Intel Powerbook and iMac in January? [Archive] - Page 2

Romanesq

Nov 13, 2005, 10:28 AM

Just a gut feeling but there may be a surprise with an intel release by January or even right before Christmas, something more like an announcement with shipping shortly after to get the masses aroused.

Even with these new signposts pointing to the imac and pb, I just can't get out of my head that the mini has to fit into that somewhere. It's just so perfect for the new wave.

Regardless of accuracy on that, there's little doubt that this is coming sooner than later in one form or another. Apple has had a lot of time to play with the architecture. At this point they must be far along with the software drive and the early compromises needed to bring something to market.

It's pretty exciting actually. The whole speed issue is about to be reduced to rubble. Then we will be looking at software efficiencies and other aspects all driven by software.

And that's the way it should be. :p

tiramisu

Nov 13, 2005, 10:40 AM

ok. if there'll be an intel board for the pb on january, apples ilife and pro application will be ready for that. but the other apps like photoshop, flash, etc. guess for some month will be only running on rosetta.

i really wounder how slower an application like photoshop is running on a super 'fast' intelmother****ingboard? more cpu but then EMUlation? :rolleyes:

well, the transition to the new application will be fast, well fast in kind of evolition, i guess one year.

my powerbook is damn old. i wish to buy a new one. :D

pionata

Nov 13, 2005, 11:15 AM

I have the feeling the pro apps are already working on x86 and that they are just trying to optimize them and fix some issues.

The intel switch has been announce for a while.

hayesk

Nov 13, 2005, 11:37 AM

I have the feeling the pro apps are already working on x86 and that they are just trying to optimize them and fix some issues.

The intel switch has been announce for a while.

Apple's pro apps, maybe. But the Mac market is full of applications written in CodeWarrior, and full of endian code dependencies which will take a long time to fix and test.

Also don't forget, some of the Apple Pro apps were bought from other companies - they weren't necessarily written with Intel ports in mind.

mac-er

Nov 13, 2005, 11:45 AM

ok. if there'll be an intel board for the pb on january, apples ilife and pro application will be ready for that. but the other apps like photoshop, flash, etc. guess for some month will be only running on rosetta.

i really wounder how slower an application like photoshop is running on a super 'fast' intelmother****ingboard? more cpu but then EMUlation? :rolleyes:

For all we know, the major developers like Adobe and Microsoft could be finished compiling their code and informed Apple of that fact. Steve said it didn't take that long.
Mathematica was done over a weekend.

A lot of the smaller companies will be left behind and have to fix their codes after the transition. Quark will have their code compiled 3 years from now.

pionata

Nov 13, 2005, 12:01 PM

Apple's pro apps, maybe. But the Mac market is full of applications written in CodeWarrior, and full of endian code dependencies which will take a long time to fix and test.

Also don't forget, some of the Apple Pro apps were bought from other companies - they weren't necessarily written with Intel ports in mind.

But they will run through emulation right?

RobHague

Nov 13, 2005, 12:21 PM

Have to look at the benifits of this move to x86, what will it mean for people buying the systems?

I can't think of any at the moment. :confused: It would appear that Apple are going to be using off-the-shelf Intel CPU's, so unless they drop the prices they are going to be in with the PC specs rat-race no? Meaning they will be refreshing their products very quickly or face looking very poor value. I'm going to imagine the 'transition' isnt going to have a positive effect on software (at least in the early stages) which isnt a exactley a 'pro' of the switch. What about these smaller programs? are they just going to die?

Ok i thought of some advantages while writing that...

1) You can install Linux or Windows for x86 -- Yay, but then what did i buy the Mac for?

2) Apple will be able to make faster and smaller laptops.... and maybe Intel will be 'ahead' again by that time. Actually when was the last time Intel was ahead :confused: ive forgotten?

3) In the long-run (2007/2008?) we might get more software ports, especially games (it seemed to me that things were just starting to take off in software terms before this 'move' though).

Dunno so i guess i don't know what im talking about really, im missing something that everyone else knows and thats why they are extatic about the move? Can someone let me know :/ im sure the next generation Intel CPU's will be 'wondeful' and 'faster' than the current G5's but then thats obvious, they are going to be released after.

gkarris

Nov 13, 2005, 12:31 PM

plinden

Nov 13, 2005, 12:32 PM

2) Apple will be able to make faster and smaller laptops.... and maybe Intel will be 'ahead' again by that time. Actually when was the last time Intel was ahead :confused: ive forgotten?

You may have missed the 5000 posts mentioning this since the transition announcement, but Intel make the best mobile CPUs.

pionata

Nov 13, 2005, 12:42 PM

As long as I can have a dual-core laptop with osx and support for the 30" cinema display I'll be Extremely happy.

I think most mac users dont mind being a bit behind the speed of windows machine if they can get something stable that look better and is thinner with an OS that js actualy working, etc...

Fact is, get the machine that does what you need to do for your work or creation, and a console if you want to play games. Apple is too late to jump on the game market anyway, its a dying market anyway (with all the piracy and the new consoles costing so much less than games machine). I say this, becose the new processor that would outrun the macs', after they first intel gen release, will be made essentialy for gamers, they will be noisy and huge (And you'll be much better with a nice powermac if performance is what you need, since most of the time the top end powermac is more powerfull in pro app than any windows machine). They will also cost like twice the price for a 20% increase in speed.

Hey, we are talking about new powerbooks wich could be up to 3 times faster than the current ones, with osx, probably a better screen and a new design. What more could we ask?

Edit: that was in reply to Rob Hague)

RobHague

Nov 13, 2005, 12:47 PM

You may have missed the 5000 posts mentioning this since the transition announcement, but Intel make the best mobile CPUs.

That's great if you want a laptop.

Melkor

Nov 13, 2005, 01:33 PM

Is the only difference between the current PB's and the new intel ones speed? Or will the intel PB's also be more compatible with windows software and such?

iEdd

Nov 13, 2005, 01:47 PM

Is the only difference between the current PB's and the new intel ones speed? Or will the intel PB's also be more compatible with windows software and such?
lol. Have you read any of this thread or information about intel? (No offense.)
Reasons it's going intel:
-Faster speeds
-Being able to boot x86 apps and operating systems.
-Less heat
-More power per watt (in other words, less electricity consumption)
-Wider, more developed range of CPUs

heartsglory

Nov 13, 2005, 02:06 PM

oskar

Nov 13, 2005, 02:11 PM

lol. Have you read any of this thread or information about intel? (No offense.)
Reasons it's going intel:
-Faster speeds
-Being able to boot x86 apps and operating systems.
-Less heat
-More power per watt (in other words, less electricity consumption)
-Wider, more developed range of CPUs

I believe he was referring if besides better performance, speed, etc., if whether Windows software will be able to run on new Intel Macs? AFAIK the answer is no, if you're thinking about running Windows software directly on OS X. The code should a little more similar as long as both versions of an app (Windows and OS X) utilize the same x86 architecture, but this won't make your Windows games or software run on OS X any easier than they do now with Virtual PC.

The big difference is that Intel Macs will supposedly be able to boot from a Windows OS installation which will allow you to have a Mac that runs both OS X and Windows.
As for this being a reason to change to Intel? Well... who knows? :confused: Maybe an unofficial reason.

pubwvj

Nov 13, 2005, 02:27 PM

It doesn't really matter which comes out and when. Just remember, you do not want to bleed on the edge of the knife of advancing technology.

hadlock

Nov 13, 2005, 02:46 PM

generik

Nov 13, 2005, 02:51 PM

Is the only difference between the current PB's and the new intel ones speed? Or will the intel PB's also be more compatible with windows software and such?

I don't foresee it being more compatible with Windows.

Why would there be windows drivers for something like.. airport?

Roller

Nov 13, 2005, 03:14 PM

Dual booting is a NICE feature I'm looking forward to. I do some system-level programming and to be able to do dual boot I can FINALLY be able to do so without using VPC for mac ( way too slow and quite the resource hog! )

Yeah, but would you use VPC if it let you run Windows apps at native (or near-native) speed alongside OS X? It should be possible with Intel Mac, but will MS do it?

rosalindavenue

Nov 13, 2005, 03:18 PM

How much physical ram you have?

