Submitted by Apple’s television ads for its new Macs boast that for years, Intel’s chips have been “trapped inside PCs – dull little boxes, dutifully performing dull little tasks.” Now, the voiceover proclaims, the Intel processor will finally be set free. Of course, that’s not exactly the way Intel would put it. “Never would we characterize our customers that way.”
It’s astonishing that Apple can spin the fact that nothing now distinguishes their hardware from regular PCs except the case as the competition being “dull”.
I am guessing that Apples target audience with these ads simply don’t know Apples history of “exotic” technology being progressively dumped in favour of industry standards, and so can’t make any objective comparisons.
Even so, the Intel Inside campaign means almost everybody knows that Intel chips power standard PCs – so how can an advert that promotes the fact that Apple are now the same possibly work?
I guess this is why I’m not in marketing … oh and FWIW this attitude of theirs is pretty annoying. I’m a PC user so I guess this means I only use my computer for “dull” things (and by extension must be a dull person)? Adverters like to promote a lifestyle that goes with a product but these guys seem to have got a bit carried away and started insulting their potential customers lifestyles too! Not something that particularly makes me want to buy a mac.
>It’s astonishing that Apple can spin the fact that nothing now distinguishes their hardware from regular PCs.
Well show me a PC with EFI today …
Anyway, if you think only 2 sec, you will understand that Apple is targeting Microsoft not PC constructor. Windows is the OS running on almost all PC.
Edited 2006-01-14 18:26
Well show me a PC with EFI today …
http://www.osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=13278&comment_id=85439
But even if there were not any, a firmware barely distinguish a solution from another… especially when they share about 99% of the internals.
I would say they are targeting PC manufacturers. After all, Apple are selling a complete hardware/software solution, just like them. They are not interested in selling standalone versions of their OS for every PC like Microsoft does. I believe Jobs pointed out many times that they are NOT a software company.
Actually Steve Jobs gave an interview a couple years ago where he said that people who write about apple just don’t get it, that Apple is now a SOFTWARE company now. He has said this repeatedly since then, but people continue to go on and on that “Apple is a hardware company”. That’s not how Steve Jobs sees it.
>It’s astonishing that Apple can spin the fact that nothing now distinguishes their hardware from regular PCs.
Well show me a PC with EFI today …
That’s not hardware.
EFI is a welcome and long-overdue improvement over BIOS, but do you really think the contents of the boot ROM makes a difference to anyone much other than the computer makers themselves?
Besides, with Intel pushing it, Microsoft finally supporting it in Vista, and Apple publicising it, EFI will hopefully soon replace BIOS on all those “dull” PCs too.
A lot apple advertising is full of hyperbole (burning bunnies, stoned girls saying beep beep beep),. You probably need a sence of humor to appreciate it. So maybe you are indeed a dull person.
okay I aggree a hundred percent. But off topic, Apple’s advertising dept has sort of been an embarrassment to the whole company. “Think Different” where is the intelect and sophistication of a company that’s public face is inept when it comes to something as simple as the english language.
“It’s astonishing that Apple can spin the fact that nothing now distinguishes their hardware from regular PCs except the case as the competition being “dull”.”
Well, a computer isn’t anything without it’s operating system, so comment is pretty pointless.
Insulting your potential customers is (sadly) nothing new in advertising. Anything to get a reaction, any reaction, from them.
The whole commercial is BS anyway. Imagine that Intel ran an ad like this:
The Apple Powerbook: for years, it’s been held back by PowerPC processors, slow power hungry chips too hot to use in high performance portable computers, when it could have been so much faster. Starting today, the Powerbook wlll be set free and get to be powered by the Intel Core Duo. Imagine the possibilities.
Can you see the reactions?
That’s be a perfectly legitimate thing to say. In many ways, for the last few years problems with the G4 have held back the PowerBook.
And Apple certainly has no problem badmouthing their own past products if they think it’ll help sell new stuff.
The G4 is not power-hungry. Power-hungry is an Athlon XP/Pentium 4. Find me a laptop that has more or less the power of an Athlon XP 1.2 GHz, but gets 5.5 hours of battery life.
That was the #1 reason I bought my iBook.
