Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

if macs had dominated......

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 26, 2002 1:30:57 PM

A thought just came to me. Does anybody realize that if Macs had become the standard of computing and not the PC, we'd all be talking about Motorola processors instead of Intel and AMD? *shudder*

Hey Baby, I'll install YOUR RAM, if you boot my Hard drive!

More about : macs dominated

January 26, 2002 5:47:17 PM

This is a foolish comment considering that anybody who studied the motorola architecture knows that they're pretty damn good. Apple is just stupid and didn't market or license any of their products correctly.

<font color=red>God</font color=red> <font color=blue>Bless</font color=blue> <font color=red>America!</font color=red><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by dhlucke on 01/26/02 11:48 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
a b à CPUs
January 26, 2002 6:30:55 PM

If Apple would have released their design for clone manufacturers as IBM did, they would have been the standard.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
Related resources
January 26, 2002 7:05:46 PM

It would've been a good thing. There would also have been less room for Microsoft. But i'm worried we would all be living in translucent houses with pastel colours all around!


<font color=red><i>I refugee from Guatanamo Bay,
dance around the border like I'm Cassius Clay
</i></font color=red>
January 26, 2002 7:08:58 PM

LoL.....

I'd love to see the enthusiast market of the world using Mac's........like, hwo the hell do u live without a REAL rigth mouse button?? AND no overclocking........that'd just be bad!!!

-MeTaL RoCkEr

My <font color=red>Z28</font color=red> can take your <font color=blue>P4</font color=blue> off the line!
a b à CPUs
January 26, 2002 7:16:43 PM

Everything would have followed the design of the Apple II, we'd still be using beige boxes, parts would be interchangeable, AMD would be making MAC processors, SCSI would have survived in the desktop, and all the fancy PC parts we have now would have been Mac parts. Pretty much everything would be the same as it is now, except for the processor and OS.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
January 26, 2002 7:23:51 PM

im with crash on this. what the consumer demanded, apple would not provide. if they had provided that they would have been dominant and most of the claims macs suck would be unsubstantiated.

i went to the tomshardware forums and all i got was this lousy signature.
January 26, 2002 7:50:19 PM

Quote:
Does anybody realize that if Macs had become the standard of computing and not the PC, we'd all be talking about Motorola processors instead of Intel and AMD?

Actually we'd be talking about IBM processors, since they are the ones who created powerpc. Motorola added the altivac instructions and such in the g4 but the core is IBM designed. For instance the gamecube uses a varient of the powerpc and has an ibm logo on it.

Also if mac had become standard we would be forced to buy overpriced systems from only one company. It's pretty sad, unless you need a mac for a specific purpose you can get a faster pc for half the money.

<i>Hi I am from Canada, I don't use amd cause they melt my igloo eh.</i>
January 26, 2002 8:09:15 PM

Is it a product of my rich fantasy, or did I once read that Bill Gates and the founder of the Apple-world (sorry, no good at names) used to work together?
a b à CPUs
January 26, 2002 8:58:55 PM

No. Mac would have only remained the standard if they would have allowed clones. They were the standard but fell out of favor because PC clones were so inexpensive.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
January 27, 2002 4:12:32 AM

man i wish i could have a G4 processor in my puter, but sadly apple is a crap company due to Steve Jobs' dumb ass marketing plans. the Woz should have tried to boot his ass out a long time ago.

Windows has started.
Would you like to play another game?
a b à CPUs
January 27, 2002 4:28:32 AM

It's funny, isn't it? Apple started out as a company that made motherboards for build-it-yourself computers, then went proprietary. IBM started out proprietary, then licenced out their architecture, making it open.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
January 27, 2002 6:18:13 AM

This thread poses an interesting question: does Apple make any hardware themselves? It seems to me that they liscence the use of a bunch of components to build <i>pretty</i> systems and jack up the price. Other than that they release the Mac OS. So how does this make Apple such a great company according to the Mac army?

Hard work often pays off in time, but laziness always pays off now.
January 27, 2002 6:50:19 AM

You guys. you know what really funny is people on the Apple fourm think there systems are faster and better. Um Mybe for some software. But other then that there crap I dont like that monitor/computer box thing anyway. For if some thing craps out like the monitor what do you do or the Motherboard? And the price $2000 for what 800mhz computer.
January 27, 2002 6:57:44 AM

My first computer was one of the original Macintosh 512K. No hard drive, so you loaded a floppy whenever you wanted to run a program. I loved that thing. The only reason I went to the PC side was that my dad gave me his hand me down 286, and then the floppy drive on my Mac stopped working. I couldn't get crap to run on that 286, no matter how much I messed with the autoexec.bat and config.sys files. I'd buy programs and have to return them because they just wouldn't work. But anyway ... the Mac was so much better than Wintel machines back in the old days. It's too bad that Apple tried to keep everything proprietary. Bill Gates and Microsoft definitely outmaneuvered Apple and saw more clearly how to take advantage of the marketplace.

