Apple and Intel Whats it mean to PC's.

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
I was referring to the US market share . That blog you linked to was cheesie at best . The author had hardly any writing skills. Just a bit better than mine . We all know how bad that is.

You must admit Apple is growing PC share fast and if it all downhill for this snow ball we know it can grow very fast . What was apples market share in US befor Conroe . What was its world share befor Conroe .

Dell is losing market share since they went to AMD .

The numbers don't lie.

No, Dell lost marketshare for over a year before they went AMD...in fact for almost 2 years prior.

With all the unethical financial issues only just now beginning to be purged from DELL's "history" I would take any statistics that DELL claimed to have garnered for themselves with a grain of salt until they are all done restating earnings for the past 5 years.

Numbers don't lie, but executive management can and in DELL's case they admittedly did.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Apple isn't going anywhere as long as their OS stays glued to their hardware, and the only reason their software is halfway decent is because they have a tiny fraction of hardware variables to consider when developing their software because they have full control of the total system. I'd bet that if you force Apple to produce an OS anyone can install on their own non-Apple computer, Vista would suddenly look like a perfect product.

Apple is niche, and they've locked themselves into it.

Their best selling computer product is still their very first iMac design, and that was because of its price - it had a price that could sell (sub $1K). Apple knows this and yet they still don't bring back a cheap computer to try and boost sales. Why? Because they're niche. They have this anal philosophy about design and what not and pretty much cannot bring out a product to compete on the mainstream. Their cheapest total computer package is $1199, there's no way they can compete with PC like that. Sure, the MacMini starts @ $599, but add their cheapest keyboard/mouse/monitor and it comes to $1296, and the overall value of the hardware inside the Mini isn't worth $600, you're paying for the chic design.

When you can get a total package PC from the likes of a Dell for ~$500, and the closest Apple can come is with a more restrictive $600 + keyboard/mouse/Monitor, you're looking at two completely different leagues, not even the same ball park.

Apple isn't going anywhere significant in the computer market any time soon and they don't 'deserve' anything.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Growing stronger and stronger. That downhill snowball effect will take place real soon .

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/...008/01/02/apple-hit-08

 

[jhu]

macs aren't too bad, although if you don't want os x, there's no real point in buying a mac.

 

[Phunk0ne]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Growing stronger and stronger. That downhill snowball effect will take place real soon .

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/...008/01/02/apple-hit-08

If you do not know this by now, anything from the inq has to be taken with a very large grain of salt (the size of Saturn more likely).

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Growing stronger and stronger. That downhill snowball effect will take place real soon .

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/...008/01/02/apple-hit-08

Well I am not sure what a downhill snowball effect is in accounting and economics theory, the MBA profs must have been uneducated dolts for never having mentioned Nemesis's theory of market supply/demand.

There is such a thing as "gaining critical mass" when it comes to market perception as well as unit volume needed to cross critical mass production thresholds in terms of reducing costs (Plasma and LCD HDTV markets are an example).

Apple, from my understanding of their multi-decade business model, does not want into the mass market low-cost low-ASP high-volume markets. Neither did Alienware, for the same rational reasons.

What I do know is that making huge year-on-year percent changes in anything is easy when one is starting with small percentages to begin with.

I think you have been subjected to the Steve Job's reality distortion field once too many times Good luck with that!

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: Phunk0ne

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Growing stronger and stronger. That downhill snowball effect will take place real soon .

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/...008/01/02/apple-hit-08

If you do not know this by now, anything from the inq has to be taken with a very large grain of salt (the size of Saturn more likely).

OK ! Is this better.


http://arstechnica.com/journal...ord-at-the-end-of-2007

 

[Nemesis 1]

I had to bring this back from the dead. As we are now learning Apple wants a piece of the Gaming pie . AS I SAID.

The nay sayers in this thread are just that . Nay sayers without the ability to use avaiable information to beable to draw resoniable conclusions.

When we read about new hardware and its capabilities . One must connect all the dots. To make reasoniable conjecture.

Since my very first post in hardware forums some 4 years ago . This has been my goal .

I haven't been proven wrong but only a couple of times . But at the time of my writing my conclusions based on available information. Has been constantly under attack.

Now I understand alot of this is my own doing because of poor writing skills. The fact remains I do very well at connecting the dots based on available information.

