Next Safari INTEL ONLY?

HyperZboy · Jul 2, 2011

I just downloaded the latest Webkit nightly and noticed it is no longer a universal binary application and does not run on PowerPC Macs.

So just a warning to PowerPC users.

DON'T UPDATE YOUR LATEST VERSION OF WEBKIT OR YOU'LL HAVE AN UNFORTUNATE SURPRISE! IT WON'T WORK AT ALL!

Fortunately, the previous nightly build r89812 which is a universal binary is still available. But don't download r90316, the latest. It is INTEL ONLY. It could be an upload error, I don't know. I found no news on the site to confirm that the change was deliberate.

The question begs though.

Does this mean the imminent end of Safari support for PowerPC Macs?

If so this would be a very sleazy move by Apple considering they still support Windows XP. It would make Apple's support for Safari better on Windows machines than for lifelong Mac owners like me that still have both Intel and PowerPC Macs, basically a kick in the balls to loyal Mac owners and buyers.

soco · Jul 2, 2011

Your excessive caps and bold make me feel like you're really hyper.

Oh wait...

Honestly though, I'd like to see PPC left behind. Go spend money on shiny new Apple stuffs!

dontwalkhand · Jul 2, 2011

This would piss me off as well as I prefer using my G5 when I'm at home as opposed to my MacBook. The g5 has plenty of life left in it. Especially if they still decide to support Windows XP but not Leopard!

42streetsdown · Jul 2, 2011

I'm not surprised that they're dropping support. You could try and compile your own nightlys if you like.

Intell · Jul 2, 2011

Judging by Apple's support of only the current and previous Mac OS X releases. PowerPC Macs will be dead in Apple's eyes very soon. iTunes may be the last universal program to be updated once Lion ships.

HyperZboy · Jul 3, 2011

Mr. Pink said:
Your excessive caps and bold make me feel like you're really hyper.

Oh wait...

Honestly though, I'd like to see PPC left behind. Go spend money on shiny new Apple stuffs!

Yes and meanwhile Apple continues to support Windows XP but not Leopard?

Are you kidding me???

And my usage of caps and bold was specifically to warn people they'll be downloading a useless update that won't work without warning since there is nothing on the website to tell you in advance.

The update will simply render Webkit useless without warning. I think caps/bold was important for that reason.

PS: HyperZ refers to an ATI Radeon graphics feature by the way for those not in the know.

HyperZboy · Jul 3, 2011

Let's not forget, this could be an error. It is a nightly.

As far as I can see, there is no official announcement that Webkit is no longer PowerPC supported that I could find.

I just know for a fact the latest nightly download is Intel only.

HyperZboy · Jul 3, 2011

2nd Build, SAFARI INTEL ONLY

Ok, the last 2 nightly builds of Webkit have been INTEL ONLY, so I think that confirms it even though no announcement has been made.

Apple will actually support Safari on Windows XP, but NOT it's OWN Macs of the same age or newer.

That is truly pathetic if it turns out true.

Caveat: Apple could easily create a PPC build of the INTEL Webkit, but I think it's unlikely.

Apple is clearly throwing its own lifelong customers under the bus again.

Sad.

burnout8488 · Jul 3, 2011

Well, won't TenFourFox run better on our PPC macs anyways?

The newest versions of Safari won't necessarily be the fastest browsers for our PPCs. They're getting old now you know! There comes a point where the newest version of Safari simply won't even run well. I doubt that's come yet, (It certainly has for old old old Macs) but Apple is pulling the plug before the problem surfaces most likely.

tom vilsack · Jul 3, 2011

does anyone use safari? with tenfourfox,camino ect...it's kinda a non issue.

SuperJudge · Jul 3, 2011

HyperZboy said:
Apple will actually support Safari on Windows XP, but NOT it's OWN Macs of the same age or newer.

That is truly pathetic if it turns out true.

Can we please stop trotting this out to shame Apple? It's not malice. It's percentages. Do you know what percentage of Windows users are still on XP? Between 50 and 60% depending on who you talk to. Do you know what percentage of Macs in the wild are Intel and running Leopard or better? Upwards of 75% and perhaps as high as 90%.

I don't like it, but I can understand it because it's about effective use of resources. You don't spend a great deal of time on an increasingly fringe platform. PPC is great, but it's starting to get long in the tooth on the desktop and it's not very well embraced outside of a small enthusiast set. This doesn't bother me, though. Having been a longtime Linux user, this is something to which I had grown accustomed. I will say this: if Lion is going the direction it appears to be going with regard to the App Store, Snow Leopard is the absolute end of the line for me and I'm going back to white boxen with Linux.

DesmoPilot · Jul 3, 2011

HyperZboy said:
Ok, the last 2 nightly builds of Webkit have been INTEL ONLY, so I think that confirms it even though no announcement has been made.