<i>There are two theories on arguing with women. Neither one works.</i>
a b à CPUs
January 27, 2002 7:09:57 AM

It's a sociallism thing. People who tend to be sociallist tend to follow Macintosh. You know the concept, right? Everybody gets the same thing...everybody drives the same cars, uses the same computers, eats the same food, etc. Why do people who claim to be sociallist waste valuable resources in coffee houses?

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
a b à CPUs
January 27, 2002 7:16:10 AM

Yes, Apple handed the industry over to MS.

What's the frequency, Kenneth?
January 27, 2002 10:15:32 AM

Hmm ... Don't compare the price and clock frequency directly. That should be clear after AMD's new naming conventions, no? But I guess you are right, a Mac is expensive and is not really capable of competing with a Wintel machine of the same price ...
January 27, 2002 10:23:26 AM

Think he compared to a P3 800 MHz, but you're right MHz doesn't say everything, it is performance that matters.

My case has so many fans that it hovers above the ground :eek:  .
January 27, 2002 3:56:28 PM

the 800mhz G4 is pretty damn fast, i think the last thing i saw was it being compared to a P4 1.5 or 1.3 (underclocked) or something like that, i will look for a link.

Windows has started.
Would you like to play another game?
January 27, 2002 7:16:42 PM

Dunno, I haven't heard that one. Wazniak might have worked with him, I don't know. But Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, I don't think so!


<font color=red><i>I refugee from Guatanamo Bay,
dance around the border like I'm Cassius Clay
</i></font color=red>
January 28, 2002 2:24:40 AM

you know what would be cool for me to see? if the x86 and macs *whatever* architecture were almost symmetrical. maybe if that happened, we'd see Athlon XP's *for macs* and Pentium 4's *for macs*

sorry if i'm saying stupid stuff, i'm just a 16 year old kid with crazy ideas. :( 

Hey Baby, I'll install YOUR RAM, if you boot my Hard drive!
January 28, 2002 4:12:39 AM

You know, I could swear that Gates did some software stuff for Jobs. I think Gates was pretty much willing to write software for anyone and everyone just to get known in the biz.

Alcohol- the cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems. -Homer Simpson
January 28, 2002 5:41:04 AM

Actually Gates was supposed to meet with Jobs to discuss making software for Apple. After Gates waited for an hour he just left and when a co-worker asked if they were going to make software for apple he said "why should i, i'll piss on him"

He sure showed Jobs a thing or two lol! Apple boy screwed up big time.

Windows has started.
Would you like to play another game?
January 28, 2002 6:23:26 AM

From what I understand, when apple was huge and microsoft was just emerging after having sold an operating system (DOS) they didn't develop to IBM, steve jobs and apple hired bill gates and microsoft to do some programming work for them. That's when Bill Gates basically copied Apple's idea for an OS and now we have WINDOWS!!! So... yes, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs worked together.

Didn't any of you watch that very exciting movie that was on PBS about it? You know that doctor from the sitcom ER? He played the role of Steve Jobs.

As long as it's funny it's okay.
January 28, 2002 6:29:17 AM

Hmm, i don't remember my computer history that well, but i beleive the "idea" came for windows, much after Apple OS was released... which was not an original Apple idea either... it was a Xerox idea, i have a feeling that if Xerox didn't drop the whole computer thing, they'd be the "PCs" we'd all be using... along with our letter sized displays... to bad those "Altos" ran for ~ 50k USD

:wink: Engineering is the science of making life simple, by making it more complicated.
January 28, 2002 8:54:34 AM

i watched that move Pirate of Silicon Valley. pretty neat movie.

from what i gather from articles and what people say, i take it that Jobs did not want anything to do with Gates because he thought he could crush him just like Coke thought they could crush Pepsi (LOL!) and they were wrong. Mac OS was out some time before windows which means Gates didn't need to necesarily be working with Apple to be able to steal the design.
one of the things Gates said was "Just because you broke in and stole the TV doesn't mean i can't go back in and take the stero" because Mac OS looked similar to some other OS made by Xerox or something like that.

Windows has started.
Would you like to play another game?
January 28, 2002 2:23:15 PM

yeah, Xerox had a couple of years there where they were at the forefront of computer technology, they developed (and sold) the first commercial mouse, the first GUI, all comming from brilliant (and young) people... at the Xerox Research center, the Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) the computers they sold were called "Altos" but as i mentioned above they went for about 50,000$ US... some universities got some. There is a few left in existence at museums and some private collectors...

:wink: Engineering is the science of making life simple, by making it more complicated.
January 29, 2002 10:09:10 AM

whoa hold on, from what i know i thought Xerox turned down the whole 'mouse' idea thinking it was silly and Apple computers picked it up and used them first.

Windows has started.
Would you like to play another game?
January 29, 2002 1:46:11 PM

doug engelbart invented the mouse in 1968, the "Alto" was created in 1973 with a mouse, e-mail, GUI... it was years and years ahead... unfortunatly it cost people 50k, and people weren't going to dish out that much for something they didn't need/use in the past, since it didn't sell well, they dropped it... in 1979, when stuff was a little cheaper, Steve Jobs (apple guy) went to "visit" PARC where the Alto was created... the Apple II with a GUI was thus created...

:wink: Engineering is the science of making life simple, by making it more complicated.
!