Even tho my writing skills suck . My reading comprehension is very high.

 

[Idontcare]

You've definitely proven your ability at condensing some rather fuzzy logic concepts into a consistent theme of linear logic. I have appreciated and benefited from this in the "beyond Nehalem" conversations.

I must have missed the latest info on Apple breaking into the gaming market. What did I miss? I haven't seen any headlines on the typical websites. Care to share?

 

[Nemesis 1]

Now I had many links to choose from . But I feel this one is best . As it supports more what others say . Than what I am saying.

I like to play fare . Its so much more rewarding at the end of the day.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ar...elating-to-gaming.html

 

[Idontcare]

Yes, I can see it now. That's not a sly attempt to sarcastic. The whole notion of Apple entering the stand-alone console market was completely lost on me. But that is genius. Of course that is where they'd try and go next.

You could even see Intel help to push them along. Microsoft went and had their own XBOX360 chip made for themselves, IBM is off pushing CELL. Intel probably would like to see itself doing something to keep those sales dollars out of the hands of the competition to prevent some of them from bleeding back into the competition's R&D groups.

So why not work with Apple to develop a new entry into the stand-alone game console market? Brilliant! And what graphics processor to use to power such a beast? Queue Nemesis's favorite post-Nehalem multi-core monster...Larrabee.

It is quirky, so "out there" but at the same time so reasonable and nearly expected if you stand back far enough from the current console-market industry ties and see where things would inevitably lead.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
I had to bring this back from the dead. As we are now learning Apple wants a piece of the Gaming pie . AS I SAID.

The nay sayers in this thread are just that . Nay sayers without the ability to use avaiable information to beable to draw resoniable conclusions.

When we read about new hardware and its capabilities . One must connect all the dots. To make reasoniable conjecture.

Since my very first post in hardware forums some 4 years ago . This has been my goal .

I haven't been proven wrong but only a couple of times . But at the time of my writing my conclusions based on available information. Has been constantly under attack.

Now I understand alot of this is my own doing because of poor writing skills. The fact remains I do very well at connecting the dots based on available information.

Even tho my writing skills suck . My reading comprehension is very high.

Your logic still fails:

Gaming...

PC gaming is PC gaming. Apple is not PC. If you want to game on Mac you pretty much have to run Windows, something Apple doesn't really want you to do - the only reason they offer it is in hopes that it'll ease users into using their computers and eventually their OSes.

Most people running a computer run Windows. If a developer wants to cut costs and have the widest possible target audience, they have to develop only for Windows. Apple fails no matter how awesome their hardware advantage is, which won't remain an advantage for long because it'll never remain truly proprietary.


Console gaming - even more of a joke to consider. The competition is already too great to join in the fray (too many major players), the competition is already too entrenched, and Apple is in nowhere near the position Mircosoft was in when they decided to jump in (heck, the position is even worse because Apple would now have to compete with Microsoft) as Microsoft had/has the resources available to plow through the inevitable grievous losses that had to be sustained in order to establish a foot hold they could push off of against the entrenched Sony and Nintendo. And in the end, Microsoft is going to be fighting over 2nd place at best, and could likely fall to 3rd by the end of the generation. And if we're considering this is Microsoft, Apple would come in at a very distant 4th...that is if they even last an entire generation before they realize how huge a failure they are and pull out prematurely.


This leaves the only plausible scenario of handheld gaming, which is far from as sexy as you're trying to make it sound. The iGame or iPwn or whatever they could end up making might find a lot of success, but hand held gaming has never been about awesome-to-talk-about processing power which you're trying to pimp in your never ending quest to provide Intel with diehard fanboy interweb fellatio.

And then when we consider they'll most likely never beat Nintendo out for the portable gaming market (Nintendo has lead here and never looked back since their very first GameBoy in 1989...we're talking nearly 20 years here), they'll still probably end up being less than stellar no matter what type of gaming situation we talk about.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Very happy here that Apple computers are not personnel computers or PC

Apple Computers or PCs are very much into graphics. RTRT is very good for graphics and infact have many advantages. In the graphics industry . As far as easy to use with software.

I really never said Apple was doing a console. But it would be a logical next step. If apple does create and API for RTRT . It would be new and exciting. I remember more than 1 console maker that once ruled the roost. What happened to them . THE wind of change. Something better came along.

Were did I imply handhelds are sexy. I have never owned or wanted one.

