Why Apple stayed with PPC so long!

[dammy]

CNN posted this video story yesterday that explains why Apple avoided Intel for so long.  It appears that when Steve Jobs was just starting up making computers in the garage he approached Andrew Grove for a discount on memory.  Andrew responded that they give discounts to large orders not to small companies like yours.  You are a nobody, why should I give you a discount.  That apparently stuck with Steve Jobs for a long time and that's why he went with IBM and PPC instead of Intel.  

So the who Intel versus PPC debate was not about endian-ness or features, it was about a bruised ego...

http://money.cnn.com/video/technology/2009/11/05/tm_steve_jobs_apple_ceo.fortune/

Yup, that sounds like Jobs' ego alright.  As  a former Apple][+ owner, I have deep respect for Woz, and contempt for Jobs.

[dammy]

Anyway, the PowerPC looked good but there was too much animosity between the partners. Apple failed to push it hard in the desktop, Motorola was about to restructure and IBM underestimated the Mac OSX momentum.

FWIR, Jobs removed Apple from the AIM alliance as he revoked OS9 clone licenses.  That was the death for the PPC right there.  Motorola took a huge write off for their recently opened production line for PPC desktops (StarMax?) that was going to use OS9.  IIRC, Motorola took Apple off the priority list for CPU purchases.  IBM was not amused by Jobs' actions.