I have 512mb installed, and with the following apps running in the background it just can't keep up

1) Mail.app
2) Azureus
3) 2 Safari Windows
4) 1 Terminal Window
5) 1 preview Window
6) Adium
7) Skype

and of course DVD player.
!

I have the stock RAM -- 512
When I watch a dvd I usually have:

Thunderbird, Firefox with a bunch of tabs, netnewswire, safari (I think Netnewswire uses safair as its included browser; thus 2 browsers) 5 widgets. I suspect (as do others who posted before me) that Azureus is the culprit.

heartsglory

Nov 13, 2005, 03:22 PM

Yeah, but would you use VPC if it let you run Windows apps at native (or near-native) speed alongside OS X? It should be possible with Intel Mac, but will MS do it?
That's true. If Microsoft will develop and release VPC for Mac-intel then I would use it instead of setting up a dual-boot system. It would be MUCH easier to do it that way instead of dual-booting.

skinEman23

Nov 13, 2005, 03:25 PM

I don't foresee it being more compatible with Windows.

Why would there be windows drivers for something like.. airport?

Yeah, why would Microsoft add drivers to sell more copies of Windows?(sarcasm) If Microsoft doesn't do it, someone will, because where there's demand there will be supply. I think there will be a lot of demand from those of us who occasionally need to run Windows.

pubwvj

Nov 13, 2005, 03:34 PM

Dual windows/OS X boot capability is the number 2 reason why I'd buy an intel mac; now I'll finally be able to play all the games my friends keep telling me about. Primary reason is that the new laptops will be 100% compatible with future apps, while emulated PPC apps will still run faster than my current powerbook (emulated PPC speed is ~800mhz w/166mhz frontside bus, my powerbook is a 550mhz w/ 100mhz frontside bus!).

A major problem with the MacIntel machines is they will not run Classic applications. There a lot of users with gigabytes of data only accessible through Classic applications. There are no upgrades for this legacy software. That makes the MacIntel's useless for many businesses who have years and even decades invested in their data. Apple is making a horrible mistake to abandon Classic.

generik

Nov 13, 2005, 03:35 PM

Yeah, why would Microsoft add drivers to sell more copies of Windows?(sarcasm) If Microsoft doesn't do it, someone will, because where there's demand there will be supply. I think there will be a lot of demand from those of us who occasionally need to run Windows.

Erm, you are mistaken. Microsoft is not in the business of writing drivers.

In case you miss the point let me repeat myself.

Microsoft is not in the business of writing drivers, at all.

If what you are claiming were remotely true there'd be no hardware unsupported by XP, but fact remains is every so often *manufacturers* cut support for old products when a new Windows is released and customers are SOL.

I do *not* see why Apple would go into the relatively dirty business of writing drivers and even promoting the existence of a competing OS.

pubwvj

Nov 13, 2005, 03:36 PM

I have the stock RAM -- 512 When I watch a dvd I usually have: Thunderbird, Firefox with a bunch of tabs, netnewswire, safari (I think Netnewswire uses safair as its included browser; thus 2 browsers) 5 widgets. I suspect (as do others who posted before me) that Azureus is the culprit.

Interesting, I'm running a PowerBook Pismo G3 500MHz with only 512MB of RAM and it does fine with a lot more running than that. 1GB is certainly better (my 2nd memory stick went south this summer) but 512MB does the job well enough that I haven't bothered replacing the dead memory.

generik

Nov 13, 2005, 03:38 PM

Interesting, I'm running a PowerBook Pismo G3 500MHz with only 512MB of RAM and it does fine with a lot more running than that. 1GB is certainly better (my 2nd memory stick went south this summer) but 512MB does the job well enough that I haven't bothered replacing the dead memory.

It is truly queer... I really expect more horsepower from this machine.

On the other hand I also see a huge number of page ins and page outs in activity monitor, so I really hope ram is the issue, otherwise I am gonna be so stuffed to be stuck with this pokey CPU until Merom :(

other

Nov 13, 2005, 03:43 PM

Is it likely that something like WINE could run a few windows applications when the macs switch to intel? My dream would be to run foobar2000 in some way. Then I would finally be able to listen to and manage my music the way I want! :cool:

mrrory

Nov 13, 2005, 03:44 PM

Seems to me if they do release the iMac as the first Mac with an Intel chip, it's because they now want the "i" in iMac to stand for Intel. Could this be a marketing boon?

weckart

Nov 13, 2005, 04:34 PM

I don't foresee it being more compatible with Windows.

Why would there be windows drivers for something like.. airport?

http://ftp.us.dell.com/network/R81433.EXE

That is one of the numerous Dell drivers for their Truemobile miniPCI cards in their laptops. Same Broadcom chip as the Airport Express. Broadcom do not restrict their chips to Apple only.

AidenShaw

Nov 13, 2005, 04:39 PM

Yes, but once you've done the work of getting your software to run on Intel, it shouldn't be that difficult to also keep it running on PPC.
"keep it running" implies maintaining two QA teams (PPC/Intel) and doubling the testing for each release.... It requires training support for two versions....

The testing/QA/support costs for an application can be huge - and fat binaries require increased resources for these forever.

In a couple of years - you'll have as much luck finding PPC apps as you have finding 68K apps today. And your water-cooled PPC box will be selling for a couple of hundred on eBay....

TorbX

Nov 13, 2005, 05:13 PM

What do you know... My rev-A 12" PowerBook IS pretty mature. Guess I'll climb the performance-ladder sooner than I thought. Not this januar, though. From the day pb 12" rev-B arrived, I've been a rev-B kinda-guy. My next purchase is going to be rev-B, for sure.

Not sure why, though. Guess it is psychological. :rolleyes: I'm sure Apple wouldn't roll anything out that does not perform as intended. My current PB still works grrrreat. I type my assignments on it every day.

Rev-B it is. Or going to be. Or, to be honest, a rev-C is also in sight. Wether it will be B or C depends on my economy at the time! :rolleyes: :D

But what do you care...:o

Seasought

Nov 13, 2005, 05:13 PM

I'd like to see new 'intel' powerbooks release in Jan.

TorbX

Nov 13, 2005, 05:28 PM

If Microsoft doesn't do it, someone will, because where there's demand there will be supply.

So where is Messenger 7.x with widgets, webcam, voice...?

ksz

Nov 13, 2005, 05:40 PM

Dual booting is a NICE feature I'm looking forward to. I do some system-level programming and to be able to do dual boot I can FINALLY be able to do so without using VPC for mac ( way too slow and quite the resource hog! )
Dual booting will become a thing of the past if Apple implements support for Virtualization Technology in Leopard. VT allows your processor and subsystems to be logically partitioned into two or more virtual machines, each capable of running a separate operating system simultaneously. This allows you, for example, to have Windows XP on one monitor and Mac OS on another monitor (dual monitor) running at the same time. If you have only one monitor, you can hot-switch between operating systems (or more technically, between virtual machines).

Virtual machines are not just for multiple operating systems, however. You can also start up Mac OS X, for example, split that into two or more virtual machines, and run different applications on different VMs for isolation or security or other reasons. It can also be used for load-balancing in which a virtual machine can be transferred from one processor to another processor (or from one core to another core).

Virtualization will be coming in Merom and Conroe in the 2nd half of 2006 in the form of Intel Virtualization Technology (IVT). Here's a Linux implementation of IVT (http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/power/ps3q05-20050191-Abels.pdf).

kiwi-in-uk

Nov 13, 2005, 06:12 PM

ksz

Nov 13, 2005, 06:23 PM

Plus ça change (plus c'est la même chose) ...

IBM VM ... NCR VRX ... others ...?

We've come a long way ...

:rolleyes:
You should get your head out of the toilet bowl of sarcasm! (j/k)

VT is not new, but VT is new to the consumer desktop and laptop. Intel has trickled down this technology from Itanium. It will only be available on dual and multi core processors as a logical evolution.

Got it?

Here's (http://www.expresscomputeronline.com/20050926/technology01.shtml) an article on VT for desktops.

