Biggest sign of the coming apocalypse
Apple goes for Intel inside
On June 6 of 2005, Apple CEO Steve Jobs announced that the company would pull a switch of its own and start using Intel processors. If you listened closely, you could hear a low, quiet whimper as droves of Mac fanboys died a little inside.

For years, Apple had claimed that its system's processors were far superior to Intel's chips. However, the G5 hasn't exactly lived up to expectations. The 3GHz clock speeds Jobs promised years ago still haven't materialized, and even 2.5GHz and 2.7GHz flavors require exotic water cooling. To Apple's credit, the company managed to squeeze the G5 into an iMac, but laptops and Mac Minis have been stuck with the dated G4. No wonder Intel's roadmap looked so good.

Apparently, the performance per watt potential of Intel's processor roadmap was particularly appealing to Apple, and that's why they made the switch. The move still looks a little odd considering that AMD's processors have had a huge performance per watt lead over Intel for some time. Then again, Apple has rarely acknowledged AMD's existence. Why start now?

Beyond the initial shock, much of the impact of Apple's impending switch will be felt when the company actually starts transitioning products to Intel processors. That should happen this year, likely starting with Intel's Yonah mobile processor. The Reality Distortion Field will have to accommodate Yonah's lack of 64-bitness, though. Mac software developers will also have to adjust, porting applications or resorting to emulation to run on systems with Intel processors. Most importantly, though, enthusiasts will no longer have to listen to Macolytes rant about how Apple processors are so superior to what's available on the PC. Mac fanboys will continue to sing the praises of OS X, of course, but at least there they have a point.

Are you kidding me?
Intel's Extreme Edition gaming processor
According to Intel's own marketing materials, those using Pentium Extreme Edition processors should be careful:

But be warned—these processors are not for the timid. Be prepared to experience the extreme realism, responsiveness, and intensity you can only get from next-generation Intel processors.

Let's be clear; Intel isn't talking about next-gen Yonah or Conroe processors. The "next-generation" chips in question are the company's Pentium Extreme Edition CPUs, the same ones that are embarrassingly outclassed by AMD's Athlon 64 family. Even AMD's mid-range Athlon 64 processors have little problem blowing the Extreme Edition chips out of the water in games, and they do so at a fraction of the cost. Yet despite the Extreme Edition's comparably dismal gaming performance, Intel continues to stubbornly push its $1000 albatross as a high-end solution for gamers. That's some good Kool Aid. This is enough to make us ask: are you kidding me?

Where are they now?
VIA's new products
Someone needs to go behind the music and find out what happened to VIA. Remember them? They used to make actual products, but in 2005, they mostly just put out press releases and previewed hardware that never made it to retail.

The most obvious and disappointing VIA no-show was the VT8251 south bridge. VIA started talking about the chip at the time of the Intel 915 chipset's debut in 2004, promising support for HD audio, 300MB/s Serial ATA transfer rates, RAID 5, and PCI Express. At Computex in 2004, they said the VT8251 would start sampling in July of that year. We then previewed the south bridge chip in January of 2005 alongside the PT880 and PT894 north bridge, but didn't get our hands on a sample. At Computex 2005, VIA claimed that the VT8251's arrival on the market was imminent. We finally got our hands on a sample in November of 2005 alongside the K8T900 north bridge, but VIA couldn't produce even working beta drivers for the VT8251 with support for HD Audio or Native Command Queuing. We're still waiting to see a production mobo with a VT8251 onboard. Perhaps 2006 will be the year.

According to VIA, the VT8251 will finally emerge on the market as a part of the company's K8T900 chipset for Athlon 64 processors. VIA could have used that chipset in 2005, though. Instead, it was stuck peddling a K8T890 chipset with questionable support for dual-core processors and a dated VT8237 south bridge. Just like that, VIA dropped off the enthusiast radar.

The company's woes weren't limited to Athlon 64 chipsets. Other products suffered in 2005, arriving well after expected or not at all. Nano ITX, the PT880 chipset, and multiple EPIA boards were tardy in 2005, and we're still waiting for products based on the PT894 chipset that VIA introduced a year ago. VIA's new C7 processor is nowhere to be found, either, despite the fact that it was launched at Computex nearly seven months ago. You can read all about the chip on VIA's web site, but good luck finding one for sale in North America.

VIA will have to execute better—or at all—in 2006 if it hopes to rebuild its relevance among PC enthusiasts. Here's hoping. The Athlon 64 chipset market sorely needs another competent player.