Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > PowerPC Macs

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jul 4, 2005, 08:05 PM   #1
steve jr.
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Akron, OH
x86 PowerBook and Apps

Hello all. I have a two part question and they are both related a little. I'll try my best to make it clear.

I am going to be a senior in high school this fall, and I want to take a PowerBook to college when I start in the fall of 06. I want to wait for the Intel processorss just for the fact that that is what Apple is moving to, and even though they will still be supporting IBM, they will probably favor Intel because that is the new standard.

Anyhow, my first question is should I wait for Intel? Naturally, I'm going to be a little strapped for cash, so will Apple lower the prices of their machines now what they have a mass-produced processor? And how about the actual system like graphics cards. Are the ones that they use now better, or the ones that were provided with the developer boxes just as good?

Ok. My second question is about software on the Intel machines. I am a current WinXP user. I have seen pictures (I believe from think secret) of XP being run on a developer box. So if I were to take any software program such as 3ds max (amination program for windows only) and install it on an Intel Mac, would it work? Or maybe something as simple as Office for Windows, but installing it on a Mac, would it work?

I hope I was able to make my questions clear. Thanks a ton for any info you all can give :->
steve jr. is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 08:10 PM   #2
MacDawg
macrumors P6
 
MacDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: "Between the Hedges"
The Windows (XP) versions of your software won't run under OSX even with the Intel processor. However, you will likely be able to dual boot and run XP on the Mac box from what I understand. However, I'm sure you will get many more detailed and informative responses giving you greater insight.

Woof, Woof - Dawg
MacDawg is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 08:11 PM   #3
Sun Baked
macrumors G5
 
Sun Baked's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve jr.
Ok. My second question is about software on the Intel machines. I am a current WinXP user. I have seen pictures (I believe from think secret) of XP being run on a developer box. So if I were to take any software program such as 3ds max (amination program for windows only) and install it on an Intel Mac, would it work? Or maybe something as simple as Office for Windows, but installing it on a Mac, would it work?
Windows Apps require Windows ...

Though installing Windows would be an option if there are some apps that do not run under Wine, or a Windows Virtual Machine isn't available yet.

At worst you would need to reboot every time you need to use a specific app.

But expect wine or a virtual machine to show up real quick -- especially since you aren't emulating the entire machine just building a partition to run Windows in a window.
__________________
If you are the type of person who solves all their problems with a hammer, because it is the only tool in your toolbox. It would be wise of you to never get in an argument with a gunsmith.
Sun Baked is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 08:30 PM   #4
steve jr.
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Akron, OH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Baked
Windows Apps require Windows ...
I'm a little confused. I would have to think that they would work on a Mac because they are using the same processor. Unless the difference is in the code?
__________________
15" 2.2 i7 MBP, 750GB HDD, 8GB RAM; 16GB iPhone 5

steve jr. is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 08:35 PM   #5
Sun Baked
macrumors G5
 
Sun Baked's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve jr.
I'm a little confused. I would have to think that they would work on a Mac because they are using the same processor. Unless the difference is in the code?
Yes, that's where it is.

If you didn't need Windows to run Windows apps, why would anyone buy Windows?

Just format the HD, and stick in the game, and be happy.

DirectX, Windows APIs, etc. are all required and not included in Mac OS X.

--- Edit

If I gave you the answer in a language you didn't speak, you probably would Not be able to use it.

But it all runs on the human brain.
__________________
If you are the type of person who solves all their problems with a hammer, because it is the only tool in your toolbox. It would be wise of you to never get in an argument with a gunsmith.

Last edited by Sun Baked; Jul 4, 2005 at 08:39 PM.
Sun Baked is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 08:38 PM   #6
MacDawg
macrumors P6
 
MacDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: "Between the Hedges"
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve jr.
I'm a little confused. I would have to think that they would work on a Mac because they are using the same processor. Unless the difference is in the code?
Same with Linux running on X86 Intel processor... different operating systems

Woof, Woof - Dawg
MacDawg is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 08:46 PM   #7
mkrishnan
Moderator emeritus
 
mkrishnan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Grand Rapids, MI, USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Baked
DirectX, Windows APIs, etc. are all required and not included in Mac OS X.

---

If I gave you the answer in a language you didn't speak, you probably would be able to use it.


To add just a little bit, back in the day, when you wrote a computer program, that computer program talked *directly* to the hardware. This is sort of like buying a suit bespoke. You could call up Isaac Mizrahi, and if you wave enough money in his face, he would make you a suit that would fit *perfectly*...not a single feature would be anything other than exactly what you want.