AidenShaw

Nov 13, 2005, 06:38 PM

Dual booting will become a thing of the past if Apple implements support for Virtualization Technology in Leopard. VT allows your processor and subsystems to be logically partitioned into two or more virtual machines....
Please, use the acronym "VT" like Intel and the rest of the industry uses... Actually, the "rest of the industry" usually says "VT/Pacifica" when referring to the x64 silicon-assisted virtualization. (When you type "VT" to the wikipedia, you don't get http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IVT) :D

Yonah will support VT as well.

Apple's biggest problem with VT will be the DRM to lock OSx86 to Apple-built machines. Once they allow VT/Pacifica enabled virtual machines, it becomes very interesting as to how they can maintain the node lock - since the DRM itself will be virtualized by the hardware. The virtualization layer could be hacked to present an "Apple box" to the OSx86 VM, even when running on a Dell.

ksz

Nov 13, 2005, 06:52 PM

Please, use the acronym "VT" like Intel and the rest of the industry uses... Actually, the "rest of the industry" usually says "VT/Pacifica" when referring to the x64 silicon-assisted virtualization. (When you type "VT" to the wikipedia, you don't get http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IVT) :D
Intel's implementation is called IVT; Xen provides Linux support for IVT.

Yonah will support VT as well.
Are you sure? There has been some confusion whether or not Yonah will get IVT despite the excerpt below.

Apple's biggest problem with VT will be the DRM to lock OSx86 to Apple-built machines. Once they allow VT/Pacifica enabled virtual machines, it becomes very interesting as to how they can maintain the node lock - since the DRM itself will be virtualized by the hardware. The virtualization layer could be hacked to present an "Apple box" to the OSx86 VM, even when running on a Dell.
I don't think Apple can ignore IVT. A solution to the node lock problem does not seem to be difficult to develop. Mac OS will only boot or operate on hardware containing Apple firmware. It's not clear to me how VT could bypass this.

Excerpt from Computer Express Online:

Both Intel and AMD are betting big on this. The recently-announced release plans for AMD’s Pacifica technology advance the industry-wide trend towards hardware virtualisation—a trend that Gartner believes will transform the way PCs are used more than any other development in this decade did. Virtualisation on x86 platforms will clear the way for a new class of innovations, making the platform more flexible, manageable and secure. Similarly, Intel announced Vanderpool—Intel Virtualisation Technology (IVT)—that will start appearing in the company’s desktop and 64-bit Itanium chips (Montecito) later in 2005 and next year in its Xeon server and mobile processors (Yonah).

AidenShaw

Nov 13, 2005, 07:27 PM

Intel's implementation is called IVT; Xen provides Linux support for IVT
Try googling for "IVT site:intel.com" and "IVT site:xensource.com", or read http://www.xensource.com/files/Xen_VT_Intel_SSaxena.pdf, and then come back and try to claim that the name is "IVT".

The Intel search will tell you the IVT is the "Interrupt Vector Table", part of VT.

In the Xensource search (and by the way, "VT" is seen 2 times on the home page at http://www.xensource.com) will get lots of hits on the source modules for the Interrupt Vector Table, and a few email lists where random users have said IVT instead of VT.

BTW, you might want to check out slide 13 of that PDF file for info about Yonah (see thumb).

ksz

Nov 13, 2005, 08:03 PM

Try googling for "IVT site:intel.com" and "IVT site:xensource.com", or read http://www.xensource.com/files/Xen_VT_Intel_SSaxena.pdf, and then come back and try to claim that the name is "IVT".

The Intel search will tell you the IVT is the "Interrupt Vector Table", part of VT.

In the Xensource search (and by the way, "VT" is seen 2 times on the home page at http://www.xensource.com) will get lots of hits on the source modules for the Interrupt Vector Table, and a few email lists where random users have said IVT instead of VT.
AidenShaw,

Why is this such an issue for you? It seems you were unable to Google for IVT and become frustrated. Look at the last page of this PDF I referenced previously:

http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/power/ps3q05-20050191-Abels.pdf

They use the abbreviation IVT at least 3 or 4 times to refer to Intel Virtualization Technology.

BTW, you might want to check out slide 13 of that PDF file for info about Yonah (see thumb).
Good information. If this is from the last IDF then it seems Yonah will in fact support IVT (or VT if it makes you happy!).

P.S. Seach Google for "Intel IVT" and see what happens.

generik

Nov 13, 2005, 09:01 PM

Dual booting will become a thing of the past if Apple implements support for Virtualization Technology in Leopard. VT allows your processor and subsystems to be logically partitioned into two or more virtual machines, each capable of running a separate operating system simultaneously. This allows you, for example, to have Windows XP on one monitor and Mac OS on another monitor (dual monitor) running at the same time. If you have only one monitor, you can hot-switch between operating systems (or more technically, between virtual machines).

Virtual machines are not just for multiple operating systems, however. You can also start up Mac OS X, for example, split that into two or more virtual machines, and run different applications on different VMs for isolation or security or other reasons. It can also be used for load-balancing in which a virtual machine can be transferred from one processor to another processor (or from one core to another core).

Virtualization will be coming in Merom and Conroe in the 2nd half of 2006 in the form of Intel Virtualization Technology (IVT). Here's a Linux implementation of IVT (http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/power/ps3q05-20050191-Abels.pdf).

I believe it is coming with the higher Yonah processors too, nevertheless that is the one feature that makes me excited about the Intel switch.

AidenShaw

Nov 13, 2005, 09:11 PM

Why is this such an issue for you? It seems you were unable to Google for IVT and become frustrated.
There's one good name for the technology, used by the creator and the major consumers.

Why confuse the issue by inventing a new acronym - isn't one enough?

Look at the last page of this PDF I referenced previously:

http://www.dell.com/downloads/global/power/ps3q05-20050191-Abels.pdf
So Tim is careless with his usage, we shouldn't parrot him.

P.S. Seach Google for "Intel IVT" and see what happens.
I see that it means "Intel Video Technology" - how 'bout that?

Search for IVT at site:intel.com, site:vmware.com and site:xensource.com - not much comes back....

If you search google for "irridescent", you get 254K hits. Does the fact that 254K people misspelled "iridescent" mean that we should "fix" the dictionary? If a few people type IVT, does that make it correct?

(For the "google vote" crowd, "vt pacifica" gets 744K hits, "ivt pacifica" gets 336. Clearly google votes for "VT", not "IVT".)

I'd think the fact that IVT doesn't show up at Intel, Xen or VMware should be a clue.

Frobozz

Nov 13, 2005, 09:29 PM

A major problem with the MacIntel machines is they will not run Classic applications. There a lot of users with gigabytes of data only accessible through Classic applications. There are no upgrades for this legacy software. That makes the MacIntel's useless for many businesses who have years and even decades invested in their data. Apple is making a horrible mistake to abandon Classic.

I disagree. If Apple took that stance (writing a new version of a 5+ year old OS to run even older unsupported software) we'd end up with crap like Windows. Microsoft has always taken the stance, right up until Vista, that backwards compatability was more important than ease of use, stability, security, etc.

I'm not saying that Classic is not an important feature for some people, but they're a pretty small niche, even if you clearly fall into that group. The PowerMac will be around as a PowerPC for a long time to come ... probably at least another revision. That has plenty of horsepower to keep all those obsolete Classic apps running.

pubwvj

Nov 13, 2005, 09:51 PM

It is truly queer... I really expect more horsepower from this machine. On the other hand I also see a huge number of page ins and page outs in activity monitor, so I really hope ram is the issue, otherwise I am gonna be so stuffed to be stuck with this pokey CPU until Merom :(

How much free space do you have on your hard drive? I find that if the hard disk free space gets under two megabytes then performance suffers badly. I upgraded from a 48MB to an 80MB hard drive to solve that problem. Go with the fastest (e.g., 7200 rpm) drive you can get. I notice my 7200 rpm drives make my whole system seem much faster than when I use a 5400 rpm drive for my system boot disk. 4200 rpm ones are dog slow. (Now that is a funny phrase, my dogs are faaaassst - they dog sled! :) )

ksz

Nov 13, 2005, 10:31 PM

There's one good name for the technology, used by the creator and the major consumers.

Why confuse the issue by inventing a new acronym - isn't one enough?

VT is a generic term. IVT refers to Intel's version. This is why you see it mentioned many times by many people. I see nothing wrong with this. It's perfectly okay to have more than one abbreviation.

