Intel Inside: What Does It Mean to You?

Hell has been pretty cold these days. Steve Jobs announced yesterday, at the WWDC in San Francisco, that Apple would be moving to Intel for its processors, leaving behind the IBM-Motorola consortium that has been making PowerPC chips for many years.

The Mac community has reacted vociferously to this change, but what does it really mean to you, the user? Aside from the effect on developers – who Steve Jobs reassured yesterday showing that porting applications to the Intel-based OS X will be simple – is there any reason to worry about this change?First, most users don’t care what type of chip their computers run. They don’t even know what’s under the hood. The fact that Apple is moving to Intel chips won’t affect the average user, who is not a Mac zealot, since people buy Macs more for what they look like and what they do than for the MHz speed of their processors. Sure, speed counts, but not to most users, who simply want a computer that works. For that reason, the big selling point is, and has always been, the Mac OS.

Second, it is possible that Intel chips will reduce the price of Macintosh computers, further enticing Windows users to switch. This is good for the Mac platform overall, but, again, for the average Mac user, it changes little. Though if the Mac installed base increases, this could be a good thing for the Mac platform in general.

However, there is one downside that I see: Intel chips get very hot. If you listen to anyone’s PC, you know that it makes a lot of noise. Macs are much quieter, and, while many users will say they don’t care (if you use a Mac in an office you probably won’t notice the difference), some of us who like quiet computers may be disappointed when Intel gets inside Macs. I hope that Apple does everything to keep these computers as quiet as many current Macs are.

It is clear that Apple is going the Intel route, but three questions remain, with interesting consequences:

First, will Mac users therefore be able to dual-boot into Windows, or even run Windows at the same time as Mac OS X, therefore eliminating the need for emulation software like Virtual PC? I know many PC users who are forced to use their PC because of professional applications that are Windows-only, and who would be grateful to be able to shift to a Mac.

Second, will Windows applications therefore be able to run on Mac OS X, or, at least, will porting Windows applications to Mac OS X become simple enough that developers will be able to offer Mac versions of there software with little additional work? If so, Apple’s choice looks very different, since Intel may help Apple erode the Windows market share.

Third, Apple’s announcement of Intel inside does not say whether Mac OS X will be sold for PCs. At first, Apple will probably include special ROM to ensure that you still have to buy a Mac. But how long will it take before the PC users clamor enough to get Apple to sell Mac OS X for their PC…?

Interesting times indeed. Vote in the latest poll, to the left, and say what you think about this news.

Read more articles in this category: Apple & Mac OS X