Regarding comparitive power consumption, according to an article I read awhile ago, the g5 powermac cpu chews up a huge amount of power, the intel chews up about half that, and the amd 64 bit cpus chew up about half the power that the intel ones do. The g4 was also included in that comparison, taking up not quiet as much power as the g5.
So on the desktop at least, it seems amd have a significant edge in power consumption, something they’ve been promoting lately, particularly when it comes to server cpus.
Compared to Yonah, the X2’s power consumption is considerably higher, but they bring more or less the same level of performance (at least in 32-bit code only, as Yonah isn’t 64-bit).
What I think Apple is trying to do is create a frame of mind in the PC customer that the Wintel PC’s is great for you workplace but is boring for home. Honestly, the amount of time we spend on the PCs is ridiculous; why not mix it up at home?
This shouldn’t be surprising, Apple has always marketed themselves as being the sexier PC for creative people. This tact didn’t get them so far in the PC world but it definitely has worked for them on the Music side of their business.
I think that Apple has finally gained enough mindshare that people will really consider making the switch. We’ll find out in the coming years if this marketing spin pays off.
And, BTW who cares if Dell, HP etc is offended by the Wintel PCs are boring statement.
Apple is right.
Dell & HPs of the world is boring, Windows is boring. OS X is not 8)
Dell & HPs of the world is boring, Windows is boring. OS X is not 8)
I agree; name one innovative thing that HP or, specifically Dell, have done – apart from being the manufacturing wing of Intel, what have they done? its the same regurgitating of the same crap in gordy looking boxes – and their buzz, (in the case of HP), “You can change the face plates!”, as if changing 5cents worth of plastic is going to change an ugly oblong box from drab into fab.
Please, when I have my computer in my house, I want it to look good, and fit in, like the rest of the funiture, and I’m sorry, gordy looking transparent cases with lights, disco balls, tail fins and ‘bug catches’ look shit – they’re the type of crap you see geeky teenagers consider cool, when in reality, its nothing more than an American made car, big, loud and ostentaciously saying, “EVERYONE LOOK AT ME! I’M STYLISTICALLY IMPOTENT!”
It’s amazing how snobby your reply sounds. Really, it does.
Just because you consider something stylish doesn’t mean anyone else done. I personally think the Mac cases look rather simple and bland. Hiding everything from the user doesn’t suddenly make a case “artistic”. And I could say that without making it seem like I am having some mid-30s life crisis.
What is hidden from a user with an apple case?
The whole case feels restrictive. Removing or covering the eject button on the CD drive is supposed to be slick, but is irritating and sometimes troublesome if an application using the CD drive crashes / locks up and you cannot manually eject the CD. All the internals of the case are carefully sectioned off and locked away, as compared to nice and open ala a standard PC case. When I opened a G5 case I was stunned by how unfriendly and unaccomodating it seemed to any changes.
It’s amazing how snobby your reply sounds. Really, it does.
Just because you consider something stylish doesn’t mean anyone else done. I personally think the Mac cases look rather simple and bland. Hiding everything from the user doesn’t suddenly make a case “artistic”. And I could say that without making it seem like I am having some mid-30s life crisis.
Oh pulease, bland? its called minimalism – stripping something back to its necessary components without the need to having unnecessary creature comforts – when my computer sits on my desk, it shouldn’t be the dominating factor on the desk.
I don’t need things hidden from me, I ran my own computer business for many years, selling computers I assembled myself and maintained for customers, so no, I’m not oblivious to the ‘IT Wizardry’ which seems to be the forté of geeks on here – make their IT knowledge seem to be more special that it really is.
It’s amazing how snobby your reply sounds. Really, it does.
Just because you consider something stylish doesn’t mean anyone else done. I personally think the Mac cases look rather simple and bland. Hiding everything from the user doesn’t suddenly make a case “artistic”. And I could say that without making it seem like I am having some mid-30s life crisis.
LOL .. ya know, I’ve never had a problem with ‘beige boxes’, and I guess I never will. In fact, paying an extra wad of cash for a box that looks ‘stylish’ would be about as useful to me as taking that same wad of cash and wiping my ass with it. In fact, my PC sits in a computer cabinet in my desk, so even if I had the coolest looking PC known to man, it wouldn’t make any difference
LOL .. ya know, I’ve never had a problem with ‘beige boxes’, and I guess I never will. In fact, paying an extra wad of cash for a box that looks ‘stylish’ would be about as useful to me as taking that same wad of cash and wiping my ass with it. In fact, my PC sits in a computer cabinet in my desk, so even if I had the coolest looking PC known to man, it wouldn’t make any difference
Hahaha…I tend to agree. If I want a really different case, I make my own. I use ideas from here…www.mini-itx.com (See “Projects” on the right hand side). Some of us PC users have taste, but unlike Mac people, we aren’t duped into paying gobs of cash for it to make us feel good about our lifestyle. We unleash our creative side by doing it, and get satisfaction for accomplishing something. Apple folks seem to be satisfied with emptying their wallets.
BTW, I’ve noticed some of the Apple folks have very stereotypical views or are really blinded by Apple’s advertising crap.
Like:
(1) “sense of humour”…For us PC users, this isn’t humour. Its blatant BS brought to you by Apple. An ad is supposed to inform the world of your product. To put down someone else shows you’re insecure about something or have something to hide, or you’re embarassed of something inside your product. What’s really odd is, you actually care about what people think of you!
(2) “PC users are Wintel users”
…WRONG. Some of us use other OSs as well. I use Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris 10, OS/2, and I even “acquired” OSX for x86. (Just to see what the fuss is all about on the Apple side)…It looks to be a nice Windows replacement, but I haven’t used Windows in months. I guess it would work for those who have no f**king idea about technology or care what’s inside. I’m not into it because I’m a CLI freak. I like to know “what’s under that skirt”, instead of admiring of her looks…What is she really capable of?
(3) “Apple is SOFTWARE company now”
…And yet, they still sell systems or HARDWARE! If Apple was REALLY to be a complete software company, they’ll completely do away with all their systems, and take on Windows head-on. If Apple weren’t as fruity as their designs, they would grow some brass balls and really give Microsoft a run for their money.
But instead, they rather make a 5 yr deal with MS, so Windows can run on a Mac x86 box. Seriously, if you buy a Mac box, the point of it is to GET AWAY from Windows!
(4) “…Steve Jobs is right, even if he’s wrong, he’s still right. He’ll guide us through it all…”
Apple, to me, has a weird cult following. They’re blinded by Apple/Jobs’s views and have no idea of the real world.
In the real world…
* many folks don’t adopt Mac because of cost. Do you see Apple being considered as part of the a computer per child project for Africa?
* some people actually know and even sometimes care of the hardware that goes inside the boxes they pay for. These are hardware enthusiasts who like to tinker with their gear, and are very selective of the components they buy.
* people aren’t that stupid to pay for a system that has “the looks” and yet does the same job as a cheaper system. They will ALWAYS go for a cheap solution that does the job. Video card market clearly demonstrates this. Budget and mainstream solutions sell far more than “elitist” or high-end solutions.
* Everyone knows that the only thing holding back Apple IS Apple themselves! (With their views and self-created restrictions). The potential is ALL there…And they won’t take it!
* Hollywood movies and TV shows have characters using Macs…And yet, if you watch something like Discovery Channel, you see people use PCs!
Overall, you can tell Steve Jobs and Bill Gates are from the same era. When they advertise, they bullshit A LOT. They make fun of, and be-little competitors and such. They are mere children with a lot of money and the power to influence. But when you really rub them to the wall (or try to play in their sandbox), they’ll get all upset like spoilt rich kids.
How about for once, they actually tell us why we should get a Mac OR a new version of Windows? Give us real reasons to adopt YOUR product. What do you really offer that no one else does? What do you offer that our existing solutions don’t have? What do you offer that we can really use?
Hahaha…I tend to agree. If I want a really different case, I make my own. I use ideas from here…www.mini-itx.com (See “Projects” on the right hand side). Some of us PC users have taste, but unlike Mac people, we aren’t duped into paying gobs of cash for it to make us feel good about our lifestyle. We unleash our creative side by doing it, and get satisfaction for accomplishing something. Apple folks seem to be satisfied with emptying their wallets.