All I said is that Apple wants a piece of the Gaming pie.

The RTRT stuff is nothing more than speculation.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Very happy here that Apple computers are not personnel computers or PC

The market doesn't care about how happy you are on this matter. Developers wills still program for Windows because there are still vastly more users out there.

I really never said Apple was doing a console.

You posted this link,
http://arstechnica.com/news.ar...elating-to-gaming.html[/quote]
which indicates consoles or handhelds...I thought you claimed your reading comprehension was high...

If apple does create and API for RTRT . It would be new and exciting.

It's not new and thus not that exciting. There's already OpenRT and when we consider any API for RTRT is going to be useless without proper hardware available for it, it won't matter until then, and by then Microsoft will surely have followed suit and have implemented RTRT into their own DirectX. Apple's efforts would have been in vain.

I remember more than 1 console maker that once ruled the roost. What happened to them . THE wind of change.

When the winds changed in the console market that you're referring to, that market was still new and malleable - nothing like it is today. Besides, those companies that were pushed out of the console market were crushed by the juggernauts of Nintendo and Sony - who still exist and are very much alive and healthy and in far better position to maintain their status against a relatively puny Apple (I'd wager that Sony and Nintendo each would have a better chance of penetrating the PC market than Apple has of penetrating the console market). And RTRT is about graphics, something we've learned is far from required to dominate sales when we look at the Nintendo Wii.

Something better came along.

That's all relative, we could argue that the Xbox1 was better than the PS2, yet it's success was only a fraction of that of the PS2. The same can be said of the PS3 and/or 360 vs. the Wii.

Were did I imply handhelds are sexy. I have never owned or wanted one.

My intention about the handhelds not being sexy is that it would never be about any uber intel hardware which you're overly biased towards and is a major purpose as to why this thread even exists (your crusade to endlessly pimp anything touched by Intel's awesome might). My mentioning it is an attempt to basically nullify the purpose of this thread. Heck, you state it yourself when you say you never owned or wanted a portable; well if Apple's true intentions really are to only enter the portable gaming market, then there's no need for this thread at all now is there.

All I said is that Apple wants a piece of the Gaming pie.

They can want it with all their might, but I already spelled out how it most likely cannot happen. Heck, I can do it too because I want my own personal Arwing with a G-diffuser and nova bombs so I can travel through interstellar space and do barrel rolls to deflect lasers, but this isn't likely to ever happen outside the make-believe virtual world no matter how much I want it to happen in real life.

 

[Nemesis 1]

LOL I simply posted that link because a very good forum member wanted to know were I got info that Apple wanted to enter the gaming market . If you read this whole topic you would know that at no time did I mention Consoles or handhelds other than to my reply to you.

I could careless about either consoles or handhelds and never even give them thought ever till your post.


As far as RTRT goes that is what were discussing. Intel and its desire to deliver RTRT to us in the near future. I mean rely Nehalem sounds exciting and Larrabee also. Since RT scales very well with number of processors . 20 processsors=70 threads working togather in an Intel Nehalem/Larrabee combination sounds like Intel may be able to deliver RTRT very soon . As for when a game is made available and an API that was the other part of the discussion. If you think Intel has to give MS any info on this your sadly mistaken . Until after its made available giving who ever Intel works with the egde. Same way it works with SSE4 . Intel doesn't have to give AMD info until its made available. To the public. Why do you think Intel is doing this in steps . Penryn gets some SSE4 instructions followed later buy Nehalem getting more of these SSE4 instructions . Intel could have done it all in Penryn or even Merom . There is a reason for their madness =AMD. Larrabee is much more than a GPU it would have to be to do RTRT. So gaming is secondary. A bonus so to speak.