So Tim is careless with his usage, we shouldn't parrot him.
It does not bother me. Seems it does bother you though.

I see that it means "Intel Video Technology" - how 'bout that?
And VT itself could mean many things. Every abbreviation has multiple definitions.

Search for IVT at site:intel.com, site:vmware.com and site:xensource.com - not much comes back....
Search for Vanderpool.

If you search google for "irridescent", you get 254K hits. Does the fact that 254K people misspelled "iridescent" mean that we should "fix" the dictionary? If a few people type IVT, does that make it correct?
IVT has been used already and I suspect it will grow in usage as it becomes adopted in desktop and laptop systems. Nothing wrong with IVT. I think using the term VT is too generic. One should use "Vanderpool/Pacifica" instead, but it doesn't bother me.

(For the "google vote" crowd, "vt pacifica" gets 744K hits, "ivt pacifica" gets 336. Clearly google votes for "VT", not "IVT".)

I'd think the fact that IVT doesn't show up at Intel, Xen or VMware should be a clue.
This is not adding to the discussion and is becoming a distraction. I suggest we drop this. Cheers. :)

ksz

Nov 13, 2005, 10:40 PM

I believe it is coming with the higher Yonah processors too, nevertheless that is the one feature that makes me excited about the Intel switch.
Agreed. Virtualization has many possibilities and could bring about new ways of using personal computers because they are rapidly gaining server-like sophistication. It's far more worthwhile to consider these possibilities than to argue over nomenclature. ;)

AidenShaw

Nov 13, 2005, 10:56 PM

Agreed. Virtualization has many possibilities and could bring about new ways of using personal computers because they are rapidly gaining server-like sophistication. It's far more worthwhile to consider these possibilities than to argue over nomenclature. ;)
One of the interesting things in Vista Server relating to VT is the concept of "roles".

If you need to run a web server, instead of running the web server on your system and opening up the necessary ports - you'd create a "web server" VM with the "web server role".

The web server would run in the VM, not in your main machine. In the event of a security issue with the web server, only the web VM would be at risk.

VT/Pacifica will enable new paradigms for "security-in-depth", by making it easy and efficient to run specially tailored VMs for various tasks, rather than the "kitchen sink" approach of running and opening every potentially needed feature on a single system.

You won't have a "main system" hosting the VMs, everything that you do will be in a VM tuned for that role. The VT/Pacifica layer will be part of a hypervisor orchestrating the various VMs.

Linux and Windows have a huge head start in this new world - Apple will have a lot of "catch-up" to do, especially since they'll need to fit their restrictive DRM into the VT/Pacifica model. (And, IMO, if Apple doesn't run within a VMware, Xen or Virtual Server VM environment they'll cut themselves out of a lucrative market.)

ksz

Nov 14, 2005, 03:15 AM

Linux and Windows have a huge head start in this new world - Apple will have a lot of "catch-up" to do, especially since they'll need to fit their restrictive DRM into the VT/Pacifica model. (And, IMO, if Apple doesn't run within a VMware, Xen or Virtual Server VM environment they'll cut themselves out of a lucrative market.)
It seems someone has found a way to install OSX86 on a Toshiba laptop (http://reviews.zdnet.co.uk/software/os/0,39024180,39235916,00.htm), bypassing DRM. Seems your concern was valid.

xrayzed

Nov 14, 2005, 05:22 AM

zim

Nov 14, 2005, 06:42 AM

This is good news! This also gives me the push to update my system now vs. waiting longer. My plan is to replace my current set up with the last or near to the end of life G5 processor, I run on an iMac. My logic is that after I upgrade it will be at least a year or so before Adobe etc.. catch up and release new versions that are intel native. I would love to have the first intel processor based mac but I am concerned with speed and currently am happy with the performance on an iMac with 2GB or RAM (I have a G4 20" iMac at home).

AidenShaw

Nov 14, 2005, 07:22 AM

http://news.com.com/Intel+brings+virtualization+to+the+desktop/2100-1006_3-5950225.html

Intel is expected to launch new processors on Monday [14 Nov] starting with its Pentium line that have the ability to subdivide tasks in a hardware feature called Virtualization Technology--or VT.

While VT is currently found in some of Intel's Xeon processors, this is the first time that the chipmaking giant has extended the technology to the desktop.

VT makes it easier to run multiple operating systems or applications in independent partitions or "containers" on the same chip, said Chad Taggard, Intel's director of technology marketing.

...

ksz

Nov 14, 2005, 07:35 AM

I have work apps that only work under Windows. Being able to run them simultaneously with my Mac would be brilliant.
Exactly! Simultaneously and at full speed on a dual-core processor (even a laptop) so that each VM gets a dedicated core. Bloody brilliant.

AidenShaw

Nov 14, 2005, 07:54 AM

Exactly! Simultaneously and at full speed on a dual-core processor (even a laptop) so that each VM gets a dedicated core. Bloody brilliant.
It won't work that way....

The system will schedule the cores as needed - if two threads on Windows need to run and nothing is happening on OSX, Windows gets both cores.

The scheduling is re-evaluated every few milliseconds, so that the most important runnable threads will be executing.

If you tamper with the scheduling (by setting affinity, for example) - you'll often have a situation where one core is idle while multiple busy threads are competing for the other core. Not brilliant, not brilliant at all.

ksz

Nov 14, 2005, 08:07 AM

If you tamper with the scheduling (by setting affinity, for example) - you'll often have a situation where one core is idle while multiple busy threads are competing for the other core. Not brilliant, not brilliant at all.
Sure. I oversimplified with the point being that two cores and two operating systems allow both operating systems to be doing useful things simultaneously without significantly degrading overall system performance compared to uni-processor, uni-core laptops that everyone has today. Hence, not only will we be able to run Windows and Mac OS at the same time, but thanks to a dual-core processor, we could run them at the same time at high speed. In reality, bus, memory, and disk contention will create traffic jams. Disk contention may be the biggest drawback, but it could be mitigated by separate hard drives (not so easy to do in a laptop).

AidenShaw

Nov 14, 2005, 08:31 AM

Sure. I oversimplified with the point being that two cores and two operating systems allow both operating systems to be doing useful things simultaneously without significantly degrading overall system performance compared to uni-processor, uni-core laptops that everyone has today. Hence, not only will we be able to run Windows and Mac OS at the same time, but thanks to a dual-core processor, we could run them at the same time at high speed.
It was the word "dedicated" that got me going ;) ...

In general, you'll often have more threads wanting to compute than you have CPUs (cores) to run them on. A VM is just a thread that needs to be scheduled when it has work to do.

A couple of VMs is about the same as a couple of applications - whether you want to run OSX and Windows and Linux "simultaneously" or run Photoshop, Itunes and Mathematica "simultaneously" is basically the same problem.

With more CPUs (cores), you'll be able to run truly simultaneously - instead of the "appearance" of simultaneity that you get with a single CPU. To whatever extent your apps (or VMs) really call for CPU at the same time, multi-cores will be faster.

ksz

Nov 14, 2005, 08:56 AM

A couple of VMs is about the same as a couple of applications - whether you want to run OSX and Windows and Linux "simultaneously" or run Photoshop, Itunes and Mathematica "simultaneously" is basically the same problem.

Keyword 'basically'. The real difference is that concurrent applications are separated from each other by process boundaries erected and maintained by the operating system. But the operating system itself has states that are shared or available to all processes. The resources of the operating system such as network ports, file handles, number of queues, number of processes, etc. are shared, and it's possible for misbehaving applications to corrupt system state.

VM provides another layer of isolation on top of the process boundary by segmenting the operating system itself into multiple partitions, resulting in an operating system boundary. But because VMs are themselves managed by an OS process, it is possible to breach a VM boundary to provide inter-VM communication that is analogous to inter-process communication. VMs can be selectively shut down, relocated to other processors on a multi-processor system, or suspended, without interfering with other VMs.

The main distinction, then, is that VT turns the entire operating system into a process and allows you to invoke multiple such "processes."

apollo8fan

Nov 14, 2005, 09:21 AM

Frobozz

Nov 14, 2005, 09:24 AM

ksz

Nov 14, 2005, 09:29 AM

This may be a stupid question, but why is VT a big deal? What advantage is running multiple OS's or applications in their own containers?
See message #298 on page 12 for some possibilities.

