If you're a hard-core geek - or just love the way computers have made many tasks faster and easier - you've probably also discovered that one machine does not fit all situations. Eventually, we're forced to "swing both ways." Last year, when I started making more of my living on-line, I (a loyal Mac user since the dinosaur days of the Apple II) had to break down and get a Windows PC, since the Web is not always Mac-friendly.

On the other hand, while I shoot machinema films and do all my web-work on PC, I still do 3d modeling, artwork and compose music on my trusty G4 - a bit of a pain, since the two machines are located on different floors.

Had I but waited a bit, I could have had the best of both worlds. The latest G5 Macs use the Intel processor, and now, thanks to the new "Boot Camp" software, one can switch from OSX to WinXP "with a simple keystroke; simply hold down the Option key at startup, and choose your OS.

System requirements:

Â?An Intel-based Mac running Mac OS X Tiger v10.4.6
Â?The latest Firmware
Â?10 gigabytes of free hard disk space
Â?A blank recordable CD
Â?Microsoft Windows XP, Service Pack 2, Home or Professional Installation Disk

According to those who have tried it, the XP runs just as fast as OSX.

There is also an interesting video that suggests there is a way to switch operating systems "on the fly." Is it for real, or not? Take a look at the screenshot above and notice the Windows Taskbar at the bottom, then check out this video.

"PA Semi was counting on that deal. They had lots of guys walking around in a daze when Apple went to Intel. They had no idea that would actually happen." said one source from PA Semi.

Rumors had it that the California based semiconductor company were already in talks with Apple of delivering chips for their notebook line and possibly desktops. When word leaked out that Apple chose Intel instead, it was a major blow for the company.

But with a stellar reputation with its alumni that were responsible for DEC's Alpha chip, which for much of the 1990s was consistently the fastest microprocessor on the market, PA Semi had no trouble bouncing back.

PA6T-1682M, PA Semi's first processor, is a 2GHz, dual-core product with two DDR2 memory controllers, 2MB of L2 cache, and support for eight PCI Express. The product will ship in volume next year and be followed by single-core and quad-core chips. It also supports the Altivec floating point instruction set that currently provides a massive speedup for multimedia and scientific Mac software. At 2GHz, the chip consumes just 7 watts of power according to PA. Intel's Core Duo consumes between 21 and 25 watts.

This product could have saved a lot of Apple's most important software partners the trouble of a difficult and needless to say, lengthy porting process.

Currently, PA Semi - though barely coming out unscathed from its battle with Apple - is enjoying a $50 million worth of investment from other companies such as Texas Instruments. It could be a long time before we'll see if Apple really did mess up on choosing Intel over PA Semi. But one thing is for sure, hell hath no fury like a semiconductor company scorned.

There was a time when PCs powered by Intel 386 and later by the 486 processors were the gold standards, the object of pride for those who owned them, and envy for those who could not afford to move up from their chip level. Not anymore.

Production of Intel's beloved 386, 486 and the original RISC 1960 will be permanently discontinued. Although they will be still available in the market until September, 2007 and orders will be accepted until 30 March 2007, Intel claimed that forecasted demands for the products beyond 2007 are too low. Economics leave them "no choice" but to say good-bye to these chips.

"Intel has been manufacturing...the 386 and the 486 processor families for over 15 years now," the company said, which would make the chips about 150 years old in robo-dog years. Other future inductees to the Technology Hall of Fossils are the MCS 51, MCS 251 and MCS 96 microcontrollers, the 186 chip family, and the i960 series of 32-bit RISC chips. May we have a few minutes of silence please...

Not a few people raised an eyebrow last year when Apple made the fatal announcement that its next generation machines would be using the chip made by their former enemy, Intel.  Now, out of fear that users might pirate the OS X for use on less expensive PC clones, Apple has made its formerly open-source Darwin core proprietary. Mac developers and power users trying to make modifications of source code can no longer do anything with the OS X's source kernel.

It has been noted that the Mach/Unix cores used by Tiger client and Tiger Server are still open for the older Power PC chip - meaning that users of the G3, G4 or G5 can still hack their own Darwin kernel and use it to boot OS X. While Apple continues to make OS X source code for commands and utilities, those wishing to build a customized OS X kernel for an Intel-based Mac are out of luck. Essentially, all users must now accept a "fixed level of performance," making it impossible for those in computationally-demanding fields like biosciences and meteorology to cut the fat out of the source code and increase efficiency.

Apple engages in ongoing battles with software pirates, especially in areas of the world without strong intellectual property regulations. Still, there should be ways to address these issues without retreating into proprietary status.

Macworld tested the new Intel-based laptops, both the 1.83GHz white and the 2.0GHz black models, set to replace the G4 based Powerbook and the G4 based iBooks. The processor speeds of these new non-pro MacBooks are the same as the first generation of MacBook Pros so they hold up pretty well in processor-heavy tasks and they beat the G4 based laptops except for the Photoshop test.

Note: Because Adobe has yet to release a universal binary for the CS2 suite they were ran through Rosetta.

The results look as good as the new MacBook color, I've always been a fan of black electronics (in fact all I carry is a black cell, a black PSP, and a black iPod) but until Adobe get the universal binary of CS2 out I'm afraid I'll have to stick to my iBook G4. What do you think of the benchmark results? What do you think of the new MacBook Color? We want to hear from you in the comments!

As we have reported before, the release of the Intel Mac has spawned a series of highly competitive of benchmark tests designed to prove dominance once and for all. True objectivity has been somewhat lacking in some of the previous tests, and this one seems no different. The attitude of the person conducting this test is best summed up by a quote, taken from a site that created a good natured spoof of a recent Mac ad campaign, that can be found near the top of the page: "The Intel chip... For months, it's been trapped inside a Mac, inside a pretty little box, dutifully performing pretty little tasks when it could have been doing so much more. Starting today, the Intel chip will be set free, and get to live life in a Mac... running Linux. Imagine the possibilities."

