He was most probably thinking of MMX. But Apples problem in the 90s wasn´t the PowerPC. They were selling more than a dozen different models at the same time, so choosing the right one wasn´t easy and more importantly: they sold a lot of 68x00 boxes too and even those were more than twice as expensive as an similary specd Pentium.
Oh and maybe PCs even had a better OS: OS/2.
QFT.
This guy is looking at the success under Jobs and simply says: its because of the move to intel. Its not.
Apple came off life support because of the ipod, their case designs (the transparent fruity imacs), the consolidation of two model classes (home and professional) and their marketing department. Jobs products were still using PPC, but prior to Jobs Apple were simply producing bland PC look-alikes with a gaziilion models. In fact Amelio wanted to head down the same PC path by licensing Apple clones, basically doing what the PC was doing and charging more, instead of proving a point of difference.
The CPU itself did not hold back wider acceptance of Apple products. Even today Apple differentiates its products from generic PC's primarily by their stylish case design. Sure OS X is nice but its not a world a way from Win 7 and isn't why people switch over. And as for the actual chips inside, they are identical to what you can get on the windows platform, but pay double for, which is why Apple will not advertise hardware specs to promote and identify its models, whereas in the PC world, the specs are what identifies a model and IS the point of difference between models. And ofcourse marketing. There is no-one that does it better