Frobozz

Nov 14, 2005, 09:40 AM

A lot of people's penchant for calling these new Intel-based Apple Macintoshes as "Intel Powerbook" or "Intel Mac Mini" has got to be driving Apple's PR, marketing, and sales teams completely bonkers.

To a company such as Apple, their brand name is king. Replacing "Apple" with "Intel" is just lazy journalism. One writes, "Intel Powerbook" when one should really write "Intel-based Apple Powerbook", or something similar. This makes it clear to the consumer/reader to what the writer is referring.

Yeah I have a feeling Apple will have to figure out a good plan of attack on this issue when they are released. I think even more than the pre-release whoopla about Intel PowerBook, Apple will have to decide on what revision to call this PowerBook line.

PowerBook 520, etc...
Through '040 and Early 601, 603, etc. PowerPCs we had PowerBook *Modelnumber* (520c for example.) Prior to this point the model number was representative as a conglomeration of features including the processor.

PowerBook G3 ...
Instead of discreet model numbers being advertised, they used the processor class for the PowerBook G3. (Third generation PowerPC.) Great for brand recognition but terrible for identifying your model number easily over many revisions. Since point-of-sale is probably more important, they stick with this. Interestingly, this might be the internal name used for the PowerBook, but marketing liked it so much they stuck with it (amongst other factors of simplifying their product line to consumers.) Even more interesting is how the Cat monikers for OS X have stuck from development into release. How long will (can?) they continue that trend?

PowerBook G4 ...
Again PowerPC based, this model followed the G3 naming theme and is otherwise identical in marketing approach. KISS.

[Intel Based PowerBook] ...
Now what do we call this one? Let's consider a couple:

PowerBook G5 -- This isn't too bad, but for purists the "G" stood for a generation of PowerPC architecture. For most consumers, however, this is simply a number upgrade and a cool name. So a G5 is "better" than a G4. Might not be as blasphemous as it sounds to a lot of us on these boards.

PowerBook I5, G5i (or similar) -- Some kind of modifier applied to the generation concept to denote it's Intel based. Not bad but not very sexy, either.

PowerBook 5, 5d, 5m -- Some name based on a broad processor family. In this case they drop the G and leave the 5. Not too bad... if they want, they can even denote the number of cores, such as the PowerBook 5 for single core and PowerBook 5d for dual core.

Any other good ideas?

Frobozz

Nov 14, 2005, 09:44 AM

See message #298 on page 12 for some possibilities.

Very interesting. So, more than performance this is a security feature? I can see how advantageous each major application type having it's own sandbox to play in would be. That's a really good way to prevent virus' from spreading, or any other corruption for that matter. Could you purge an invected virtualization when trouble arises and just "reboot" it? And how does this apply to consumer oriented software? As a web designer/developer I easily see why you'd want to have your DB and Apache running in one, with your OS in another, for example. But what about Photoshop or Cinema 4D. Any advantages there?

AidenShaw

Nov 14, 2005, 10:05 AM

But what about Photoshop or Cinema 4D. Any advantages there?
What if you want to run Photoshop 5 & 6 & 7 & CS & ... ?

Many applications don't work well (or at all) with multiple versions installed. You could put each in a separate VM....

What if you want to test an upgrade before committing it to production ?

You could clone the VM with the app, apply the upgrade and test. Then, if the upgrade is good you trash the original VM, if it's crap you trash the clone, or if you want to keep both you can do that.

What if you want to install some shareware/freeware apps but don't know if they're safe or usable?

Put 'em in a VM - trash the VM if they're crap.

Salty Pirate

Nov 14, 2005, 11:41 AM

Very interesting. So, more than performance this is a security feature? I can see how advantageous each major application type having it's own sandbox to play in would be. That's a really good way to prevent virus' from spreading, or any other corruption for that matter. Could you purge an invected virtualization when trouble arises and just "reboot" it? And how does this apply to consumer oriented software? As a web designer/developer I easily see why you'd want to have your DB and Apache running in one, with your OS in another, for example. But what about Photoshop or Cinema 4D. Any advantages there?

Look at this technology. I read about it linked from another website. http://www.lanswitchboard.com

It puts every user in a self contained VLAN.

reflex

Nov 14, 2005, 12:19 PM

But surely you would have to factor in the "loss" of sales of ibooks and minis if that was true. There would be a huge downturn in sales of those models.

Not if the new machines are (some of) the expensive ones. People buying a Mini do so either because they want something small or because they want something cheap. People who buy an iBook most likely do so because they can't afford a Powerbook.

So if the Powerbook goes Intel first, this would still leave a lot of people who can afford an iBook but not a Powerbook. In terms of sales this probably won't make a huge difference.

oskar

Nov 14, 2005, 12:40 PM

What if you want to run Photoshop 5 & 6 & 7 & CS & ... ?

Many applications don't work well (or at all) with multiple versions installed. You could put each in a separate VM....

What if you want to test an upgrade before committing it to production ?

You could clone the VM with the app, apply the upgrade and test. Then, if the upgrade is good you trash the original VM, if it's crap you trash the clone, or if you want to keep both you can do that.

What if you want to install some shareware/freeware apps but don't know if they're safe or usable?

Put 'em in a VM - trash the VM if they're crap.

Isn't that like Virtual PC and using "undo drives" or having various OSes running at once? I would believe the difference is performance?

AidenShaw

Nov 14, 2005, 01:35 PM

Isn't that like Virtual PC and using "undo drives" or having various OSes running at once? I would believe the difference is performance?
A couple of inter-mixed issues here....

First of all, "Virtual PC" to most Mac users is a product that emulates an x86 CPU on a PPC CPU, with performance that hopes to be marginally acceptable.

To Windows users, "Virtual PC" or "Virtual Server" or "VMware" or "Xen" are virtual machines that run at full native speed on purely user-compute code - but suffer additional overhead for applications that do a lot of I/O and system calls (particularly if they do a lot of small I/Os).

The main advantage of VT/Pacifica is that the IO/system call overhead can be reduced.

So, yes you get the VPC "undo" advantages, but at performance levels that are much closer to native levels across the board.

The real paradigm shift for virtualization that VT will enable, however, is that suddenly the "downside" of virtual machines basically disappears. Running your laptop as a "cluster" of VMs is feasible, and desirable.

pionata

Nov 14, 2005, 10:54 PM

Hey, do you think the next gen of Powerbook will be able to play HD 1080i 1080p movies smoothly?

Im asking becose I just noticed it requires dual 2.0ghz on quicktime.com.

iEdd

Nov 15, 2005, 01:20 AM

It's likely that they will be 2.5Ghz+ or dual core ~2Ghz, so probably.

Blackheart

Nov 15, 2005, 01:58 AM

Hey, do you think the next gen of Powerbook will be able to play HD 1080i 1080p movies smoothly?

Im asking becose I just noticed it requires dual 2.0ghz on quicktime.com.

First of all you'd have to get a display bigger than the current 17" to play a 1080 movie, as the current display only has 1050 horizontal lines.

pionata

Nov 15, 2005, 09:20 AM

First of all you'd have to get a display bigger than the current 17" to play a 1080 movie, as the current display only has 1050 horizontal lines.

Yeah I know, I wanted to get a 30" with my intel PB.

RobHague

Nov 15, 2005, 10:36 AM

Nooooooooooooo its like a nightmare :D j/k

http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=34785&d=1132072572

Though this could be a protype ;)

iEdd

Nov 15, 2005, 02:12 PM

*Shudders* I know apple won't have stickers on them. Heres a phrase for PC users. "If you still have a sticker saying 'intel inside', your opinions on computers are even less valid than before" :p
*Continues refreshing thread to find friends*

Blackheart

Nov 15, 2005, 10:15 PM

Yeah I know, I wanted to get a 30" with my intel PB.

Ouch! Quite nice. Those are beautiful. :p

pionata

Nov 15, 2005, 10:40 PM

Ouch! Quite nice. Those are beautiful. :p

Yeah, Ive been dreaming of getting one since its out and saving my money since then. With the present prices drops and a little student loan that pays for half the system, I will be able to finaly have one.

