Well I can't say I was shocked when I officially heard that Apple is moving to x86. I only wish they had done this earlier (it would have saved us folks working on Virtual PC 8 a bunch of work). I still remember when we were speculating back then that Apple would announce a switch to x86. However, we all realized that this would be extremely unlikely. Most ISV's were just finishing or recovering from a long process of getting their applications running on OS X. Apple would have killed their ISV's if they changed processor architecture's underneath them. Furthermore, Apple needed to convince its developer market that they had a solid set of development tools, and API set to make the eventual transition easier.
Now, 2 years later, they only need to lobby some of their biggest ISV's again (Microsoft, Adobe). Many of the smaller guys have moved to Cocoa and XCode which Apple has been heavily promoting the past few years (to Metrowerk's detriment). So, the timing seems better than ever to say so long to PowerPC. Not to mention Microsoft hasn't shipped a new OS in a while, and there is opportunity for Apple to be in the limelight.
But this kind of makes you wonder. Apple had to bear the brunt of two major processor architecture changes, and a major OS change in the past 20 years. Meanwhile the x86 world has remained largely compatible, and Windows as well. I can't imagine how much this has actually cost Apple in engineering man years, and ISV/Customer pain.
Anyway, this is a fairly interesting situation as Dan points out. I remember when Steve proclaimed that you could port an application to Mac OS X using Carbon in 2 weeks. He cited how Photoshop was ported to run on OS X using Carbon:
"An Adobe VP almost single handedly [sic] updated Photoshop to run smoothly on OS 10. Photoshop was running with almost no problems with only two weeks of work."
Meanwhile it took a little over a year after OS X was released for Adobe to actually release anything. It took a heck of a lot of work for us to get Office running and looking good on OS X. And today we saw:
"Toward that goal, Apple demonstrated software tools that allow developers to carry out this "recompile" by simply checking off "Intel" in an on-screen dialog box.
While it may not prove quite that easy in practice, Jobs leant [sic] credibility to the concept by having Wolfram Research software designer Theo Gray recount how his company was able to recompile its complex Mathematica program in less than two hours."
Two hours and a check box eh? Sadly all this is going to do is piss people off when <insert your favorite application with a significant code base over 10 years old> isn't available on day one that the new MacIntels are.
What's that saying... "Fool me once..."
.
I'll be first in line to get a MacIntel PowerBook though. Apple is, and always will be an incredible maker of Hardware. Their software has and always will be a means to an end. That being a 1) great user experience, and 2) a vehicle to sell hardware. If they can manage to increase their market share by moving their highest margin product (hardware) to folks like me who look at a Dell and think Yuck, then the'll grow their business, possibly doubling sales in the next 4 years. Not sure where that's going to leave their OS business. Apple could be just as successfull shipping many of their applications to the PC and nailing the two goals above (assuming Longhorn really is going to be Simple, Safer and Sexier as Vic says).