Apple will actually support Safari on Windows XP, but NOT it's OWN Macs of the same age or newer.

That is truly pathetic if it turns out true.

Caveat: Apple could easily create a PPC build of the INTEL Webkit, but I think it's unlikely.

Apple is clearly throwing its own lifelong customers under the bus again.

Sad.

You knew this day was coming the day the Intel machines were announced half a decade ago, how on earth are you actually shocked at this? Apple is moving forward at the appropriate time. PPC machines are at least 5 years old now, sorry but time to move on. Not to mention, can only imagine the small percentage of OS X users still using PPC machines, a number which will only dwindle.

HyperZboy · Jul 3, 2011

I have an Intel Mac. I have many Macs.

I simply refuse to throw out a superior machine like a high end tricked out PowerMac G5 for a low end slower less capable Mac Mini.

Who pays money to downgrade?

I understand the percentages of PPC vs. XP. But, it's not like Apple doesn't have the cash. They just spent 2 billion on NORTEL and they can't spend less than $1 million on their lifelong customers?

Like Apple doesn't have the resources that the TenFourFox people have? PLEASE!

I do have TenFourFox by the way, but Camino is turning to webkit I read, so that won't be an option.

Is Apple really going to throw it's lifelong users under the bus with Safari?

That's pretty sad in my opinion.

VanneDC · Jul 3, 2011

i use safari, much much nicer than 10-4 or Camino.

soco · Jul 3, 2011

HyperZboy said:
Yes and meanwhile Apple continues to support Windows XP but not Leopard?

Are you kidding me???

And my usage of caps and bold was specifically to warn people they'll be downloading a useless update that won't work without warning since there is nothing on the website to tell you in advance.

The update will simply render Webkit useless without warning. I think caps/bold was important for that reason.

PS: HyperZ refers to an ATI Radeon graphics feature by the way for those not in the know.

Yeah I was playing around. Winky wink, right?

As far as Apple's support of XP and whatnot is concerned, you have to understand that they're not trying to get Windows users to upgrade their PCs. They're simply trying to get them to use Safari. Easiest way to do that is keep supporting their old crap.

SuperJudge · Jul 3, 2011

HyperZboy said:
I have an Intel Mac. I have many Macs.

I simply refuse to throw out a superior machine like a high end tricked out PowerMac G5 for a low end slower less capable Mac Mini.

Who pays money to downgrade?

I understand the percentages of PPC vs. XP. But, it's not like Apple doesn't have the cash. They just spent 2 billion on NORTEL and they can't spend less than $1 million on their lifelong customers?

Like Apple doesn't have the resources that the TenFourFox people have? PLEASE!

I do have TenFourFox by the way, but Camino is turning to webkit I read, so that won't be an option.

Is Apple really going to throw it's lifelong users under the bus with Safari?

That's pretty sad in my opinion.

Well, like Mr. Pink said, it's also a matter of them not trying to get Windows users to buy new hardware. Apple is a hardware company. They want you to buy a new computer from them. They are, in fact, selling you something. At least, that's what they're attempting. Given the support from most hardware vendors for their old crap, I'd say Apple is still doing better than most.

But honestly, it's not like desktop software seems to be a really high priority for Apple these days. See the recent fiasco with Final Cut. We're watching as Apple transitions to a new business model dominated by iOS devices. That where they see the future being.

HyperZboy · Jul 4, 2011

Complaints about Webkit are not the only PowerPC browser complaints...

http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Chrome/thread?tid=14516bb9389cc3cc&hl=en

People are still bugging Google about Chrome too.

It's important to note we're talking about iMac G5's and PowerMac G5's that are far more powerful still to this day than the initial series of low-end INTEL Macs and probably still on par with the low-end Macs from a year or so ago, at least any that have INTEL graphics in them.

I realize it's a platform and resources/suppport issue, but it's not like Apple is poor.

Neither is Microsoft and they're still supporting Windows XP!

I say boooooo Apple just for that reason alone.

It reminds me of the original iPhone release when Apple immediately reduced the price by $100 and people like me went nuts and they had to give $100 Apple store credits.

Just a reckless disregard for their customers in my opinion, some of which spent $4000 or more on their G5 setups.

PS: I actually got ridiculed, reported & briefly banned by MacRumors.com for ranting too much about the iPhone $100 fiasco, but guess what? I WON! I got the $100!

MacHamster68 · Jul 4, 2011

what would Apple say to your problem :
We don't have a solution, but We do admire the problem.

Chundles · Jul 4, 2011

A much greater percentage of Windows users have XP than Mac users with PPC machines.

I'm sure Apple would love to dump support for XP but so long as the market share of XP is still so high I doubt they will do anything.

