All of this coring around would be funny if weren’t actually as confusing as I’ve portrayed it.But I think the easiest way to distinguish Core Duo and Solo from Core Microarchitecture is this: Core Microarchitecture is a 64-bit design, Core Duo/Solo is 32-bit. That’s not all there is to it, nor is it necessarily the bit that matters most to the broad population of users. Still, I’d like to see Apple use this fact to cut through Core confusion the way it did so effectively with G5. G5 was a wicked chip compared to G4, and Apple bragged about its bus and cache and all, but G5 and 64 shared top billing. The larger 64-bit Mac issue is one I’m about to tackle. But since Apple hasn’t taken to applying its own branding to Intel’s CPUs as it did to PowerPC, I’d like to see them do something simple with model names for the purpose of making sure that customers know what they’re buying. I’d put “64” in the model names of systems that have 32 and 64-bit implementations, i.e., “iMac 64.” There’s no need to distinguish the workstation and server. They’re 64-bit machines by convention and by competitive necessity. To re-tease my upcoming post on the subject, Apple has no genuine precedent for a 32 to 64-bit transition. Leopard will be a whole new ball game in that regard, and it’s going to rattle the rafters among Mac buyers and developers. Software Development