iPredict
So the current consensus is that it is all but certain that Jobs will introduce the new MacTels at the MacWorld Expo in San Francisco two weeks from now. Probably it will be a Mac Mini and/or an iBook with a Yonah processor.
Not as much ballyhoo is being made of this as I would expect, and I don’t understand why not. This could be a huge move by Apple, and possibly could deal a serious blow to Microsoft, even though it may seem like Apple is sidling up to the software giant.
Here’s why: in the past, switching meant a big investment: new machines, new OS–but mostly, new software, which could cost thousands of dollars.
With MacTel, you can switch with simply your next natural purchase of a new CPU box, which you would do anyways.
All of this depends, of course, on Apple providing a smooth and slick way to easily switch between operating systems. That when you start up your new MacTel, both Mac OS and your choice of Windows or Linux would start up simultaneously, and you could just jump between them at a button’s touch–probably with a Command-key that you could customize.
The key to this could be a new Intel announcement about something the call the “Intel Virtualization Technology“:
Virtualization enhanced by Intel Virtualization Technology will allow a platform to run multiple operating systems and applications in independent partitions. With virtualization, one computer system can function as multiple “virtual” systems.
Since Windows will run natively on Intel chips, it is probable that by a keystroke, possibly using the Mac OS’s fast user switching capability, you could go from iMovie on OS X to MS Access on Windows XP in a flash, or if you wish, by a nice 3-D transition. Apple would probably be smart to bundle Windows with any new Mac purchase, seeing as how many Windows install discs are keyed to one piece of hardware and won’t work on other Windows-ready machines.
The benefits should be obvious. Malware attacks Windows, not the Mac, and spread via Internet activity, especially email. So a user could do all their web and email work on OS X (as I do now). Similarly, the iLife suite is far better than the scattered 3rd-party software for Windows that achieves the same end, so that would also be Mac-based. On the other hand, business-based apps as well as gaming would occupy the Windows side of the partition. But with easy switching, that would be a very fine distinction, and the two would flow almost seamlessly.
Almost. The control-versus-command hotkey dichotomy would confuse a good many people until something could be worked out. Perhaps the keyboard could be mapped so that the Windows control key could be the same as the Mac command key; the Mac’s control key could then be a secondary one. Any way you look at it, some keys would change place, but at least you wouldn’t have to re-learn the keyboard every time you switched between OS’s.
But that’s just the beginning, and where the real battle begins. After a few years, if enough people are using hybrid Mac-Windows machines, the question for developers would become whether Mac or Windows was the best place to plant their products–at least enough to create a Mac port of the app. This has been a big strike against Apple, maybe the biggest, that software makers haven’t seen enough of a market in the Mac to cater to that community. Yes, Explorer and Office will not be made for the Mac anymore, but Apple is very close to finishing their own office suite, and Explorer has always been a terrible browser in any case. Other reasons may also push 3rd party companies to the Mac, including security and the difference in environments.
It will also be a question of whether users will prefer Windows or Mac OS. Today, many prefer Windows, but do so as they claim that the Mac OS is “harder to use.” I don’t know how many times I’ve heard that, and wondered in amazement. The Mac OS is clearly easier to use (fewer steps, more consistency and intuitiveness, better visual interface). The perceived “difficulty” is due to the fact that these people are simply used to using Windows, and the Mac OS runs differently. That will likely change as more people get around to using the Mac–especially after they try doing a simple find-file with the two systems.
It won’t happen suddenly, but I would expect the Mac’s market share to increase a great deal within the next two to three years. At the very least, this new shift will change the whole OS paradigm.

I think Apple will do well here by selling to people who buy computers for other people (mis manager in big co), so they can tell the end users, “you can run what you want”. I don’t think the end user is going to want to maintain 2 setups, since it takes time to maintain each.
You mean that it takes time to maintain Windows. Not nearly so much the Mac. Another thing users will discover as they use both side by side.
Well, thankfully, Apple is smart enough not to do anything like that! Lets think about this: If I am a software developer and can write for either OS-X or W!#dow$ and wish to reach as many potential customers as possible, then it makes more sense for me to write for w!#dow$. If those who are using OS-X are able to run this software with very little inconvenience, then I will NEVER write a native OS-X version.
I think that providing a Mac which you could potentially load W*****s on if absolutely necessary is a better move – more people will decide to buy a Mac if they know that they can still just turn it into a PC if it turns out to be too alien and not do what they need. Of course, almost no one would ever choose Windows over OS X, but they don’t know that until after the purchase, and they need the “safety net” to get them even that far.