If you believe Intel is happy with MS over the AMD64 thing and the fact MS wouldn't do OS for EPIC . You need to do a reality check. This has much to do with revenge. It in no way effects Intels present market position none what so ever. I want to see intel bitch slap MS/IBM. So intel doesn't need to do gaming in a big way right off the bat. It is MS that has kept us here in X86 hell. Most informed people are aware of Intels compilers. Apple intel was the best thing to happen in a long long time. Intel can't just drop a bomb on the market. It has to be a smooth transition. When the time is right and these 2 companies have everthing worked out. Than you will see Apple sell its OS to everyone. Not just exclusive to Apple PCs. By than Apple will have built up considerable market share compared to pre Intel cpus. and its factories will be ready to compete with HP /Dell. Right now thats not possiable. There is a plan in place lets watch it unfold. Sun is very much involved in the scheme of things. Or do you think Intel is happy about how IBM has put the screws to them threw AMD. I watched IBM use Intel to put DEC out of business. They tried the same shit with AMD against intel. But failed. Do you know the whole Apple /MS story . I mean right from the beginning . Who approached who . Apple go to intel . Not likely. Intel went to apple and said heres what were going to have and this is were we want to go. Apple jumped all over it. Sweet revenge. Its to bad AMD got caught in the Middle of these giants. Other than the stupid ass lawsuite I don't see were AMD has done anything wrong.



You passed jugdement without reading the topic . If you did read the entire topic your simply trolling. Because at no time did I say the things you sugjest. Or imply them .

I am guilty of being an Intel fanboy but I have explained that befor. To many peoples satisfacation for giving a reasonable explanation. I simply believe intel will get us from point A to point B faster than anyone else . Is that so unreasonable?

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
LOL I simply posted that link because a very good forum member wanted to know were I got info that Apple wanted to enter the gaming market . If you read this whole topic you would know that at no time did I mention Consoles or handhelds other than to my reply to you.

I could careless about either consoles or handhelds and never even give them thought ever till your post.

Yeah, it is beyond frustrating to deal with you. This thread is your thread. You started it about Apple and it serves further purpose to pimp Intel. Your recent self resurrection of this thread has to do with the concept of Apple and gaming. You claim to be able to connect the dots yet you cannot do so for your own posts. You're way too slow to be able to properly communicate with. FOCUS. These. Most. Recent. Posts. Are. About. Apple. And. Gaming. The. Most. Recent. Link. You. Provided. Suggests. Hand. Held. Or. Home. Console. Yet. That. Very. Same. Article. Suggests. A. Strong. Possibility. That. The. Trademarks. Could. Very. Well. Just. Be. For. The. iPod/Phone?s. Gaming. Capabilites. And. Nothing. More. Certainly. Nothing. Suggesting. An. Alternative. To. PC. Gaming.

Let me break it down by quoting the article you so utterly failed to comprehend.

Tradmork, who first unearthed the application and contacted us about it, suggests that this could be the first credible evidence that Apple might build a gaming machine. The question is, does this filing suggest anything more than the iPod gaming that already exists?

A. a gaming machine implies something less than a personal computer
B. this whole thing might all be an overkill move merely to overly protect the iPod, much like the completely ridiculous patents Nintendo put out for Wii bicycle attachments.

What is far-fetched is the notion that Apple would build a gaming-only console, rather than some set top box that has gaming support as one feature among many. The publisher support, the development framework, a market crying out for another console player?it's all missing in action. We don't see Apple surviving in the big-budget segment of the gaming world.

Wow, so the article shares the same exact conclusion I drew.

Nevertheless, the filing can be interpreted as a sign that Apple intends to step up its involvement with gaming, which is really a no-brainer given the company's success with handheld devices.

Again, the article's ultimate conclusion is that IF this act is an actual first step in Apple developing a gaming device, it will most likely be a portable hand held in the spirit of the iPod - Apple's true success, not their back-burner computer/OS garbage.

As far as RTRT goes that is what were discussing. Intel and its desire to deliver RTRT to us in the near future. I mean rely Nehalem sounds exciting and Larrabee also. Since RT scales very well with number of processors . 20 processsors=70 threads working togather in an Intel Nehalem/Larrabee combination sounds like Intel may be able to deliver RTRT very soon . As for when a game is made available and an API that was the other part of the discussion. If you think Intel has to give MS any info on this your sadly mistaken . Until after its made available giving who ever Intel works with the egde. Same way it works with SSE4 . Intel doesn't have to give AMD info until its made available. To the public. Why do you think Intel is doing this in steps . Penryn gets some SSE4 instructions followed later buy Nehalem getting more of these SSE4 instructions . Intel could have done it all in Penryn or even Merom . There is a reason for their madness =AMD. Larrabee is much more than a GPU it would have to be to do RTRT. So gaming is secondary. A bonus so to speak.

