A day for mourning....

[A Gruesome Discovery]

as for protection built into the chips...I really wouldn't worry about that. I'm sure somebody will release a patch which will remove it's ability to function...and if you don't know how to get it, I'm sure you'll know somebody who does...

But the protection will be in the hardware. It's nothing like today's schemes, where you run a crack and it alters the code of the program. One would have to alter the very functionality of the processor and chipset; the DRM resides in the chip's firmware. This alteration cannot be done in the realm of software. You cannot download a crack for a processor- the firmware has to be, for lack of a better word, "burnt" into it electronically. This requires both programming skills for microprocessors, as well as an intimate knowledge of the functionality of the chip, information most likely not widely known outside of Intel's headquarters. And even if someone somehow does this, it can't be distributed; each and every chip must be flashed with the new firmware- electronically, not over the internet or through a "patch"; in fact, not via software means at all.
I should add that I don't condone the piracy of software, and every application that I use I have paid for- yes, Steinberg and NI have received quite a bit of my money. I do however find DRM intrusive, unfair for legitimate users, and ultimately harmful to the open market, especially small developers.

 

[DracWell]

Hm. one question. There's lots of units where you can d/l new firmware for it, why not for processors?

 

[Nitronium Blood]

Microsoft MAC OS.

I can almost see it now.

 

[daemon097]

...exactly Dracwell. Almost all devices allow you to upgrade their firmware...and it would certainly hinder Intel (more them help them) to not allow for firmware upgrades into their CPU's (actually, I don't think they have firmware updates for CPUs now...but, that's not to say they won't in the future..in fact, I would probably expect it if they add this technology as they will need to make changes to it as time goes on.)

So....I'm not too worried about their "built-in protection."

As for Apple - I don't think their overall business is far broader in scope than Dell or Gateway. In fact, there's not much difference between an Apple catalog and a Dell catalog. Just the person reading it.

I can assure you that there's more money in software than there is in hardware. (Profit margins for hardware are typically 30-40% if you're lucky, while they're 200-300% with software.)

But - who knows what Apple would do. They've already kind of alienated their die-hard Apple fans by working with Intel...only time will tell what will happen next.

 

[Kazrog]

As for Apple - I don't think their overall business is far broader in scope than Dell or Gateway. In fact, there's not much difference between an Apple catalog and a Dell catalog. Just the person reading it.

Are you forgetting Apple's Digital Lifestyle products? iPod+iTunes+QuickTime, iLife, iWork, etc.? Apple has 80% market share in digital music, and QuickTime video has become the standard by which all others are judged for delivering video content on the web.

Dell and Gateway have nothing comparable to any of this. All they do is make pizza box PCs, they don't make the OS, they do absolutely nothing to drive innovation of any kind, etc. Nothing is different about them than any other PC clone makers, except that they're on the top of the heap in terms of sales.

I can assure you that there's more money in software than there is in hardware. (Profit margins for hardware are typically 30-40% if you're lucky, while they're 200-300% with software.)

Apple, as one of the leading manufacturers of computer hardware, makes billions in hardware sales. This is not something they want to give up. It's stupid, regardless of the relatively low profit margin of hardware, to abandon a major source of revenue.

But - who knows what Apple would do. They've already kind of alienated their die-hard Apple fans by working with Intel...only time will tell what will happen next.

I'm a die-hard Apple person because they make the best computers and best operating system. Until they stop doing this, I will not feel alienated.

 

[Matt Smith]

If this means I can finally get Metric Halo's Channel Strip for my PC, then bring it on.

 

[axeman720]

the fact is people, NONE of us here have the knowledge or ability at this point to discern the difference between the hardware of either company. Sure an IBM processor and an intel work differently but the choices we make are based more on a stable Operating System than anything. Arguing at intels potential improvement or degrading of a MAC cannot be decided until the processors are developed and implemented with the proper mac OS.

Once again its an unmeasured, insecure and inconsistent comparison.

Apples and oranges people. Decide when it comes out.

 

[Impy]

And you never know, Intel might develop a CPU that has nothing to do with PCs and therefore Apple will still have their own market...

 

[Kazrog]

And you never know, Intel might develop a CPU that has nothing to do with PCs and therefore Apple will still have their own market...

No, Apple has already been developing OS X for Intel x86 chips for 5 years in secret. Macs are absolutely going to be using the same Pentium 4 chips found in PCs. However OS X will only run on Macs:

http://www.macnn.com/articles/05/06/08/schiller.on.os.x.on.pcs/

This pretty much sums everything up!

 

[Impy]

Ahh i see, well that's good then, sort of takes away the thing about macs beeing just another PC...

 

[egan.]

It's hard to imagine that there won't be a workaround for this since we have cracks and patches for nearly every other kind of anti-piracy.

 

[Kazrog]

It's hard to imagine that there won't be a workaround for this since we have cracks and patches for nearly every other kind of anti-piracy.

Yes, but you have to consider that an operating system like OS X is a very deep thing that looks for specific hardware, etc. I absolutely think that within a couple of weeks of the release of the first Intel-based Mac, some geek out there will figure out a way to get the Mac OS X running on regular PCs.

But, as the article I linked to said, it's still going to prevent the average person from doing this. Sure, some hackers will have fun with it, and it might work pretty well for surfing around and doing basic stuff... but I bet you wouldn't be able to do more intense interactions with hardware, DAW apps, etc. without weird crashing.

 

[Hopkins-WitchfinderGeneral]

As long as theres an alternative i'll NEVER use intel chips. AMD all the way.

 

[The Grim Clown]

Well, we do already KNOW for certain that Apple is switching to Pentium 4 based architecture:

http://www.macnn.com/articles/05/06/06/intel.transition/

So that part of the equation was answered yesterday morning.

Oh. Alright, I just thought it was one of those accidental rumours.

It's hard to imagine that there won't be a workaround for this since we have cracks and patches for nearly every other kind of anti-piracy.

If Intel decides to make these PCs with intel chipset they can even force Windows not run on it. Having that in mind, means Apple will not abide to the general principles of OSes on normal PCs and as such, there'll be a lot of work that the average reverse engineer wouldn't be able to work out efficiently well unless he was able to grasp the whole thing behind it, which I doubt Apple would ever release any info about publicaly, since they wouldn't want competitors to their OSX or whatever future may bring out of it.

 

[Kazrog]

Some more light has been shed:

http://www.macnn.com/articles/05/06/09/intel.mac.performance/

Specs for the developer test units. Very interesting!

 

[DanAbela]

Before you ask im a Mac user and hate pc's with a passion yet this thread reminded me of this flash animation thingy

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/apple.php