Ljunberg

Nov 18, 2005, 03:06 AM

Beyond the problem of porting applications, Apple's biggest debate must be offering products that will blow away PC users vs. affordability. Some balance of these two factors will give Apple the biggest sales in the beginning and it is absolutely imperative that Apple Intel machines don't experiene a slow start.

With this in mind, I believe we'll see Powerbooks first. Of course, not all Pro apps will be ready at the time, but Apple will make Powerbooks because:

1) the Powerbook needs to address the perception that is noticeably slower than PC equivalents. The quickest way to alter this perception is to offer the fastest available mobile processor speeds.
2) some will argue that not all pro-apps will be ready. the people making the biggest noise about this are people who already own a Powerbook and are using it for Adobe and other apps. However, the fact is that
i) the PowerPC processor is unlikely to get much faster
ii) Apple laptops typically last a long time, so
People who bought Powerbooks in the last two or three years won't need to buy a new powerbook and those who are still using older powerbooks will likely experience a speed bump even while using Rosetta on the new intel Powerbook.

With these reasons in mind, I'd expect to see Powerbooks coming out first. iBooks should be available at latest just before the summer to allow customers to start placing orders for the next school year.

iEdd

Nov 18, 2005, 02:50 PM

You have some good points, Ljunberg.
And yes, there is this misperception of rosetta. There will be a speed decrease. As soon as that's said, people start imagening VPC's level of slow. If we have 2.4Ghz single processor laptop emulating a program such as photoshop with rosetta, I'd say it would run like a 1.6-1.8Ghz* PPC. By that time, it is about the same speed as the current powerbooks, so for PPC apps, there is no comparative loss.

*Based on educated guess. Sizes may vary. Check the wattage of your microwave oven for actual cooking times.

pubwvj

Nov 18, 2005, 04:10 PM

There will be a speed decrease {with Rosetta}. As soon as that's said, people start imagening VPC's level of slow.

The speed of Rosetta is not the biggest problem. The big gotcha for many people is going to be that Rosetta and the new MacIntels don't do Classic applications. This is a massive problem for a lot of individuals and corporations. Our company has gigabytes and decads of data in pre-OSX application file formats where there is NO upgrade path. Without those Classic applications we can't access our accounting, publishing, billing, customer database, employee payroll, book layouts, magazine layouts, etc.

The simple answer for many people is going to be NOT to upgrade to MacIntel computers. We'll just stick with the old PPC machines and keep them running. If people end up having to finally replace the machines and lose access to all their data they will give serious consideration to Windows. At that point Apple is going to offer not particular advantage so why bother sticking with the Mac.

I greatly prefer MacOSX but if Apple is going to cut off support for legacy applications and data they are going to lose me and a lot of other customers. Apple needs to continue to support Classic applications.

CalfCanuck

Nov 21, 2005, 11:09 AM

Came across a great preview of Aperture based on talks with the developers and posted in an Aperture thread...

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=162844

Here's a key quote, though:
"It’s also important to note that Aperture makes huge use of the power of the system’s graphics card, relying on GPU (Graphics Processing Unit) calls for its image processing prowess. This means that users with an older system but a newer card might see higher speeds than a user with a newer system but the entry-level graphics card. It also means that future Macs built around the Intel platform won’t suffer a performance hit due to the architecture’s lack of Velocity Engine, the subset of the processor that would be used for graphics tasks in the absence of a powerful graphics card."

So here's at least one Pro app ready for powerful computers, again assuming they realease them sometimes soon! ;)

electronboy

Nov 21, 2005, 12:18 PM

they better give us plenty of notice before yanking the PowerPC PowerBooks. :eek: We need at least three more of them and do not want to be stuck with first gen. Intel PowerBooks as Adobe and Extensis will not have universal binaries ready by that time. We don't want to run those apps under rosetta as the performance would suck.

electronboy

Nov 21, 2005, 12:29 PM

The speed of Rosetta is not the biggest problem. The big gotcha for many people is going to be that Rosetta and the new MacIntels don't do Classic applications. This is a massive problem for a lot of individuals and corporations. Our company has gigabytes and decads of data in pre-OSX application file formats where there is NO upgrade path. Without those Classic applications we can't access our accounting, publishing, billing, customer database, employee payroll, book layouts, magazine layouts, etc.

The simple answer for many people is going to be NOT to upgrade to MacIntel computers. We'll just stick with the old PPC machines and keep them running. If people end up having to finally replace the machines and lose access to all their data they will give serious consideration to Windows. At that point Apple is going to offer not particular advantage so why bother sticking with the Mac.

I greatly prefer MacOSX but if Apple is going to cut off support for legacy applications and data they are going to lose me and a lot of other customers. Apple needs to continue to support Classic applications.

I agree and disagree with your statements.

First, the speed of Rosetta for large applications running on laptops, which are always slower than desktops, will be an issue. None of my users will be running apps such as InDesign or Photoshop or Final Cut Studio under Rosetta on an Intel PowerBook. Some apps which make calls to the Velocity Engine may not function properly under Rosetta. (Last I heard.)

Second, OS9 is DEAD, DEAD DEAD! Why haven't people migrated the data to an OSX application or another platform all together? OSX has been around for 5 years now. Time to get rid of OS9. I suspect that Apple will eliminate Classic support in 10.5 and rightfully so. How long does it need to hang on? If you really need to keep running OS9 get an old G4 and install OS9 on it! Why run Classic? I never liked Classic and it creates all sorts of font management problems for the creative folks.

Third, I agree that unless Apple makes some compelling reason to remain on Mac hardware and MacOS after the transition, people will start to evaluate their options on the dark side. Once Apple makes the transistion to Intel they cannot keep charging a fortune for equipment that always lags behind industry trends. The market will not allow it.

iEdd

Nov 21, 2005, 01:45 PM

I don't understand this "classic problem". Your docs should open with SOMETHING in OSX, and in future they shouldn't be made with classic. If you were using a major program in classic, it would've been made into an OSX version 4 years or so ago. And of course the point that still remains, if you are behind enough to use a 5 yr dead operating system, you don't need a new computer

jevau

Dec 3, 2005, 01:09 PM

CalfCanuck

Dec 3, 2005, 01:18 PM

i've been reading all the forums and rumor sites about the new powerbooks being released this january and i am definately confused. i'm a freshman in college and a visual arts major interested in a 17 inch powerbook for next semester and i was just wondering if it would be worth it to hold out or just to get a 1.67 ghz model right now? would it be a good investment for the next couple of years to buy a 1.67 model right now? i just wanted a second opinion before i drop the money.
It depends when you need it. You have to remember that even if a new PB DOES get announced in January, there are both shipping delays for new systems and the massive backlog of others who are also waiting to order the "new Intel Mac". So even if it does come out, it might be hard to get a hold of one before late spring.

Have you thought about the option of getting a cheaper temporary iBook for about $1000 off Amazon, reserving your student discount to buy the "real" 17" you want later in the year? You can do almost everything on an iBook that you can do on a PB, esp. if you run an external monitor. It might just take a little longer to do every task. But that lets you keep moving with learning the Mac design programs - and these transfer from computer to computer almost seemlessly with the transfer utility on new Macs.

http://www.macprices.com/ibooktracker.shtml

visualanté

Dec 3, 2005, 01:31 PM

i bought a pb 1.67 17.......its display is more color accurate and resale will b higher

It depends when you need it. You have to remember that even if a new PB DOES get announced in January, there are both shipping delays for new systems and the massive backlog of others who are also waiting to order the "new Intel Mac". So even if it does come out, it might be hard to get a hold of one before late spring.

Have you thought about the option of getting a cheaper temporary iBook for about $1000 off Amazon, reserving your student discount to buy the "real" 17" you want later in the year? You can do almost everything on an iBook that you can do on a PB, esp. if you run an external monitor. It might just take a little longer to do every task. But that lets you keep moving with learning the Mac design programs - and these transfer from computer to computer almost seemlessly with the transfer utility on new Macs.

http://www.macprices.com/ibooktracker.shtml

jevau

Dec 3, 2005, 09:09 PM

It depends when you need it. You have to remember that even if a new PB DOES get announced in January, there are both shipping delays for new systems and the massive backlog of others who are also waiting to order the "new Intel Mac". So even if it does come out, it might be hard to get a hold of one before late spring.

