Why Not AMD?

Drunkenblog posts a fantastic analysis on why Apple chose Intel, and not AMD. Well worth a read if you’re a slightly-puzzled Mac user. The short version: AMD is Yet Another Underdog, and Apple has rightly decided that stability in its supply of the core processor is the right thing.

  • Phil

    With “Yet Another” you are saying that Apple is an Underdog as well I presume.

    AMD might be the underdog in terms of market share – at the moment – but in all other respects they are Top Dog.

    Last time Apple changed it’s chip basis, they lost massive market share.

    This will happen again with the move from PPC to Intel X86.

    There is no reason in the world for me to buy an Apple Mac with an Intel Chip inside.

    Had they brought out an AMD64 machine with OS-10, then that “would” be a reason to “consider” buying such a machine.

    ..but then again, I could get a fantastic AMD64 machine with Linux64 or Win64 or even Solaris64 at HALF the price on the FREE MARKET !

    APPLE – no thanks !

  • http://technovia.typepad.com Ian Betteridge

    Actually, the “yet another” referred to IBM/Motorola, which – in terms of market share, investment in chip fabrication plants, overall economic health – were very much underdogs. What’s more, if you take a look at the original posting that I link to, you’ll find a good load of reasons why AMD would be a risky bet for Apple and a very poor choice as a chip marker compared to Intel.

    Had they bought out a machine running OS X on AMD64, that would have been a very good reason for them to have to uproot and switch to Intel in a couple of years anyway. If you think AMD would have been a better bet – either in business or technological terms – you have no clue about either chips, or business.