Mac OS 10.X for PC boxes?

[System]

Last night (Friday)  on TechTV's Screensavers a story about a "dozen or so" engineers having ported Mac's OS 10.2 to run on intel/AMD CPU's. The story pointed out faster cheaper hardware...etc.  for the PC. (Groan!)

More here and here.

[Ayashoka]

I don't think Apple will be that keen on this...
Besides, the current switch to OS X already forced a software-replacement (excluding the classic-compitability stuff)

So they'll stir up a lot of trouble if they do this....

[AmigaMac]

Apple will never go to an Intel/AMD chip anytime soon... especially since IBM's announcement of the 64bit PowerPC CPU!

[Hardboy]

64 bit cpu?? The 603 and 604 (The ones from BlizzardPPC and CyberstormPPC) are also 64bit cpu´s...

[System]

Hi,

64 bit cpu?? The 603 and 604 (The ones from BlizzardPPC and CyberstormPPC) are also 64bit cpu´s...

Well, not really. They have a 64 bit internal architecture, but the connecion to the outside is 'only' 32 bit. This is like e.g. the 68000, which is a 32 bit internal but 16 bit external cpu.

Greetz,

[newbee]

The "Intel" platform is a killer.

BEOS went "intel" just before it was killed...

If MAC go intell they will suffer such a backlash that it will kill them.

They should stick to PPC hardware where they can diferentiate themselves.

Hopefully the new IBM PPC offerings will give respectable GHz counts to apease the GHz bigots.

I personaly find the GHz race a lot of c**p as the computer do not "feel" any faster.

Regards
Darren

[Kronos]

@newbee
Jusr install Amithlon in it, and you will feel the speed  :-D  :-D

[JamesR]

Apple probably won't do this - it makes too much sense. On x86, Apple would have a fighting chance against Microsoft and so, of course, Steve Jobs would never decide to to it.

[whabang]

Apple would have a fighting chance against Microsoft and so

If there ever was to be a serious competitor to MS, Apple would be the one.