Apple sees the writing on the proverbial wall I'm afraid to say. So sad. Longhorn + 64 bits and dual processing are coming. Linux is second. Where does Apple fit in? Does this also mean innovation is dead? Hardly. To be different today in a multi-billion dollar industry or almost trillion dollar one that microcomputers are is a price Apple seems unwilling to pay or more accurately its shareholders.More to the point is Apple better? Is the cost premium worth it? What about the developing world and its thirst for inexpensive computers? I do not believe Apple was willing to lose out on the future. Murray-- Message: 2 Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 19:23:33 -0700 (PDT) From: "O. Sharp" <ohh at drizzle.com> Subject: Apple Goes Intel... To: cctalk at classiccmp.org Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0506061916360.30247-100000 at drizzle.com> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I don't know if this is bad news or even worse news, but for those who haven't heard yet: "At its Worldwide Developer Conference today, Apple announced plans to deliver models of its Macintosh computers using Intel microprocessors by this time next year, and to transition all of its Macs to using Intel microprocessors by the end of 2007. Apple previewed a version of its critically acclaimed operating system, Mac OS X Tiger, running on an Intel-based Mac to the over 3,800 developers attending..." http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html I think most of the eggs are in one basket now, and not a very reliable basket at that. :( Opinions? -O.- ------------------------------