Rob Enderle's Take on Apple's Intel Switch

[Kent Pribbernow]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://news.designtechnica.com/talkback57.html' target='_blank'>http://news.designtechnica.com/talkback57.html</a><br /><br /></div><i>"On the PC hardware side… if you’re a company called Osborn, you don’t announce new hardware long before it is available (otherwise, people stop buying what you do have and that can crater hardware sales.) In this case, while some will show up in 2006, most of the high margin products won’t show up until 2007, which will make the second half of 2005 and most of 2006 particularly nasty unless Apple can bring another market winning product in to cover the gap."</i><br /><br />This is exactly what I said in one of the recent discussions about Apple. By pre-announcing the move to Intel, a great many Mac customers will hold off buying PowerPC-based systems in anticipation of new Intel-based offerings. The classic "Osborn effect" in play. Exactly what effect this will have on sales of current offerings remains to be seen, but I have a feeling the next twelve months are going to be brutal on Apple. 8O

[Mr. MacinTiger]

Maybe Jobs figures with business going so good now and so many billions in the bank, that Apple can take the hit? :?

It's hard to say what he is thinking, but even after a day to reflect on it, I am still disgusted with Apple's switch. I will ride out my Mac Mini for a few years and then, for the first time in forever, will actually sit down to weigh buying a Mac against a Wintel instead of just automatically buying a Mac.

[Felix Torres]

Pain now or pain later...

The software ports are *not* going to be easy or cheap.
(Details are starting to emerge on what *won't* run on Rosetta. Basically, nothing that needs a G4 or G5 cpu.)

And the approach--low-end first, high-end later--makes sense in that the hardest to port apps will be the high-end technical apps generally run on the G5's, so they *need* the two years lead time.
Plus they have to match their customers' hardware refresh schedule.


Folks that bought the bulk of the G5 dual-cpu boxes won't be upgrading until 07 anyway.
Remember, Apple sales are spikey, usually centered on the release of a new generation and then levelling off.

Finally, Intel's chip schedule lines up, too; they can start out with the dual core Pentium-M and then transition to the P4-successors in 07, skipping out on the whole current generation of Pentium-4's that they've been slandering... ;-)

[James Fee]

Well beyond that, it sounds like the G5 is maxed out anyway and there wasn't going to be much there as far as performance. I've been sitting waiting for a G5 powerbook, but I'll gladly wait longer for a Centrino Powerbook. For Apple it isn't a lost sale because it sounds like there would have never been a G5 powerbook let alone a 3ghz Powermac

[Tim Williamson]

Isn't Apple living off the the iPod's profits anyways...so does this really make a big difference in the long-run?

[Jason Eaton]

Isn't Apple living off the the iPod's profits anyways...so does this really make a big difference in the long-run?

I wouldn't say 'living'. Yes the iPod has added to the bottom line but it isn't the only thing turning a profit. Even though the 2% of computers sounds really small the installed user base of OS X is in the millions around the world. So yes, their PC side of the business is very important to them while the iPod is a spinoff product.

Also Apple is completely in the black, it regards to longterm debt. Any money it makes goes straight into the coffers. They are a realitively 'small' outfit that don't require horrendous operating budgets to 'keep the lights on' when compared to others.

Hence the news of Apple about to fold, Apple about to be bought out year after year, or that they are constantly losing money is quiet funny to read. :D