Well, I don’t know what a ‘lifestyle’ is, because my computer is just that, a computer, it number crunches and spits out results – nothing more than just that – and I don’t put Apple up as *THE* example of good industrial design, but compared to many out there, they’re a darn site more visionary in that department with SUN and SGI, although not ‘mainstream’ (in terms of sales to the general public), they too can show that you can still sell big irons with a bit of flair and excitement.
As for Steve, I watched his keynote speech, and quite frankly, I fast forward through alot his drivel – its like watching the MSDN conference which are reminiscent of the ‘Christian crusades’ of people falling over and jabbering in tongues claiming they’re received ‘they holy spirit’.
I wanted to see what was in the iLife and iWorks suite, the new Intel products, and that was it – any more of his hype would have been enough to send me to the funny farm.
Like I’ve said before, if I could get every software title I run now, but on Solaris or FreeBSD, I would instantly sell this iMac and purchase an Ultra 20 workstation from SUN, along with a big ass screen – but the fact is, I’m wedged into this position of using a Mac because the alternatives are so shit, and they’ll remain shit until they get the applications I need; NO, not ‘replacments’, the actual products I use.
Apple is right.
Dell & HPs of the world is boring, Windows is boring. OS X is not 8)
Apple is wrong. I don’t run any of the above, and my desktop is everything but dull:
http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/original.php?release=523&slide=8
http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/original.php?release=471&slide=37
PC doesn’t necessary mean Dull errr… Sorry, “Dell”, IBM and Windows.
(QuickTime Alert!)
http://www.apple.com/intel/ads/
These videos cause both Internet Explorer and Firefox to crash on me.
Contrary to what most people on osnews seem to think, the vast majority of apple users are not tech savy, they just know they have a “cool” computer that looks pretty and works well, that’s about it.
The switch to Intel means nothing to these people, I have a few friends who use macs and they know there is an architecture switch but they don’t really know what it means and they don’t care.
In the old days that may have been true but now it is actually the opposite.
OSX is a UNIX based Operating System using the Mach microkernel technology, which by the way is better in concept than most Linux and other Unices and Unix-Like OSes, AND designed from the ground up for multiprocessors/cores. OSX has attracted millions of programmers and scientists to the platform because of it’s extreme power, not only because of it’s extremely advanced technology but also because of its open source abilities and support, fantastic GUI, and UNIX nature.
As to the Intel issue, Apple is not, I repeat NOT in bed with Intel. Apple could use any chip it wants to and switch without much difficulty since extreme platform neutrality is built in OSX AND the Mach kernel. It’s not the hardware that is most important here, it’s the OS and the software that runs on it.
What makes a Macintosh a Macintosh is the whole machine (software AND hardware) and not wether Intel makes the chips or AMD or IBM, simple, as that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_kernel
As to the Intel issue, Apple is not, I repeat NOT in bed with Intel. Apple could use any chip it wants to and switch without much difficulty since extreme platform neutrality is built in OSX AND the Mach kernel. It’s not the hardware that is most important here, it’s the OS and the software that runs on it.
You sir, are clueless.
Did you even read the sentence you’ve written; “It’s not the hardware that is most important here, it’s the OS and the software that runs on it”.
It’s exatly the hardware that is important here. They can make OS X run anywhere, but they can’t make Mac software run anywhere by their own. And just look at the problems the switch is causing them. Photoshop runs like crap – even Steve himself said he wouldn’t recommend running PS on Macintel for professional use. When this man says something like this it’s gotta be at least 3x as bad as he says. Rosetta isn’t all that great as people want it to be.
good thing PS will be realized by the time the professional computers come out.
OSX is a UNIX based Operating System using the Mach microkernel technology, which by the way is better in concept than most Linux and other Unices and Unix-Like OSes
Mach is old and nothing really special. In fact OSX isn’t really a microkernel anyway. It is more of a fusion of FreeBSD and Mach. Most of the advantages modern microkernels have don’t exist in Mach. It’s too big and does too many things. The OSX kernel does even more and is even less “micro”.
Wonder how loudly the ms bunch defecated when they realized the rumors were true about the fruit going after their market on their platform. Hope it was a total surprise.