If you believe Intel is happy with MS over the AMD64 thing and the fact MS wouldn't do OS for EPIC . You need to do a reality check. This has much to do with revenge. It in no way effects Intels present market position none what so ever. I want to see intel bitch slap MS/IBM. So intel doesn't need to do gaming in a big way right off the bat. It is MS that has kept us here in X86 hell. Most informed people are aware of Intels compilers. Apple intel was the best thing to happen in a long long time. Intel can't just drop a bomb on the market. It has to be a smooth transition. When the time is right and these 2 companies have everthing worked out. Than you will see Apple sell its OS to everyone. Not just exclusive to Apple PCs. By than Apple will have built up considerable market share compared to pre Intel cpus. and its factories will be ready to compete with HP /Dell. Right now thats not possiable. There is a plan in place lets watch it unfold. Sun is very much involved in the scheme of things. Or do you think Intel is happy about how IBM has put the screws to them threw AMD. I watched IBM use Intel to put DEC out of business. They tried the same shit with AMD against intel. But failed. Do you know the whole Apple /MS story . I mean right from the beginning . Who approached who . Apple go to intel . Not likely. Intel went to apple and said heres what were going to have and this is were we want to go. Apple jumped all over it. Sweet revenge. Its to bad AMD got caught in the Middle of these giants. Other than the stupid ass lawsuite I don't see were AMD has done anything wrong.



You passed jugdement without reading the topic . If you did read the entire topic your simply trolling. Because at no time did I say the things you sugjest. Or imply them .

I am guilty of being an Intel fanboy but I have explained that befor. To many peoples satisfacation for giving a reasonable explanation. I simply believe intel will get us from point A to point B faster than anyone else . Is that so unreasonable?

LOL, I'm dying here, this is seriously one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read on these forums (that was posted in a serious manor). You're a self proclaimed conspiracy theorist and boy have you cooked up a good one.

:beer: cheers, thanks for the laughs :laugh:

 

[Nemesis 1]

Well good I am pleased your amused.

This is nothing more than a speculation Topic. Nothing more. All I have said here is Were I believe INTEL/Apple MAY be heading. Not ARE . Than in the last post I made . I went on to provide some insight as to why I feel Intel would operate in this manner. I pointed out that Intels true enemies isn't really AMD as AMD is nothing more than a tool used by IBM and MS to hold Intel down. I am sure that Intel is concerned about the AMD lawsuite. But since it can be easily proved IN the US court of law AMD was capacity constrained that shouldn't be a concern . The EU is a totally differant story. As this want to be nation has a delusions of being something more than a bunch of small rag tag nations.

Most here know what MS did to Apple . Apple for along time believed it was Intel who almost ruined them just like DEC. But since apple came to its senses and sees clearly Intel was a mere tool used by IBM/MS. Just as IBM/MS used AMD as a tool against Intel . Same as MS used AMD64 as a tool against Intel. Since Intel is the common denominator here they actually know who the true enemy or threat to their survival is. AMD is nothing more than a thorn in intels foot. Thats all they ever were or will be.

Every member here knows INTEL wants to bring RTRT to the gaming community. Because Intel has as much stated it.

Do you really think INTEL can trust MS after the AMD64 deal. and the fact that MS refused to do a proper OS for EPIC. DO YOU? So Intel isn't going to trust MS to do a API in a timely fashion for RTRT. THis is exactly the reason I believe Intel approached Apple with a vision of the near future. Apple with a great history in graphics looked at what Intel was offering and said Hell ya . Count us in. So far the results have been good for both companies. Now its just a matter of only a year befor we can turn speculation into facts. Its only 5 weeks to Spring IDF which offer us much more insight into what Nehalem and larrabee are bringing to the table.

If what I forsee here does occur its not going to be easy for either company. To pull this off. But if again IF the Elbrus compiler is all its cracked up to be . Apples job will be made so much easier. In the scheme of things.


All of this is speculation based on past history of all companies in this game. Also based on what intel has told us. Were they want to be. Why is Intel running around doing demos of RTRT gaming?

5 more weeks will offer us more insight. 1 year will show fact from fiction.

Fiction that can be proven right now. Is you saying I was pimping Consoles and handhelds from Apple complete BS. But it does bring up a question as to what chip will be in these apple handhelds.

