First Intel Macs to arrive in January?
Summary: Last week I reported that the first Intel Macs may be coming sooner than originally expected. New PowerBooks and iBooks built on Intel hardware are rumored to arrive as soon as April or May—just in time for the back-to-school buying season. This week rumors are swirling that the first Intel Macs could arrive in as little as two months.
Last week I reported that the first Intel Macs may be coming sooner than originally expected. New PowerBooks and iBooks built on Intel hardware are rumored to arrive as soon as April or May 2006—just in time for the back-to-school buying season. This week rumors are swirling that the first Intel Macs could arrive even sooner, possibly in as little as two months.
Forbes.com is reporting that the first ever Intel-based Macintosh could be announced at Macworld Expo which begins at San Francisco's Moscone Center on January 10, 2006. The bigger surprise is that the Intel Mac won't be a PowerBook or iBook, it'll be a Mac mini according to the story which quotes a UBS analyst.
"Our extensive checks in the supply chain are pointing to a very possible early introduction of Intel-based Macs before the June 2006 target date, with a possible Intel-based Mac Mini introduced at MacWorld," wrote UBS Analyst Ben Reitzes in a recent research report...
While any Intel Mac announcement would be great for the platform (and Apple tends to under-promise and over deliver, so it could happen) I'm still holding out hope that the Intel-based PowerBook will be announced first.
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Dubious sources ...
Well Yes and no.....
depths of Apple.
I also think that annoucing a full year or more ahead of
introduction the switch to Intel was VERY risky all things
considering. People simply might have put off purchases so
having a SURPRISE right around the corner would be very SWEET
and oh by the way a common enough Apple stunt is it not?
So either way I would not be shocked if in January we see the
MacTel Mini and an announcement about the PowerBook line.
Nor would I be stunned to see that we do have to wait.
Pagan jim
That could be the point
No other choice
Additionally, by announcing it that far in advance prevents most users from waiting for it. If you needed a new Mac a few months back, you were unlikely to hold out that long.
However, I wouldn't be surprised if announced this date knowing full well they would actually start shipping Intel Macs much sooner. Doing so would be very "Applesque".
And the Mac mini is actually a practical entry point if you think about it. Work out the bugs on a sub $1000 system. Don't make someone pay $2000 plus for a PowerBook or PowerMac. The only other option is the iBook, and doing so on the iBook before the PowerBook would simply cannibalize PowerBook sales (product lines are too similar). On the otherhand, the difference between the PowerMac and the mini are significant enought that an Intel mini isn't going to convert too many PowerMac buyers to the mini.
Hardly.
The PC world is leaps and bounds better than the Mac world in terms of performance, at the moment, and it's significantly better in terms of mobile performance. Apple aims to fix this.
I'm eager...
-Pikl
I wouldn't say dumb
Oh, certainly.
I was merely forecasting the sudden deluge of pro-AMD, anti-big-corporation obnoxiousness that seems rampant from many of the users here at ZDNet. That's merely my opining of the environment here.
THIS WILL END MICROSLOTH FOREVER!!!
It will take a bigger bite out of Linux
Totally Disagree
I think this is going to hit Microsoft, another blow after the one the IPOD has delivered...
I don't think MacIntel will do significant damage to MS,
Eh? Say WHAT?
MS IS TOO a hardware vendor! MS sells keyboards, mice and game pads (read: INPUT DEVICES) - and let's NOT forget the XBox and XBox 360. They're still doing WebTV (aka MSN TV these days) even.
It would be, however, correct to say:
"Microsoft is not a(n) MP3 PLAYER hardware vendor."
I don't think MacIntel will do significant damage to MS,
iTunes hurts MS in the longrun
install iTunes for their iPods >>>>> iTunes also uses
QuickTime engine >>>>> iTunes/QT is by far superior to MS
MediaPlayer >>>> more PC users are starting to prefer using
iTunes more than MediaPlayer for their iPods, internet radio &
podcasting, digital music shopping, cd-ripping and burning, etc.
Of course this is the music side to iTunes. However when it
comes to video .... yes QT is better than MediaPlayer, but the
market share of WMV is by far larger than QT.
There is a plugin/codec for QT to play WMV and AVI files ... and
when iTunes truly incorporates the full QT player within it, then
it is possible that iTunes will take over MediaPlayer in every way.
Remember, QT now has the following features: HD quality,
plays interactive flash files inside it, flash video, interactive
video, slideshows, chapter markers, DVD playback, video
capture, blah blah blah ..... again, by far superior than
MediaPlayer.
Thus,
70+ million iPods + iTunes + QT = DEADLY COMBINATION =
game over MediaPlayer.
It's not anyone thing that will hurt MS but a combination
plus Apple has a slew of Applications that are SWEET! iTunes and
the iPod will do their part. Google of course. MS is a big target
and a lot of people/organizations are going to try and take their
part. Will MS be destroyed? Not anytime soon...and likely not at
all, but I might say they will shrink. After all Apple can not
continue to add to her MarketShare without someone taking a hit.
Pagan jim
Somehow, I doubt it...
1.) You incorrectly assume it's all a "zero sum game" - meaning there are only a fixed number of consumers available. This isn't the case. There are always new people getting computers, older consumers dying off, etc... The numbers, by no means are fixed.
2.) What makes you think Microsoft won't come out with something that kicks the iPod's collective butt? History has a way of repeating itself. Just look at Netscape. From First to Worst in no time at all after the release of Windows 98 and IE 4.0.
Why?
But.... if by some miracle Apple could pull it off (frankly I don't think they have the resources) everyone's hopes and dreams of Linux being dominate on the desktop would be obliterated.
Licensing OSX
Right now, Apple still relies too much upon hardware sales. However, if they continue to increase market share and software offerings, at some point down the road (probably at least 5 years), I wouldn't be surprised if they began to license OSX to others PC makers. It's a necessary step if Apple truly wishes to compete with the "big boys" on the OS and application playing field.
I'd also guess that when they do so, they won't open it up completely, rather just allow select companies such as Dell to use the same technology Apple uses to prevent OSX from being installed on just any Intel hardware. I doubt you'll be able to build your own Intel Mac anytime soon, at least legally.
You don't know Steve...
What's more likely - and this is more in line with how Steve and the 'boys' at his level think - is that Vista will run on Apple's hardware - giving Michael Dell a run for his money. We're not far from the day when Oracle will push Apple (Intel)XServes as their preferred platform. Larry Ellison is giddy over the possibility that he can give his buddy's business that kind of boost...("...maybe then I'll be more like Steve").
But license the Mac OS to PC makers...not until Steve leaves Apple. Personally, I would never let that ugly Windows icon or those clunky Windows windows appear on the screen of my Powerbook. No way!
d2