Re: Apple, Jobs, and the irony of it

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

Greg Buchner <apple22@mn.rr.com> wrote:

>I'd have to guess then that Apple is basing their information on what 
>the machines are intended for, not what they're being used for by end 
>users.  And they're probably considering stuff labeled as workstations 
>as different than 'personal computers.'
>
>I guess it's no different than someone using an IBM Power4 series 
>computer for personal use.

The difference is this:

Macs are almost always (99%) bought as a complete
computer.  Half of the time, PCs are built.

Right now, I can build an Opteron machine using
processors and motherboard of my choosing.  Just
like I have bought Athlon MP processors and a
motherboard to support them, both processors and
motherboard were "intended" by the manufacturers
for server/workstation duties BUT who ultimately
gets to decide this?  The builder.

Look, it is great for Apple that IBM developed the
G5 chip.  Hey, technologically I even like it.  Very
Opteron like and that is high praise from an AMD
fan.  But the fact is, Apple is trying to claim that
the G5 came out as the first 64-bit chip for PC
use and that it is not.

When I was a new Apple IIGS user, I really had
a lot of respect for Apple.  Then I saw what they
did to us Apple II users and that respect dried
up.

It seems to me that Apple and AMD are both
rebel companies but the difference is that the
latter one does what it says and the former
plays with words.