I would hate for this thread to be locked because as we recieve more info I will bring it back. Some already said in this topic that Apple isn't interested in gaming. Now we have some info that this may very well not be the case. But I have seen nothing from apple saying they are. Only what the linked topic states. But since this article was written after this topic was created. For right now . It gave me hope I am on the right track . Nothing more nothing less. Have a nice day:light:

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
Console gaming - even more of a joke to consider. The competition is already too great to join in the fray (too many major players), the competition is already too entrenched, and Apple is in nowhere near the position Mircosoft was in when they decided to jump in (heck, the position is even worse because Apple would now have to compete with Microsoft) as Microsoft had/has the resources available to plow through the inevitable grievous losses that had to be sustained in order to establish a foot hold they could push off of against the entrenched Sony and Nintendo. And in the end, Microsoft is going to be fighting over 2nd place at best, and could likely fall to 3rd by the end of the generation. And if we're considering this is Microsoft, Apple would come in at a very distant 4th...that is if they even last an entire generation before they realize how huge a failure they are and pull out prematurely.

Apple has previously proven their ability to enter into an existing market segment as a new player and proceed to dominate. Just look at what they did to the MP3 market with the iPod.

Look at what they are doing with the iPhone.

Not saying success is a foregone conclusion, i.e. iTV, but it seems on average you should expect above average results from Apple's ventures.

Specifically regarding the game console market all I can say is "Wii". Nintendo was so written off for dead that they were barely mentioned in the run-up to XBOX360 versus PS3 forum wars.

Wii shows just about everyone is a complete ignorant noob at assessing the game console market, myself included. As such I am reluctant to assume I (or you for that matter) know more about why Apple would fail or succeed in this market segment than say Apple might know about it.

It is plausible, if we can agree to this then we can have fun with forum discussions as to how probable it is.

But if folks want to interject their "NOT!! So NOT gonna happen!!" comments and assume it is completely implausible then there really is zero value added to the thread because Nemesis owns the thread and he's made it quite clear what the purpose of the thread is for.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: Idontcare
Apple has previously proven their ability to enter into an existing market segment as a new player and proceed to dominate. Just look at what they did to the MP3 market with the iPod.

Look at what they are doing with the iPhone.

A. the iPod was introduced in during a time where mp3 players were very new, especially large capacity harddrive based ones, that was nothing akin to them entering the gaming scene today or near future.
B. the iPhone is successful because of the iPod - hey, its an iPod that's also a phone!!!1!1!
C. I've already stated where I believe Apple could possibly impact the dedicated hand held portable market and find success there.

Not saying success is a foregone conclusion, i.e. iTV, but it seems on average you should expect above average results from Apple's ventures.

Precisely - I think any stand alone unit developed by Apple to compete in the home console market will be a complete failure much like Apple TV.

Specifically regarding the game console market all I can say is "Wii". Nintendo was so written off for dead that they were barely mentioned in the run-up to XBOX360 versus PS3 forum wars.

Apple isn't Nintendo. And one way Apple could have been awesome or unique is to pull what Nintendo did with the Wii, but that's already been done. Besides, Nintendo already had a foothold on the gaming market, you can't just jump in and expect people to accept you even if your product is a very good one. Again, I quote arstechnica...

The publisher support, the development framework, a market crying out for another console player?it's all missing in action. We don't see Apple surviving in the big-budget segment of the gaming world.

Wii shows just about everyone is a complete ignorant noob at assessing the game console market, myself included. As such I am reluctant to assume I (or you for that matter) know more about why Apple would fail or succeed in this market segment than say Apple might know about it.

It is a two way street. There's nothing guaranteeing that Apple couldn't also be lumped into the "ignorant noob" category and thus guaranteeing a colossal failure. There have been many huge electronics/software companies try and crack the console market and all of them have failed except the 3 major players we see today. There's little reason to believe Apple could find any more success than them. So far we're still banking on Apple because of their iPod. They have had some neat hardware but its all too extremely overpriced to compete on the mass market - you buy Apple for its looks and status, not to save money and get the best price/performance. They'd take their same ridiculous philosophies to the console market and then they'd fail just like Sony with the PS3 when their system was far too expensive for users to buy no matter how awesome it was.

It is plausible, if we can agree to this then we can have fun with forum discussions as to how probable it is.

But if folks want to interject their "NOT!! So NOT gonna happen!!" comments and assume it is completely implausible then there really is zero value added to the thread because Nemesis owns the thread and he's made it quite clear what the purpose of the thread is for.