Wonder why intel over amd?
Wonder why intel over amd?
2 things. a) Intel is a much more established company and is here to stay for 20/30+ years at least. Whereas AMD still(?) doesn’t make profit from its CPU sales. b) DRM.
I disagree; take their flash part, which is being sold off, out of the equation, and the CPU side of the business is profitable.
The problem *IS*, as outlined by Arstechnica, they can’t keep up with demand – they only have, IIRC, two fabrication facilities, and due to archaic export control laws in the US (thank you Republicans and your xenophobic paranoia), they can’t use the excess capacity sitting in mainland China.
Intel on the other hand have got more fabs than you can shake a stick at, and new ones on the pipeline for the next few years – Israel being one of those countries – so unlike AMD and IBM, Intel can not only keep up with demand but supply HIGH END processors in volume, which IBM could not achieve.
I think another factor is that Intel is an established brand, especially after this “Intel Inside” campaign. Everyone knows the little Intel “jingle”. AMD just isn’t as recognized outside of computer literate circles. Now the average computer user may think “Wow, a fancy interface, and good old Intel, I can’t lose!” and rush out to buy a Macbook.
Just to comment on the established part – AMD has been around since 1969 and Apple since 1976 – 7 years less than AMD. If they aren’t making profit on their CPU sales, they are doing something right for being around for so long.
Wrong two things.
1. Intel provides more than just the CPU, they provide the whole low-level hardware platform (CPU, chipset, NIC, audio, etc). All Apple has to do is throw in a harddrive, code the drivers, and ship a product. AMD only provides CPUs and server chipsets. Apple would need to develop or license the chipset, a NIC, sound, etc and integrate it themselves. Not something you want to do during a major transition like this.
2. Intel has the production capacity to provide Dell and Apple with CPUs, chipsets, etc. AMD is having trouble keeping up with current demand, adding another major customer like Apple would most likely cause issue. Apple is already complaining that IBM/Motorola couldn’t keep up with demand .. why would they put themselves through the same thing with AMD?
this is to be expected…seriously, we’re dealing with apple here, i love them and all, but look at their track record, lol…
I used a pc for awhile, I like it fine, & that seems like a stupid thing for Apple to say. If Apple wanted to really test the waters, make OS X compatible for all PCs.
Then Apple would lose a lot of their customer base because of the “outrageously overpriced” products Apple has. That would be a horrible business decision, and me personally, primarily owning PCs, and a couple of Macs, do not want to see OS X running on PCs. It would kill the just works out of the box experience and you can most likely see the stability of OS X drop as Apple would not have control over hardware.
Overall, OS X available for all PCs is a bad idea IMHO.
Overall, OS X available for all PCs is a bad idea IMHO.
Trust me, they do not want to go head to head with Microsoft.
I view anything that drives a wedge between Dell and Intel to be a good thing.
Most of Apple’s past criticisms of Intel still apply. Apple switching to Intel does not negate this. Do the Apple fanatics (of course I am not talking about all Apple users or even all Apple advocates) live in 1984? To go from Intel chips suck to Intel is the grandest thing ever leaves my head spinning…
The amazing part, is that it seems like they do. At once point the zealots were revolting against the SPEC benchmarks, back when they showed how terribly slow the G4 and G5 line.
Now, they have done a complete flip flop, as if Intel was always their patron god. Suddenly the SPEC benchmarks are the best thing since sliced bread. And Apple is right there to push it along.
Reminds me of the “chocolate ration being raised to 20 grammes a week”, when it had actually been lowered. I guess some people can’t stop drinking the Mac kool-aid.
…In addition to my last post here is a site that discusses more about the specific design of the OSX XNU (Mach/BSD) based kernel.
http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/osx/arch_xnu.html
…by going with AMD. AMD has invented the Dual Core chip, everyone knows that, AMD’s dual core being light years ahead. But AMD keeps it simple, cheap, low power, reliable, everyone can afford it. Not only that, but if Apple would have went with AMD they could have kept the cool factor, exotic factor and would have gained a even bigger following. But I guess that the snow was going high in Steve’s nose when he decided with who to go. Apple zealots and fanatics look real stupid now, and the rest of the world, well, will just run OS X on home cooked “dull little boxes”, just like I have…@home…
” AMD has invented the Dual Core chip, everyone knows that”
thats utterly not true. sun microsystems had the first dual core chip (it was no x86) but it was dual core. at least on a mass use scale.
