Saturday, September 06, 2003

Like uptime, but not "up"...

I've recently noticed that seems to have mediocre-at-best uptime.

I'm looking for some of you wonderful readers out there to just drop me a line with your thoughts on MacUnderground's uptime versus downtime situation.

Unfortunately, all this will be able to do is confirm - or not confirm - the uptime situation. Since BlogSpot hosts this site for free, there's not much I can do (although I'll mention that I'm spending more and more time looking into alternative hosting situations for the site).

Anyway, thanks in advance to anyone who takes the time to drop me a line on this subject. And to those who don't, I'm sure there was a great reason why you couldn't.

Friday, September 05, 2003

The definition of vague...

Mac Rumors Page 2 points out the latest unreliable rumor out of France.

MacBidouille is claiming that several sources have told them to check Apple's website on Monday. Of course, isn't MacBidouille be checking on a daily basis? Seems pretty fundamental to me.

Anyway, these sources apparently aren't giving MacBidouille any clues as to why they should check especially on Monday, but that's the entire rumor. Check Apple's website on Monday. That's really the whole shebang.

Who knows what this might wind up producing! Maybe Apple will advertise another one of their many products on the homepage! Or maybe they'll add a new "Hot News" item (let's keep our fingers crossed on that one)!

Sarcasm aside, it seems unlikely that we'll see new Powerbooks or etc. out of this rumor. It's more conjecture and speculation than anything else.

Or is it?
(Yes, it probably is)

Wednesday, September 03, 2003

Powerbook rumor fix...

MacBidouille and AppleInsider are both touching base on Powerbooks this morning.

With no mention of the upcoming Apple Expo Paris, the sites claim that Motorola is to blame for even futher delays that will push a release into October. Now they're also claiming that we may see G5 Powerbooks "early" next year (which is funny because these are the sites that claimed it would be at least a year before we'd see such Powerbooks just a couple months back).

Despite these rumors, I still think Powerbooks are a very good possibility for the Apple Expo Paris keynote.

Tuesday, September 02, 2003

News Notes.

Here some new news developments this evening.

- Apple claims that the Dual-Processor G5s are shipping.

- As expected, The Rolling Stones have arrived in the iTunes Music Store.

- Sources from CNet to Slashdot are providing confirmation for the Virginia Tech G5 supercomputer rumor was first reported at Think Secret.

And lastly,
- Apple stock hit a new 52-week high today, cruising upwards on everything from the G5 to iTunes, iSight, and iChat. Let's just say I'm iMpressed.

Monday, September 01, 2003

It's time for America's Stupidest Rumors!

(Sorry for the late post. I was busy today.)

Yes, for some reason Mac Rumors dragged up this pointless rumor from, a site with no Mac rumor credibility (I respect Mac Rumors highly, but think this rumor wasn't worth a front page posting).

It's another baseless Apple on Intel rumor.

Let me be clear on this topic: Apple is not moving to Intel.

Does that clear things up?

Any Apple on Intel rumor is false to begin with, especially when you consider Apple's new commitments to IBM (you know, that "G5" thing). This rumor starts to feel particularly false when it claims "An original idea to release a duel platform MAC..." in the first paragraph.

"MAC"? I don't know who your source is, but I hope they haven't confused a computer company for a sandwich with the word "Big" in front of it.

On top of that, the story references Intel's mythical "Itanium" chip. It's like the Motorola-made G5 of Intel (although in all fairness Intel may acutally produce the Itanium someday, once they work out the hoards of debilitating design issues).

Anyway, here's my summary: The people at "Smart House" are about as smart as Willie's Shack on The Simpsons.
Apple isn't going to move to Intel processors. Period.

I'm personally interested in finding out whether the folks at "Smart House" are just stupid, or if they've got a secret motive in posting a story as inaccurate, if not more inaccurate, than any Apple on Intel story.

For those who don't understand why Apple really can't move to Intel, the answer is simple (there's also the previously mentioned IBM factor): OS X on Intel would most likely put Apple out of business. The bulk of Apple's profits are from hardware sales, which would drop substantially if Apple moved to Intel's processors.

Your comments are welcome at