Have you thought about the option of getting a cheaper temporary iBook for about $1000 off Amazon, reserving your student discount to buy the "real" 17" you want later in the year? You can do almost everything on an iBook that you can do on a PB, esp. if you run an external monitor. It might just take a little longer to do every task. But that lets you keep moving with learning the Mac design programs - and these transfer from computer to computer almost seemlessly with the transfer utility on new Macs.

http://www.macprices.com/ibooktracker.shtml

i have thought about getting just something low end, but i was thinking if i got a 1.67 PB now, i would be OK for 2 or 3 years, so i can upgrade during my junior or senior year when i'll probably have more money. i mean i should be able to run say CS2 or Aperture on my 1.67 and be fine for a while, right?

mpw

Dec 4, 2005, 01:57 AM

i have thought about getting just something low end, but i was thinking if i got a 1.67 PB now, i would be OK for 2 or 3 years, so i can upgrade during my junior or senior year when i'll probably have more money. i mean i should be able to run say CS2 or Aperture on my 1.67 and be fine for a while, right?
Aperture should run but the recommended minimum system is a Dual 2.0Ghz G5 with 2Gb RAM, so I'm guessing using it on anything less wouldn't be a pleasant experience.

iEdd

Dec 4, 2005, 02:04 AM

Aperture should run but the recommended minimum system is a Dual 2.0Ghz G5 with 2Gb RAM, so I'm guessing using it on anything less wouldn't be a pleasant experience.
:eek: That's intense. If you want Aperture on a portable, wait for a dual core 2Ghz Yonah in a PB with at least 1.5GB ram. Hopefully that will be possible in about 2-3 months. :)

generik

Dec 4, 2005, 02:33 AM

supersalzme

Dec 4, 2005, 04:13 AM

I wonder if Powermacs will get a speed bump too?

Makes no sense to sell dualcore yonahs 2.0 and dual core G5 2.0 at approximately the same price point.

Edit: Especially when the laptop has wireless, a keyboard, and a screen mounted into a tiny form factor while the PM doesn't even have wireless..

Which makes me think everyone in here is jumping to conclusions on the processor they are going to put in the gen A powerbooks.

But...if they do have the dual core yonah....I will buy one...that's for sure.

generik

Dec 4, 2005, 02:37 PM

Second, OS9 is DEAD, DEAD DEAD! Why haven't people migrated the data to an OSX application or another platform all together? OSX has been around for 5 years now. Time to get rid of OS9. I suspect that Apple will eliminate Classic support in 10.5 and rightfully so. How long does it need to hang on? If you really need to keep running OS9 get an old G4 and install OS9 on it! Why run Classic? I never liked Classic and it creates all sorts of font management problems for the creative folks.

So?

1) He is the customer
2) He is the one who makes demands
3) Apple should ****, stop being such a bully, and deliver the goods.

If you walk into a major financial institution, look at their computers, and scoff "Haha, mainframes are so 1950s", let's see who is the one who will get laughed out the door. Some businesses do have legacy applications that are really too entrenched in their operations to "upgrade" every so often, and don't blame them, blame the vendor who failed to provide a bloody upgrade path, breaking binary compatibility from time to time.

If anything the original poster should relegate to the thought that serious business should be done on UNIX/Windows servers, instead of stupid toy computers from a fruit company.

generik

Dec 4, 2005, 02:39 PM

Which makes me think everyone in here is jumping to conclusions on the processor they are going to put in the gen A powerbooks.

But...if they do have the dual core yonah....I will buy one...that's for sure.

I sure hope they roll the quad (dual socket logic boards) down to the lower clock configurations too :rolleyes:

pubwvj

Dec 4, 2005, 05:07 PM

Why run Classic? I never liked Classic and it creates all sorts of font management problems for the creative folks.

For most legacy applications we're not talking creativity. For the most part these are either:

1) documents (books, magazines, etc) that were created in applications that are no longer being supported today. The creativity was there back when they were created. New documents are being created on newer software but we still need access to the old docs. It is too expensive to transfer everything over to new applications. We're talking huge volumes of data.

2) databases (accounting, payroll, employee data, customer records, etc). The cost of transitioning these everytime Apple wants to bring out some neat new processor change is rediculous. Businesses last a lot longer than chip cycles.

3) utilities that do some very specific tasks that we need and are not available under OSX.

I don't understand this "classic problem". Your docs should open with SOMETHING in OSX

No. See above.

if you are behind enough to use a 5 yr dead operating system, you don't need a new computer

The problem is when the older computers stop working and can no longer be repaired. 5 years is an absurdely short cycle to be thinking in. Consumerism gone nutty - a product of our throw away society. Another very big topic in itself.

Legacy data and applications is a very big problem. Maybe you are fortunate enough not to be affected by it but many businesses and individuals are. Personal, business and historical information is being lost because of this problem.

generik

Dec 4, 2005, 05:22 PM

Ultimately the answer is.. Opensource.

Had your documents been in open formats, and comply to open transparent standards, it would be trivial to just chuck the specs to some software shop and get them to code OSX/XII/XIII versions of anything.

Sadly many vendors are too selfish to do that :(

pubwvj

Dec 4, 2005, 05:34 PM

Ultimately the answer is.. Opensource.

Yes, but that is today and tomorrow. The issue with legacy applications is stuff that is in data formats from the 1980's mostly. I realize that is longer than some users can remember or have even been alive :) but there are many businesses that have been around that long and longer who have stuff in those formats that they still need and will need for decades to come.

it would be trivial to just chuck the specs to some software shop and get them to code OSX/XII/XIII versions of anything.

Trivial, no. Expensive, very. Ironically, it is actually now illegal to "crack" some old data formats thanks to our wise and wonderous congressional critters (note use of lower case) with their putting through the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act).

generik

Dec 4, 2005, 06:12 PM

Trivial, no. Expensive, very. Ironically, it is actually now illegal to "crack" some old data formats thanks to our wise and wonderous congressional critters (note use of lower case) with their putting through the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in the case of your own documents, it is *your* own IP! How is it wrong to crack the data formats in those instances?

I also noticed that the DMCA did have a provision allowing for reverse engineering for the sake of interoperability... however all said and done, yes, the DMCA is one hell of a crap law.

Just my 0.02.

xraycat

Dec 5, 2005, 04:33 PM

Blackheart

Dec 5, 2005, 05:43 PM

ok right christmas and my birthday are coming up, and i decided after many years of being a pc user.. i wanted to change to a powerbook, for reliability and better graphical performance.

However now i dont know what to do because of these intel processors that are apparently due for january.. i honestly didnt expect them so soon but i' am not sure whether i should wait as they will be faster but supposedly not as much compatability/updates with software.

i am 17 and use a comptuer fo photography , graphic design and web design, using programs such as photoshop, illustratuor flash dreamweave and 3d design tools such as pro desktop, maya and modo.

does anyone have any recomendations whether to wait or not?:confused:

Know this about rumors surrounding Intel Powerbooks:
1) A rumor is just that... a rumor... they may not be released for MONTHS after January and you may be waiting during this entire time.
2) It will be Rev. A. Know that first generation products (from any company, really) tend to have problems.

Whether to buy now or wait, it's specific to your situation. If you currently have a computer that suits you fine in what you need to do, then I'd wait and get bleeding edge. But again, that's just me. You may not fancy bleeding edge as much as I.

generik

Dec 6, 2005, 01:54 AM

2) It will be Rev. A. Know that first generation products (from any company, really) tend to have problems.

Not really, it is true for Apple only.. don't taint the entire industry because of one lousy company.

I never had any issues buying *any* thinkpads ever, despite the release dates of their chipsets/cpu. Apple is always the one stuffing it up and charging us OUTRAGEOUS prices to be beta testers.

maverick808

Dec 6, 2005, 06:04 AM

Hmmmmm...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/06/apple_intel_macs_due_june/

generik

Dec 6, 2005, 06:50 AM

Hmmmmm...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/06/apple_intel_macs_due_june/

6th of June on the 6th year of the 2nd millenium?