DesmoPilot · Jul 4, 2011

HyperZboy said:
It's important to note we're talking about iMac G5's and PowerMac G5's that are far more powerful still to this day than the initial series of low-end INTEL Macs and probably still on par with the low-end Macs from a year or so ago.

iMac G5s on par with low end Macs from a year or so ago? Bahahahah! You really don't realize just how slow those machines are. Please, back up this claim, I have to watch you try.

Phil A. · Jul 4, 2011

HyperZboy said:
It's important to note we're talking about iMac G5's and PowerMac G5's that are far more powerful still to this day than the initial series of low-end INTEL Macs and probably still on par with the low-end Macs from a year or so ago, at least any that have INTEL graphics in them.

If you go by geekbench 32 bit scores, the fastest Power Mac gets a rating of 3316 and the fastest iMac G5 gets 1180.
These are both beaten by a 2009 Mac Mini with a rating of 3700.

The fastest current Mac Pro gets a rating of 21,754

The Power Macs were a great machine in their day, but their day has well and truly gone...

840quadra · Jul 4, 2011

HyperZboy said:
Just a reckless disregard for their customers in my opinion, some of which spent $4000 or more on their G5 setups.

While Safari is simply a web browser, it is one of those tools that can make an old system (like this G3 running Tiger that I am typing on), feel a lot newer than it really is. If Apple does make future Safari versions (for 10.5) Intel only, it's just more proof that Apple doesn't care much about having system longevity as part of their brand image.

What's sad is the fact that the G3 B&W I am typing on, was introduced in 1999, and supported with fresh OS releases / patches until 2007, with security updates and minor software patches up until 2009 / 2010.

While the system itself wasn't supported by Apple after Applecare expired, you could still buy, and install the newest available OS for this system all the way up until the release of Leopard.

That is essentially 8 years of New OS support, while the later G5 systems only had 2 years, if you were one who purchased in late 2006.

DesmoPilot said:
iMac G5s on par with low end Macs from a year or so ago? Bahahahah! You really don't realize just how slow those machines are. Please, back up this claim, I have to watch you try.

Read possibly. It is obvious the OP is venting some things to relieve some frustration. Regardless, they are correct on the first point. Early Core Solo, and Core Duo systems were not that fast, especially when compared to later G5 systems for highly processor / graphics intensive applications that involve heavy disk IO.

Nameci · Jul 4, 2011

I feel pity for those people bashing the powerpc's. Before your intel macs there were the powerpc's. And they are not yet "dead" as you would like to imply.

Apple woould like to kill it to get more sales on the hardware. Apple is a hardware company not a software like microsoft. If they would end support for old hardwares, that would force "consumers" to buy the latest. Thereby forcing "us" to buy the latest h/w.

That is where the frustration of the OP came from. And in my opinion Apple should not be doing towards its loyal customers who doesn't want to upgrade.

The "latest" and the "greatest" is not needed at all for web browsing. I think everybody would agree with me.

MacHamster68 · Jul 4, 2011

i agree , but from a collectors point of view i have to thank apple big time with their initiative to kill off PPC Mac's and a big thank you to all the people here on the forum bashing the PPC Mac's for beeing slow and unusable
as all that makes collecting my beloved PPC Mac's cheap as chips now

so dont think about what you cant do with a PPC Mac ,
think different ,
think about what you can do with them

mabaker · Jul 5, 2011

840quadra said:
While Safari is simply a web browser, it is one of those tools that can make an old system (like this G3 running Tiger that I am typing on), feel a lot newer than it really is. If Apple does make future Safari versions (for 10.5) Intel only, it's just more proof that Apple doesn't care much about having system longevity as part of their brand image.

What's sad is the fact that the G3 B&W I am typing on, was introduced in 1999, and supported with fresh OS releases / patches until 2007, with security updates and minor software patches up until 2009 / 2010.

While the system itself wasn't supported by Apple after Applecare expired, you could still buy, and install the newest available OS for this system all the way up until the release of Leopard.

That is essentially 8 years of New OS support, while the later G5 systems only had 2 years, if you were one who purchased ,...

Great post indeed! Unfortunately apple would beg to differ here, they have their own strategy which involves not supporting legacy soft and hardware. Fortunately neither yout G3 nor my G4 will be defunct or completely unusable by the time Safari 6 ships. There still be Ten4fox and camino. Still plenty more browser to cling to considering that Mac OS 9 browser choice is extremely limited.

Next Safari INTEL ONLY?

macrumors 65816

macrumors 68030

macrumors 603

macrumors 6502a

macrumors P6

macrumors 65816

macrumors 65816

macrumors 65816

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 68000

macrumors 6502

macrumors 65816

macrumors 65816

macrumors 6502a

macrumors 68030

macrumors 6502

macrumors 65816

macrumors 68040

macrumors G5

macrumors 65816

Moderator emeritus

Moderator

macrumors 68000

macrumors 68040

macrumors 65816

Our Staff