyone's hands-- by getting on the pc platform & thru getting to play w/ the big boys in Hollywood. You do this by playing their game: DRM... & Intel conveniently happens to fully embrace it: coded into processor & bios. The further advantage here is that this allows its OS to be tied into its hardware & NOT get separated, because if it did, this glorified Linux OS would eventually get decimated: both from a price war with windows & anything else that can eventually be ported over also-- maybe lindows, solaris, some linux-- who knows... & from eventual independent re-compiling/reverse-engineering/disassembling/combining with other OS IF it were to be sold apart from hardware: right now it can limit its use to ONLY its machine & nothing else--if i buy a standalone OS, there's no way i could legally be prohibited from tweaking it & installing it on the hardware of my choice, or the vice-versa re-coding my hardware to interface with it-- the resulting free-for-all would lead(& probably will lead there anyhow) to $50 OS & $100 computers.
2. So why didn't it strike a deal with AMD? Besides any volume-producing considerations, Apple's mindful of the lesson "Wintel" gave the world 10 years ago: IBM/Motorola/Apple were set to give all of us, the masses, a true supercomputer/workstation-class processor
while Intel had the puny 486 & P1...but of course, Billy & Andy did their little side deal & left all the other parties at the altar..
Don't hear anyone complaining how they set the industry back almost to the stone age!
Funny how the drama replays itself again decades later, with the musical chairs having switched?

Of note, and as an aside: the left out player here: Motorola, is now part of the consortium with Sony, Toshiba, Samsung, et al-- these players are collaborating on tomorrow's tech: just one of their innovations is the cell processor, which runs circles around today's 64-bit ones...
What a tangled web we weave....

Hey there's no reason to get excited here mr.Drumcat! Aah you must be a Mac user. ;-) But I'll tell you this though, the day Mac OS X operates on my PC I will sure be pleased for it. You're right, it is a solid (and smart) business decision they've taken. Ho! And my AOL settings are fine thank you.

I'm glad to see that the Apple-Intel switch is working out well. I have made a vow to myself to only buy Macs as small as the Mini. I'm too used to it by now. I Love Apple. I am done with PC's. The spyware. The viruses... It never ends with PC's, but Macintosh computers are preventable from all of those headaches. I just hope the Apple-Intel system is as light (and more powerful) than the Mac Mini. Peace out!