Right, but all the evidence seems to suggest the far more likely possibility of a mobile iPwn, but he doesn't care about it so he refuses to accept that and continue to dream.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
LOL I simply posted that link because a very good forum member wanted to know were I got info that Apple wanted to enter the gaming market . If you read this whole topic you would know that at no time did I mention Consoles or handhelds other than to my reply to you.

I could careless about either consoles or handhelds and never even give them thought ever till your post.

Yeah, it is beyond frustrating to deal with you. This thread is your thread. You started it about Apple and it serves further purpose to pimp Intel. Your recent self resurrection of this thread has to do with the concept of Apple and gaming. You claim to be able to connect the dots yet you cannot do so for your own posts. You're way too slow to be able to properly communicate with. FOCUS. These. Most. Recent. Posts. Are. About. Apple. And. Gaming. The. Most. Recent. Link. You. Provided. Suggests. Hand. Held. Or. Home. Console. Yet. That. Very. Same. Article. Suggests. A. Strong. Possibility. That. The. Trademarks. Could. Very. Well. Just. Be. For. The. iPod/Phone?s. Gaming. Capabilites. And. Nothing. More. Certainly. Nothing. Suggesting. An. Alternative. To. PC. Gaming.

Let me break it down by quoting the article you so utterly failed to comprehend.

Tradmork, who first unearthed the application and contacted us about it, suggests that this could be the first credible evidence that Apple might build a gaming machine. The question is, does this filing suggest anything more than the iPod gaming that already exists?

A. a gaming machine implies something less than a personal computer
B. this whole thing might all be an overkill move merely to overly protect the iPod, much like the completely ridiculous patents Nintendo put out for Wii bicycle attachments.

What is far-fetched is the notion that Apple would build a gaming-only console, rather than some set top box that has gaming support as one feature among many. The publisher support, the development framework, a market crying out for another console player?it's all missing in action. We don't see Apple surviving in the big-budget segment of the gaming world.

Wow, so the article shares the same exact conclusion I drew.

Nevertheless, the filing can be interpreted as a sign that Apple intends to step up its involvement with gaming, which is really a no-brainer given the company's success with handheld devices.

Again, the article's ultimate conclusion is that IF this act is an actual first step in Apple developing a gaming device, it will most likely be a portable hand held in the spirit of the iPod - Apple's true success, not their back-burner computer/OS garbage.

As far as RTRT goes that is what were discussing. Intel and its desire to deliver RTRT to us in the near future. I mean rely Nehalem sounds exciting and Larrabee also. Since RT scales very well with number of processors . 20 processsors=70 threads working togather in an Intel Nehalem/Larrabee combination sounds like Intel may be able to deliver RTRT very soon . As for when a game is made available and an API that was the other part of the discussion. If you think Intel has to give MS any info on this your sadly mistaken . Until after its made available giving who ever Intel works with the egde. Same way it works with SSE4 . Intel doesn't have to give AMD info until its made available. To the public. Why do you think Intel is doing this in steps . Penryn gets some SSE4 instructions followed later buy Nehalem getting more of these SSE4 instructions . Intel could have done it all in Penryn or even Merom . There is a reason for their madness =AMD. Larrabee is much more than a GPU it would have to be to do RTRT. So gaming is secondary. A bonus so to speak.

If you believe Intel is happy with MS over the AMD64 thing and the fact MS wouldn't do OS for EPIC . You need to do a reality check. This has much to do with revenge. It in no way effects Intels present market position none what so ever. I want to see intel bitch slap MS/IBM. So intel doesn't need to do gaming in a big way right off the bat. It is MS that has kept us here in X86 hell. Most informed people are aware of Intels compilers. Apple intel was the best thing to happen in a long long time. Intel can't just drop a bomb on the market. It has to be a smooth transition. When the time is right and these 2 companies have everthing worked out. Than you will see Apple sell its OS to everyone. Not just exclusive to Apple PCs. By than Apple will have built up considerable market share compared to pre Intel cpus. and its factories will be ready to compete with HP /Dell. Right now thats not possiable. There is a plan in place lets watch it unfold. Sun is very much involved in the scheme of things. Or do you think Intel is happy about how IBM has put the screws to them threw AMD. I watched IBM use Intel to put DEC out of business. They tried the same shit with AMD against intel. But failed. Do you know the whole Apple /MS story . I mean right from the beginning . Who approached who . Apple go to intel . Not likely. Intel went to apple and said heres what were going to have and this is were we want to go. Apple jumped all over it. Sweet revenge. Its to bad AMD got caught in the Middle of these giants. Other than the stupid ass lawsuite I don't see were AMD has done anything wrong.