The results: (see the full version for complete results)

In both tests the Mac had the poorest performance between the Intel machines running XP and several different configurations of machines running Linux. As a person who prefers Linux myself, it was refreshing to be reassured about something I already know. However, to be fair to Apple I felt that some of the criticism leveled at the company seemed to carry a general anti- Apple bias that led to some conclusions I did not agree with.

One thing is for sure, supporters on all sides will certainly continue their steadfast support of their favorite system. Most will be unswayed by these results. The marketing will continue, meanwhile the actual difference between products will continue to decrease.

Adobe's CEO, Bruce Chizen has hinted on the arrival of its flagship product, Photoshop, and Creative Suite to the Intel based Mac. He has stated that they should be with us in the first half of next year. Photoshop Elements was out in February at version 4.0 however due to time constraints, it was impossible to code it in the Universal Binary needed for it to run on Intel machines. Â?We are working very hard on making our products Mactel (Mac Intel) compliant,Â? Adobe CEO Bruce Chizen said at a Tokyo news conference. Â?When we ship the new product Acrobat 8 this fall it will be Mactel (Mac Intel) compliant. When we ship Photoshop and the Creative Suite products next spring they will also be Mactel compliant.Â?

The problem being at the moment, if anybody wishes to use older PowerPC software on Intel Mac's, they have to do so while running the emulator environment called Rosetta. This causes problems as it seriously degrades the Mac's advantage of performance. Software such as Photoshop is a staple for many Mac users, and in such, when it arrives we should expect to see the take up of MacTels to be much higher. On commenting about other software from Adobe, the outlook wasn't so bright. Â?However there are some products that we have today that we have not been able to afford to continue to develop to makeavailable on the Mac. A great example being FrameMaker. The majority of FrameMaker users use Windows as an OS but there is a small percentage that want to use FrameMaker on the Mac so they can use Boot Camp.Â?

Next year is a long time for many of us, unfortunately its the best Adobe can do.

With the advent of the Intel based Mac and the subsequent addition of bootcamp to allow dual booting of OSX and XP, Mac users have been blessed with the best of both worlds. The long running rivalry between the Mac and PC has come to a new place, leaving the Mac with a distinct advantage. As a PC user myself, who dual boots between Ubuntu (Linux) and XP, I can't help but have a bit of jealousy when I think about the new found capabilities available in the latest generation of Intel based Macs. Apparently, I'm not the only person who recognizes that the operating system support paradigm has shifted. According to James Coates, a writer for the LA Times, Michael Dell himself has voiced his desire to see operating system support reach a new found balance by implementing OSX support in Dell PC's. In a recent email to Forbes magazine Dell said, "If Apple decides to open the Mac OS to others, we would be happy to offer it to our customers." Naturally, Apple responded with perfunctory rhetoric; saying that it will only sell OSX for installation on Mac hardware. Microsoft was understandably silent on the issue. Presumably they are content making a few extra sales of their OS to Mac users and see no need for reciprocal action by Apple. Fortunately for wishful thinkers like me, Steve Jobs is given to flip- flopping (as he initially did with his decision against supporting XP on the Intel Mac). However, at this point I'm certainly not ready to hold my breath in anticipation of a situation where Apple will offer OSX support for PC's.

Just yesterday I was chatting with a co worker about the Apple Boot Camp news.  Not an Apple user [yet], his initial impression was that Apple had sold out.  To which I explained my view and the related benefits of this news.  Most notably, "What other computer is capable of running both OS X and XP?  That's 2 mainstream operating systems on one laptop."  His face lit up a bit.  Later he asked about the speed and capabilities, figuring slower results - no doubt considering the previous requirement to run under emulation.  Well Macworld comes to the rescue with benchmarks which pit the Intel Macs against similar HP and Dell machines.

You may notice the Mac Mini is not shown in these results.  There were apparently some issues that precluded it from being listed here.  Interestingly - in my opinion - is that the MacBook Pro beat out even the desktop based iMac.  The MacBook Pro takes the crown in 4 of the 6 tests used.  The 2 that it gave up were by a point or two, and the iMac was just a hair behind the MacBook Pro in just about each result to boot. 

Very impressive showing for the new kid on the block, eh?

OK, first a little background on the Merom processor from Intel. The Merom is a mobile 64-bit processor. It is said to offer 20% more performance than the current Core Duo at the same battery life. It will reportedly come with 4MB L2 Cache (up from 2MB on Yonah), and it's supposed to be released in late 2006.

Now for the great news. The same guy who had revealed earlier that the Mac mini could be processor upgraded simply by swapping out the socketed Intel processor, now reports that the unreleased Merom 64-bit mobile processor is also similarly compatible.

"It is possible to drop in Merom into Mini, one hell of an upgrade path. confirming this is a working combo, just drop the chip in."

More details aren't available. Blame it on those pesky NDAs. This time, the backward compatibility has been advertised by Intel themselves .

"During a separate briefing, Intel's Mooly Eden showed a benchmark pitting a Dell Core Duo system against the same system with a Merom processor (Eden literally swapped out the Core Duo CPU and stuck in a Merom processor, partly to showcase its backwards comptability). The benchmark was a custom Quake 4 timedemo, with the Core Duo system scoring 106.6 fps while the Merom system scored 134 fps: advantage Merom by just over 25%. We don't know any of the specifics of the settings on the systems, other than they were claimed to be identical."

It's great times for Apple fans these days, after Windows XP booting on it, and later bootcamp. Clearly, Apple is on a roll these days. That ought to shut-up the critics who were up in arms after Apple announced their partnership with Intel.