[DM-MUG] here's another take which seems accurate= From IBM to Intel chips

[Victoria L. Herring]

>C
>My own take is that, although switching to Intel may not provide
>Mac's an immediate speed boost, Apple is safer to bet on Intel rather
>than IBM for at least 3 reasons:
>
>1. Intel's survival depends on their fixing their speed and heat
>problems, so they will devote huge resources to this project, whereas
>IBM has very little incentive to improve the chips they sell to Apple.
>
>2. Even if it takes Intel a long time to solve their problems,
>switching to Intel will ensure Apple keeps pace with Windows PC's, so
>Apple will be at no competitive disadvantage.  Conversely, if Intel
>quickly solves its problems and pulls ahead of IBM, Apple could lose
>its graphics design customers if Apple stuck with IBM.
>
>3. With IBM selling chips to M$, Sony and Nintendo for their game
>boxes, Apple will receive even less attention from IBM in future than
>they are getting now.
>
>The biggest downside for Apple is that customers and the press will
>expect Mac's with Intel inside to be priced close to Dell PC's, and
>they won't be, so the press will revert to their former habit of
>ridiculing Apple for their price premium.
>--
>
>Bob Stern

-- 
Victoria L. Herring, Attorney, Civil Rights, Discrimination & 
Employment Law, <http://www.HerringLaw.com>;  Travel research and 
planning, <http://www.JourneyZing.com>;  Des Moines, Iowa, 
515-255-4475.