You passed jugdement without reading the topic . If you did read the entire topic your simply trolling. Because at no time did I say the things you sugjest. Or imply them .

I am guilty of being an Intel fanboy but I have explained that befor. To many peoples satisfacation for giving a reasonable explanation. I simply believe intel will get us from point A to point B faster than anyone else . Is that so unreasonable?

LOL, I'm dying here, this is seriously one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read on these forums (that was posted in a serious manor). You're a self proclaimed conspiracy theorist and boy have you cooked up a good one.

:beer: cheers, thanks for the laughs :laugh:

He who laughs last laughs best
Well its 2009 and we all know about Apples CL. . It looks like I had the dots connected pretty good. Or do you want to tell me now CL on snow is a joke. I waited along time but we now have the ans. and I was looking for . What Intel and Apple were up to was called open CL and even MS come onboard with DX11. This was written 2007. So many will say in 2009 Bs . I say think what you want . I was write.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Pyrokinetic
Apple, in my opinion, has little interest in the gaming sector -- otherwise why do Macs support only buffered memory, which is slower on gaming systems? If Apple really wants in, they need to open up on the hardware side like the PC.

However, being that Leopard will run on Intel CPUs, it will be interesting if Apple can finally release an OS product that is hardware independent -- an OS that will give Vista some competition. Not that I really want to switch from Microsoft, but $300+ for the "Ultimate Edition" is highway robbery. I want some competition to drive prices to reasonable levels. Until then, I stick with XP. Apple screwed up on this whole issue up before, we will have to see if Steve Jobs finally got a clue.

As for Intel, I think Larrabee is just an effort to drive AMD/ATI under. Their integrated graphics are inferior to the competition (even though they dominate the sector) and I have low expectations of the Larrabee part. However, if they can compete in the midrange graphics arena, and provide their own multi-GPU interface independant of ATI or Nvidia, they can deprive AMD of desperately needed revenue (and give Nvidia the finger).

Anyway, just my two cents worth.

An identically specced computer from apple compared to a PC vendor, like dell, will increase in cost at a greater rate.

At the top end you have 10,000$ apple PC with the exact same hardware as a 4000$ dell (which comes with a 100$ vista OEM license)... and you can buy that hardware yourself at 1500-2000$ (then you need to pay 300$ for a vista ultimate). Which means you are paying that extra 6000+$ for:
1. MacOS X
2. Apple designed BOX (worthless)
3. Apple logo on the front.

And then you pay another 300$ for vista and however much bootcamp costs to actually get any use out of your crapple computer.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Interesting . But Apples out ragious pricing aside. I would like to maybe talk boot camp here. As you know sandy ports x86 to avx. So my question to a man I know uses reason. Is this. Whats the odds of sandy AVX running native on apples snow os?

my ans is 100% . Intel will not need bootcamp with Sandy bridge. I am also betting this is when Apple will sell its OS to public. NOW you can build either or. Whats shocking is ATI and NV will need boot camp to run DX games . But not Intel larrabee.

 

[taltamir]

there is something called hackintosh... its a hacked version of OSX that removes to DRM checks, allowing it to run on a regular priced computer.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Interesting . But Apples out ragious pricing aside. I would like to maybe talk boot camp here. As you know sandy ports x86 to avx. So my question to a man I know uses reason. Is this. Whats the odds of sandy AVX running native on apples snow os?

my ans is 100% . Intel will not need bootcamp with Sandy bridge. I am also betting this is when Apple will sell its OS to public. NOW you can build either or. Whats shocking is ATI and NV will need boot camp to run DX games . But not Intel larrabee.

It's been tried before...unsuccessfully.
Just before they brought Steve Jobs back, Mac opened up their architecture and OS to allow anyone to make them. It just didn't work, and sales were dismal.
The first thing Jobs did was to axe the program and make Macs a closed architecture again...

 

[Nemesis 1]

So is this a legeal copy? If not talk to my hand.