Hmmm.... when Steve unveils the new Macintel line Satan and Bill Gates will rise up and reap the souls of mac users worldwide :D

xraycat

Dec 6, 2005, 01:08 PM

ok thanks a lot blackheart, generik and maverik 808. i think i probably just stick to getting one thats available now mainly because i am unsure about the truth of this rumor and the fact that i dont know how much software will be suitable for it. thanks again people! :)

Prom1

Dec 6, 2005, 05:10 PM

I just want to see PowerBooks in Black!

Would be nice to have say, genuine soft black leather accents or carbonfiber inner frame with some other metal that doesnt conduct heat to easily or ceramic composites for the outter shell (fortifide enough strength so not to shatter).

reflex

Dec 6, 2005, 05:28 PM

gekko513

Dec 6, 2005, 05:36 PM

I just want to see PowerBooks in Black!
I think carbon fiber could be nice. It's lighter and stronger than aluminium and I think it could look good. http://www.hardware.no/nyheter/images/asus_w1_carbon_notebook.jpg

sk3pt1c

Dec 7, 2005, 04:24 AM

carbon fiber is expensive too!!!
i think they will be plastic like all intel laptops
i for one am ordering by 17" powerbook now and will be happy to have the last "all apple" powerbook
i think that with intel processors they may be faster but they will lose in my eyes...
plus i am more than sure they first revs will have problems
if you think about it,apple has been making g4s for years and they still have some problems,you think that with a new processor on powerbooks everything is gonna magically work?
fat chance!

mdavey

Dec 7, 2005, 08:21 AM

i think they will be plastic like all intel laptops

They are not going to be plastic! They could have made the Mac mini completely from plastic but chose not to.

It is all about first reactions. People may not be aware that they react differently when they pick up a metal laptop, mac Mini or touch a metal PowerMac, but they do.

Metal feels cold to the touch and feels 'more solid'. People implicity assume that the product is better engineered and less likely to break.

mpw

Dec 7, 2005, 11:23 AM

carbon fiber is expensive too!!!
i think they will be plastic like all intel laptops...
Based on absolutely nothing I don't think they'll go fully plastic for the PBook's at least.

I saw a neat little sony VAIO that has a carbon fiber screen enclosure/lid, VERY small/slim/light but actually unnervingly so. I'm sure it'd hold up as Sony must've tested it but it felt like it'd snap in a moment.

IIRC Apple were poaching Sony staff earlier this year. I wouldn't be surprised to see some influence from them along the lines of a move to cylinder batteries to use space better.

Morn

Dec 8, 2005, 02:27 AM

Black.... looks too plane, remember the pismo? Boring. Silver is stylish.
Anyway, to this, I say will jobs really let say dell beat them to the market place?

iEdd

Dec 8, 2005, 02:43 AM

Black.... looks too plane, remember the pismo? Boring. Silver is stylish.
Anyway, to this, I say will jobs really let say dell beat them to the market place?
I'm typing on a "plain" Pismo right now punk. :p Nah, it is old and carries the plastic look, but you'll probably get all the pismo fanboys annoyed at that comment. The pismo is better than any black plastic pc notebook design today and it's about a 7 year old design. It was released around the time pc notebooks were able to go to the "slim" 50mm thickness :D
I agree that silver is stylish in brushed, polished or frosted aluminium :)
Anyone thinking new intel powerbooks will look and feel like other intel laptops obviously has no idea about apple :rolleyes:

panda

Dec 8, 2005, 02:52 AM

I'm typing on a "plain" Pismo right now punk. :p Nah, it is old and carries the plastic look, but you'll probably get all the pismo fanboys annoyed at that comment. The pismo is better than any black plastic pc notebook design today and it's about a 7 year old design. It was released around the time pc notebooks were able to go to the "slim" 50mm thickness :D
I agree that silver is stylish in brushed, polished or frosted aluminium :)
Anyone thinking new intel powerbooks will look and feel like other intel laptops obviously has no idea about apple :rolleyes:

right on!
:)

Morn

Dec 8, 2005, 03:46 AM

Ok, pismo isn't that bad, it looks better than vaio's even I think, but the current powerbook is a huge leap over it in design and style I think. :)

pubwvj

Dec 8, 2005, 07:35 AM

Black.... looks too plane, remember the pismo? Boring. Silver is stylish.

Silver is a plain pain. It shows every little mark. Black is tough, cool and not at all plain or boring. The Pismo was the ultimate in design of the Apple Macintosh PowerBooks both from a case and hardware guts point of view. I use one every day. It is solid, rugged and far more useful than the bayless castrated PowerBooks of today. The Pismo also has greater Wi-Fi range than your metal cased PowerBooks and does not ding or scratch like the Ti and Al cases. Yes, it is not as fast as today's computers but that has nothing to do with the color. I hope that Apple moves back to a tough plastic. I would like to see the next PowerBooks back in a form factor like the Pismo's sexy body.

Plymouthbreezer

Dec 8, 2005, 03:40 PM

Silver is a plain pain. It shows every little mark. Black is tough, cool and not at all plain or boring. The Pismo was the ultimate in design of the Apple Macintosh PowerBooks both from a case and hardware guts point of view. I use one every day. It is solid, rugged and far more useful than the bayless castrated PowerBooks of today. The Pismo also has greater Wi-Fi range than your metal cased PowerBooks and does not ding or scratch like the Ti and Al cases. Yes, it is not as fast as today's computers but that has nothing to do with the color. I hope that Apple moves back to a tough plastic. I would like to see the next PowerBooks back in a form factor like the Pismo's sexy body.
I agree that the G3 PowerBook form factor was the maybe one of Apple's best designs, along with the G4 iMac and maybe the G3 B&W tower. All were very solid feeling designs with power. :cool:

themacmaestro

Dec 8, 2005, 09:17 PM

If they upgrade the PB in January I think I will puke on my new Powerbook I just got three weeks ago.

Gregory

Dec 8, 2005, 10:56 PM

If they upgrade the PB in January I think I will puke on my new Powerbook I just got three weeks ago.

Don't Puke on your New Powerbook, people are forgeting something, the software. How long will it take to get intel base code software and not some emulation code that will run very slow. Just think how long it took apple to change the software for the G5, over a year. And you think intel will be easier not at all, it will take much longer, wait and see. . . So thats why I'm not worried about the intel mac not just yet. . .

themacmaestro

Dec 9, 2005, 08:32 AM

So anyone ready to buy my Powerbook? 3 weeks old!

Randall

Dec 12, 2005, 02:59 PM

Don't Puke on your New Powerbook, people are forgeting something, the software. How long will it take to get intel base code software and not some emulation code that will run very slow. Just think how long it took apple to change the software for the G5, over a year. And you think intel will be easier not at all, it will take much longer, wait and see. . . So thats why I'm not worried about the intel mac not just yet. . .
I guess you've never heard of fat binaries? Or the fact that Apple has been slipping them into a lot of fat binaries in "software updates" unbeknownst to many users. Apple is pretty far along in supporting Mac Intel. It is the third party software that is/might be lagging behind in the switch to Intel based Macs. I for one can deal with emulation for the time being, so long as eventually there will be native Mac Intel third party apps. I would bet money that Apple will release an Intel based Mac this January. The question is which model will it be? Your guess is as good as mine. My gut tells me that it will be the Powerbook, for the simple reason that dual core Yohna will be available in January. The single core Yohna version is a better fit for iBook and the mini, but that chip won't be out until mid-2006. Put 2 and 2 together and you have questions that lead to one answer. Intel is focusing on the dual core processor to be completed for January. Apple has all of it's core OS X 10.4 applications available on Intel via fat binaries. Guess what's coming this January?...

generik

Dec 12, 2005, 04:44 PM

If they upgrade the PB in January I think I will puke on my new Powerbook I just got three weeks ago.

Thank goodness I just sold mine :D

Now it is the time to countdown to.. MWSF!!

Machead III

Jan 2, 2006, 04:17 AM

The 6th of June?! Christ alive, I hope that articl is wrong.

pkkrusty

Jan 2, 2006, 08:49 AM

What about anodized aluminum for the iBooks? Keep the colors that made the iMac so popular. Sure it might make them look like kids toys, but that's why you have the all-white one for people like me who are scared to step out. The kids would love it.

Since Apple seems to be working in a strategy to separate the PB and iBook line again in terms of performance, they should be able to go with better materials in the iBook now.

DVK916

Jan 5, 2006, 06:50 PM