Is Snow Leopard the last to support 32-bit Intel Macs?

Discussion in 'macOS' started by Amdahl, Aug 24, 2009.

  1. Amdahl macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    #1
    Snow Leopard may default to 32-bit boot, but with 32-bit Intel Macs being almost 3 years old, and all new apps being produced in 64-bit, how much longer can 32-bit systems expect to get new OS releases?

    My guess is that OS X 10.6 is the last release for 32-bit Intel hardware. Apple will make 10.7 64-bit only in order to stop splitting development between 32-bit x86 architecture and the futuristic 64-bit AMD64 architecture.

    For instance, even though Safari & Firefox still support PowerPC, the latest versions do not have the optimizations that the Intel version does for JavaScript. They each run much slower. Soon, those optimizations will probably only be done for AMD64 versions of software, and the 32-bit x86 versions will be slowly phased out.

    Is 10.6 end of the road for 32-bit Macs?
     
  2. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #2
    This is the last time out for 32-bit on OS X and Windows.

    Yonah should have never happened to begin with.
     
  3. mathcolo macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    #3
    Somehow I really doubt this. I think that there are still a ton of good quality 32-bit EFI computers out there. This includes mine... (specs in my signature).

    My MacBook runs very fast. It's old, given its 2007 release date, but I still love it. I don't mind having a 32-bit EFI computer, and I also do think it will be able to run 10.7 and beyond.

    I don't completely disagree agree with this thread though. To be prepared for the future, old technology does need to be left behind at some point.
     
  4. J the Ninja macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2008
    #4
    Some of us held out hope once that Win 7 32bit wouldn't even see the light of day. I agree with Eidorian, this in the end of the road for 32bit on both Windows and OS X. And good riddance. IA-32 has clung on plenty long enough.
     
  5. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #6
    I don't seem to remember why Microsoft put 32-bit Windows 7 out again. Atom supports 64-bit.
     
  6. Markov macrumors 6502

    Markov

    Joined:
    May 18, 2007
    Location:
    Philadelphia
    #7
    Well, I think Microsoft owed it to the 32-bit only crowd because Vista just sucked out loud (this is MY opinion, others may disagree). Apple JUST dropped PPC support in Snow Leopard, so I think 10.6 will be it for 32-bit.
     
  7. Eric S. macrumors 68040

    Eric S.

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2008
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Mountains, California
    #8
    Yes. 32-bit Macs are the next to get the heave-ho. And the same rationale will be recycled: 10.7 won't be of any benefit to those systems.
     
  8. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #9
    32bit needs to make like a Dodo, and go extinct. :p
     
  9. morrisman1 macrumors 6502

    #10
    i think that 10.7 will largely be based on 10.6 and will be more of a feature upgrade unlike 10.6, which was a groundwork upgrade from 10.5

    I expect that 10.7 will support macs with a 32bit chipset
     
  10. wrldwzrd89 macrumors G5

    wrldwzrd89

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2003
    Location:
    Solon, OH
    #11
    I think at least some of the oldest Intel Macs will be phased out with 10.7. As whether that includes all the 32-bit Intel Macs, that remains an open question, though I suspect we'll find out sooner than we all think we will (we'll know much more at WWDC 2010, but leaks before then will reveal a fair amount). :eek:
     
  11. MorzillA macrumors 6502

    MorzillA

    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Location:
    Miami
    #12
    So if most ppl are saying and agreeing that the 32-bit Intel Macs are fased out of the new 10.7 OS X, then my question is the following and this has something to do with Eric S. post.
    Once Snow Leopard is out, is there any rumors that the current Macs can/will be upgradeable with the new chipset, or does the public face the hard$hip of buying a refurb with the new OS.
    It's always cheaper to do the upgrade, especially if one does it instead of coughing up $$$ for some one else to do it. Unless you have no clue as to what you are doing, of course!!!
    Only time, leaked news and WWDC 2010 will tell.....


    :apple:
     
  12. JFreak macrumors 68040

    JFreak

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    Tampere, Finland
    #13
    +1
     
  13. JFreak macrumors 68040

    JFreak

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    Tampere, Finland
    #14
    Ever heard anyone saying "Somehow I really doubt this. I think that there are still a ton of good quality 64-bit G5 computers out there." in the not-so-distant past?
     
  14. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #15
    :D
     
  15. Barbie macrumors regular

    Barbie

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Location:
    ocean
    #16
    at the moment, every macbook air's processor is 32-bit kernel so they will keep support for 32-bit

    barbie
     
  16. Small White Car macrumors G4

    Small White Car

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Location:
    Washington DC
    #17
    Well, this isn't true at all, so I have a hard time following the rest of your argument.

    Besides, it's not like the Intel/PPC difference. Apple had to put a lot of work into keeping OS X working on both platforms. Would they really save THAT much time dropping 32-bit support? I just don't think's the same level of work to do that as it was to continue supporting PPC.
     
  17. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #18
    How many 64-bit OS X applications are out there under Leopard right now? Transmission is the only one I have. :rolleyes:
     
  18. mathcolo macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    #19
    Chess.app is. Someone mentioned Xcode a while ago but I don't think it is.
     
  19. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #20
    What an amazing selection.
     
  20. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #21
    Refurbs and new machines ARE the upgrade path for chipsets.

    Sort of sucks, but even in the PC world. A new chipset requires a new logic board/motherboard.

    And with the Macs, Apple tends to alter the machine innards a bit making the motherboard swap messy and expensive. And not much cheaper than a refurb, or the cost of a Big Mac away in some cases (seems like it).
     
  21. gnasher729 macrumors P6

    gnasher729

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    #22
    Apple will have to support 32-bit applications for a long long time, just as you can run PowerPC applications on an Intel Mac under Snow Leopard, and that will have to continue to work for a long time.

    As long as 32-bit applications are supported, there is very little reason to not support 32-bit Macs.
     
  22. chrfr macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    #23
    Adobe Lightroom is, as is at least one high end digital camera application from Hasselblad.
     
  23. Amdahl thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2004
    #24
    It's exactly the same level of work. X86 and AMD64 are two different architectures, same as PPC and X86 are different architectures. The logical argument that since the X86 work is already done (or the PPC work was already done), there is no reason to drop support didn't fly in 10.6, and it won't fly for X86 at some point.

    This is the 'silent transition' and the Yonah (32-bit Mac) owners are on their way to a silent spring after the Snow. Indeed, it appears likely even some of the 64-bit 2006 Mac Pro owners are heading there as well, based on 10.6's behavior.

    There weren't any Intel 32-bit apps three years ago, either. The apps will still be supported, just as PPC apps still run on SL even though it can't boot on a PPC machine. x86 apps will still run on 10.7, it just won't boot on 10.7. PPC apps probably will not run on 10.7, hence the reason Rosetta was made 'optional' install for 10.6.

    Non Sequitur.

    This is the Apple way: Abandon the slightly old product, to keep moving the platform forward and not become Windows. Also, it makes them more money because you have to buy everything again. And again. I hear the next iMac is going to go completely cordless, with a 30-day battery; you'll take it to the new Apple Store in WalMart once a month to have it replaced. Johnny Ive has a new masterpiece on his hands! :)
     
  24. cube macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #25
    That's not a valid comparison. x86 is to AMD64 as G4 is to G5.
     

Share This Page