The advantage to that is obvious. In the computer world, the code that talks directly to the processor is much more efficient. It will run a given task much faster. The disadvantages are these: 1) like the suit, it's more expensive to design this way, because you're rebuilding the wheel every time; 2) what happens when two programs want to talk to the hardware directly at the same time? What happens if program A modifies a register or something, and doesn't tell program B it did it, and they're both using it? And so on.

So, now, computer programs at the application level almost never talk directly to hardware. They work through a bunch of APIs -- these are sort of like the middlemen in the garment industry ... some are higher level like stores, and some are lower level like warehouses, and closer to the hardware (the designer). The app talks to the APIs, which in turn talk to the hardware, while managing the demands of all the apps.

That is a big part of what a modern OS is -- these "APIs." That's why Linux, with WINE (which recreates the APIs) can run Windows apps, without needing to look like Windows on the surface, but a Mac or Linux machine (without something like Wine to give it the APIs) cannot.
__________________
Mohan
mkrishnan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 09:26 PM   #8
steve jr.
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Akron, OH
OK. I have heard loud and clear that Win software won't work on a Mac. Thanks for the clarification. Anything on the hardware that mite be expected with the new machines and how it compares to what currently is used?
__________________
15" 2.2 i7 MBP, 750GB HDD, 8GB RAM; 16GB iPhone 5

steve jr. is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2005, 10:07 AM   #9
ThatSoundAgain
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
While the developer machines have onboard graphics (some Intel chip) you can rest assured that GPU specs will not go backwards on actual products.

Whether the next update to the portable lines will feature Intel CPUs or not, expect graphics to get better or (unlikely) at least stay the same. I can't recall Apple ever downgrading anything (CPU, RAM, graphics, HD size etc) with an update. They go forward or stay the same.

Last edited by ThatSoundAgain; Jul 6, 2005 at 10:08 AM. Reason: clarification
ThatSoundAgain is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2005, 12:15 AM   #10
steve jr.
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Akron, OH
That makes a lot of sence. Why upgrade one thing, and downgrade the rest. Just hope you're right. I'd personally like to see the pb's move to intel (and be one of the first so I can have it in time for college in the fall of 06...wishful thinking I guess), but also drop in price but get better or equal things like your said, graphics card hdd size and what not. Do you think Apple would go with an all on board machine for both laptops and/or desk?
__________________
15" 2.2 i7 MBP, 750GB HDD, 8GB RAM; 16GB iPhone 5

steve jr. is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jul 7, 2005, 07:21 AM   #11
ThatSoundAgain
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
The way Apple does business, and, according to recent analyses of the iPod's success, one that makes very much sense, is to offer each product in few but clearly distinguished configurations. Think small/medium/large.

This is done for clarity. It's very easy for customers to undrstand, and I think they go out of their way to make sure that nothing muddies this approach. You don't want potential customers to read reviews that say "Sure, the new powerbook is great, with faster CPU and all, but why did they cut the hdd space from 100 GB to 80?"

Updates in this scheme have to be clear improvements (they messed this up with the low-end powermac in the last update - that machine was later quietly removed). Unlike HP, Dell etc. that have completely messy product lines. When I bought my iBook, I was researching an HP as an alternative. 1.5 years later, I'm advising my gf on a laptop purchase and am again researching HP. Most their machines now have lesser graphics than the one I looked at back then - wtf?

Now, about onboard graphics, I think the radeon in this iBook is technically onboard, as in soldered on the mainboard, but if Apple wants to do anything like the shared RAM Intel chip in the dev machines in the powerbooks, they'll have to show that it's a clear advantage, ie. MUCH faster. If not, their simplicity / clarity goes out the window. So don't worry, it's Apple, not Dell we're talking about.

What I'm looking forward to with PBs, is not as much the specs list, though. When they did the titanium PBs (previous case design) everyone thought that was the coolest laptop ever. The aluminum design trumped that. What's interesting, to me, is that the Intel thing warrants a new case design, and if I know Jon Ive, he'll completely blow our collective minds with cool, head-turning, must-own industrial design. He has to to top the alBooks.
ThatSoundAgain is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > PowerPC Macs

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bootcamp can not support Windows7 x86??? greatwall9528 MacBook Air 8 Aug 17, 2013 08:21 AM
Intel x86 Programmer's Reference Manual? (HW) ArtOfWarfare Mac Programming 1 Feb 3, 2013 12:51 PM
how do i run classic os apps with g4 powerbook? kevin242 PowerPC Macs 2 Jul 26, 2012 04:11 PM
Intel on x86 vs ARM - Power consumption vs Performance KnightWRX Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion 9 Jun 15, 2012 01:26 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:14 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC