<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Mac OS X86</title>
	<atom:link href="http://theappleblog.com/2005/02/13/mac-os-x86/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://theappleblog.com/2005/02/13/mac-os-x86/</link>
	<description>TheAppleBlog, published by and for the day-to-day Apple user, is a prominent source for news, reviews, walkthroughs, and real life application of all Apple products.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:20:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: muhammet</title>
		<link>http://theappleblog.com/2005/02/13/mac-os-x86/#comment-700</link>
		<dc:creator>muhammet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2006 19:26:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theappleblog.com/2005/02/13/mac-os-x86/#comment-700</guid>
		<description>ss</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ss</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Apple Blog &#187; MacOS should stay on Apple hardware</title>
		<link>http://theappleblog.com/2005/02/13/mac-os-x86/#comment-698</link>
		<dc:creator>The Apple Blog &#187; MacOS should stay on Apple hardware</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2005 06:57:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theappleblog.com/2005/02/13/mac-os-x86/#comment-698</guid>
		<description>by           Ian          Samuel                                  	Reading over this post gives a decent overview of why you might initially think porting Mac [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>by           Ian          Samuel                                  	Reading over this post gives a decent overview of why you might initially think porting Mac [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Electric Monk</title>
		<link>http://theappleblog.com/2005/02/13/mac-os-x86/#comment-699</link>
		<dc:creator>Electric Monk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2005 05:28:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.theappleblog.com/2005/02/13/mac-os-x86/#comment-699</guid>
		<description>Not even close. Apple would suffer huge. Porting OS X to x86 is fairly simple, so is porting some of the applications. But porting all the applications, keeping independent developers on board, etc... Very hard.

Now if those companies were willing to use PowerPC I think Apple would deal. Sony especially if Apple decides to use parts of the Cell chip in future computers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not even close. Apple would suffer huge. Porting OS X to x86 is fairly simple, so is porting some of the applications. But porting all the applications, keeping independent developers on board, etc&#8230; Very hard.</p>
<p>Now if those companies were willing to use PowerPC I think Apple would deal. Sony especially if Apple decides to use parts of the Cell chip in future computers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