Sun are offering a dual-core UltraSparc for a while, at least a few months before AMD. Likewise, many of their chips got an integrated memory controller. Probably the same thing for IBM, although I am less aware of their POWER development. Sorry.
AMD has invented the Dual Core chip, everyone knows that
I don’t know who made the first dualcore cpu, i only know it wasn’t AMD
At the time of the first pentium there were already 32core cpus availabel.
32 core cpus sound interesting, was it for some kind of supercomputer?
No, AMD did not make the first dual core cpu at all. However, they came up with the first x86 dual core cpu, which is also the first one targeted at the average consumer. But I think one of the reasons that intel was chosen by apple is that they have the facilities for widespread worldwide distribution of their hardware, and amd don’t have those kind of resources just yet.
32 core cpus sound interesting, was it for some kind of supercomputer?
they were used for simulations and AI stuff.
iirc the smalest box you could buy had 1024 cores.
I think you are taking things too seriously if you find this annoying and are trying to imply they are calling you dull.
As a non-Mac user I do believe Apple comes up with better designs. Look at the G5 tower, even though you can’t upgrade as much as a “normal” PC, look how easy and clean the swing open design is, and the the great idea of separating heat zones.
I think anyone that knows anything about Apple and its history realizes this “partnership” or choice of Intel over AMD has more to do with marketing and Intel’s market share than anything to do with hardware performance.
Plus they can push Intel to change their logo to a smooth soft white, instead of the brash orange and blue that didn’t fit into the Mac monochrome world.
One thing still puzzles me though. Why did Gates make a “deal” to develop Office for Mac for 5+ years? I realize Microsoft still makes a lot of money from it even though Mac has a little share, but then again piracy is almost non existent on the Mac so…
Nevertheless I still can’t find a valid reason why he’d do something like this. Cutting Office from Mac would almost render it useless for office (and partly also home) use. And it’s not only about Office, there’s still Messenger, Outlook etc. and until recently WMP and IE for Mac which are all important apps even on OS X. And to couple this with Jobs constantly acting like a f–ktard bashing Microsoft and the PC industry I really don’t see a solid point why Bill continues trying to be their friend.
Anyone has any conspiracy theories to share?
One acronym: DoJ.
“Apple’s television ads for its new Macs boast that for years, Intel’s chips have been “trapped inside PCs – dull little boxes, dutifully performing dull little tasks.”
If you were Dell, Compaq, or even Gateway or Sony, how pissed (enraged, to you Brits) would you be at Intel to allow Apple say that?
I have to think one of the major brands is going to announce soon that they are shifting a major portion of their PC production to AMD…
Do people have zero sense of humour these days?
Come on, Apple is known for outrageously ridiculous commercials and bizare advertising angles. Who cares? Is everyone really so hypersensitive that they can’t take a little nudge ‘n chuckle tongue-in-cheek humour?
“Is everyone really so hypersensitive that they can’t take a little nudge ‘n chuckle tongue-in-cheek humour?”
In a word, yes! ;^)
when AMD makes a chipset to go with their cpu’s, then dell, hp, and even apple will consider using them, till then AMD will be a nitch market
it is really a shame because AMD really spanks most of intel’s offerings, the only place intel is better (performance to watt ratio) is on laptops.
but if AMD made a chipset that would perform as well as an nforce4 chipset and was fully supported, they would really take a lot of the market away from intel…….. i think intel would still have a dominate market share but say…….. 60-70%……with AMD at 20-29% and everybody else filling the rest of the x86 market
lol cool ad!
… if they went with AMD…:
“For years the AMD chip powered the machines of people who couldn’t afford to trow money out the window, but wanted top notch performance. For years AMD chips powered dull little boxes running buggy Windows for poor people, but now, now the time has come for AMD to do much more, and live freely in a highly proprietarry environment, live freely in a MAC!”
The reason the ad is causing some much controvery here is simply because it hits too close to home!!!
AMEN!!!!