Bookmark and Share


Even though Apple Computer was ahead of the the schedule with introduction of Intel processors-based computers, consumers are not really as enthusiastic about the systems as Apple might have expected, some web-sites cite their sources as saying. The observers blame relatively low performance of Intel-based Macintosh computers when running applications developed for the PowerPC.

Sources of Think Secret web-site report that weeks following the announcement of Macintosh products powered by Intel chips sales of such systems were lower than Apple expected. Furthermore, sales of both PowerPC-based iMacs and PowerBooks have trailed off considerably even keeping in mind seasonally unfavourable period.

The reasons for slowed-down sales of Macintosh computers were predicted back last year: performance of software originally developed for PowerPC-based computers is not high on the new machines since the programs run using emulation software, but not a lot of consumers want to spend their money on the Mac G5 machines that are set to face end of live in several months time and and which are already slower in some applications.

Customers may have realised – based on third-party benchmark results – that even though iMac Core Duo is 20% to 40% faster than its G5 predecessor when performing native tasks (QuickTime conversion, iTunes CD ripping), it is anywhere from 10% to 50% slower when running non-native applications through Rosetta software.

Major developers of performance-critical software, such as Adobe or Microsoft, are not yet ready with their programs capable of running on both PowerPC and x86 architecture, which is likely to keep PowerMac computers away from introduction till the new software emerges. Still, Apple may continue transitioning lower-end product lines, such as Mac mini, to new chips by Intel Corp.


Comments currently: 2
Discussion started: 02/01/06 06:57:42 AM
Latest comment: 02/01/06 09:11:47 AM


Forget blaming the performance through rosetta...try blaming the same expensive apple price index...they need to take about $300 per machine off the price tag.
0 0 [Posted by:  | Date: 02/01/06 06:57:42 AM]


Add your Comment

Related news

Latest News

Wednesday, November 5, 2014

10:48 pm | LG’s Unique Ultra-Wide Curved 34” Display Finally Hits the Market. LG 34UC97 Available in the U.S. and the U.K.

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

12:52 pm | Lisa Su Appointed as New CEO of Advanced Micro Devices. Rory Read Steps Down, Lisa Su Becomes New CEO of AMD

Thursday, August 28, 2014

4:22 am | AMD Has No Plans to Reconsider Recommended Prices of Radeon R9 Graphics Cards. AMD Will Not Lower Recommended Prices of Radeon R9 Graphics Solutions

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

1:09 pm | Samsung Begins to Produce 2.13GHz 64GB DDR4 Memory Modules. Samsung Uses TSV DRAMs for 64GB DDR4 RDIMMs

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

10:41 am | AMD Quietly Reveals Third Iteration of GCN Architecture with Tonga GPU. AMD Unleashes Radeon R9 285 Graphics Cards, Tonga GPU, GCN 1.2 Architecture