Latest Mac OS X 10.5.6 Seed; Rosetta Becomes Optional in Snow Leopard?

[wizard]

Not to mention that PPC sucked performance wise.

Cassie, there was no reasonable roadmap for PPC processors for laptops, the most popular form of computer sold today. Not the G5, nothing... nothing that could have been reasonably priced and engineered into a popular product. The whole thing was a dead end.

The above is all true but is only part of the story. One big issue with PPC is that it sucked big time as a general purpose processor. The G5 was significantly slower than the intel processors of the day when introduced. It had some advantage in float and vector operations but even that was a short term reality.

The other big issue is that both intel and AMD had road maps that showed significant improvements in new processors about to come to market. The PPC world had nothing and frankly it appeared that IBM was really affraid to improve PPC significantly.

To put it bluntly Apple with PPC was on a set of tracks going no where.

 

[twoodcc]

The above is all true but is only part of the story. One big issue with PPC is that it sucked big time as a general purpose processor. The G5 was significantly slower than the intel processors of the day when introduced. It had some advantage in float and vector operations but even that was a short term reality.

The other big issue is that both intel and AMD had road maps that showed significant improvements in new processors about to come to market. The PPC world had nothing and frankly it appeared that IBM was really affraid to improve PPC significantly.

To put it bluntly Apple with PPC was on a set of tracks going no where.

but what about the cell processor?

 

[Eric S.]

Sorry, i don't get this, have NEVER had dropouts/slow connections with WiFi in Leopard...either on my original Netgear Wifi router, or subsequently on my Airport Extreme connected tp my Virgin Media cable modem.

And this is on a Macbook (Mark 1) that I have updated, not clean installed since I bought it.

I have problems with wifi dropouts. Normally it's not noticeable because Airport automatically rescans and reconnects, but when I'm connected via VPN, the VPN connection gets dropped which is a major pain. I don't know if the problem is Leopard or the new Macbook, but it doesn't ever happen with Tiger on my iBook G4.

 

[bluefido]

All I care about is whether Diablo II will work with my MacBook. I love my MacBook, but it absolutely blows as a gaming machine. Hence, I retreat to older games like Diablo II to get my fix.

 

[contractcooker]

On one hand I like that Apple is fully embracing the intel switch, but I'm not so happy that they're pushing everyone else to do the same, especially not so fast.

Ok... it's really not that fast.... it's already been 3 years. That means that all the PPC machines will be running out of applecare extended support by the time Snow Leopard is out. I don't know how ANYONE can be surprised that Apple are doing this. Really it's a good choice because it cuts down the time they need to develope for something that is at the end of it's life... I suppose they could have gone one more version with PPC support BUT Apple has always been a forward facing company.... even to a fault. If you have a PPC machine Leopard should be just as good as snow leopard. From what I understand most of the optimizations will be focused on solidifying intel support so PPC machines wouldn't benefit much from this version anyway.

Sigh, getting harder and harder to run my 5 year old PowerBook.

Does that count as a backlash?

Nope not backlash just understandable annoyance at how quickly hardware becomes obsoleted.

Fast? Macs has gone completely Intel in 2005. By the time Snow Leopard comes out, it will have been 4 years since PPC disappeared from the Mac lineup.

Uh... not really might want to check the timeline. But I think that even though it's only been 3 years since the switch that has been enough time. I understand that there may be a few people who bought PPC machines on the cusp of the intel transition. They were just in the wrong place at the wrong time.... it happens to everyone once in a while, especially where technology is concerned.

I disagree with "forced."

Other upgrades have added new features (Expose, Time Machine) that everyone might want. It's fair to say "forced" in those situations, because those features were so useful, everyone would like to have them.

Snow Leopard, on the other hand, seems to mostly be adding hardware optimization that only speeds up newer hardware. Meaning: Intel hardware.

So, even if they offered 10.6 for PPC, the changes would be minimal. So you'd get minimal changes and they'd have to put in a LOT more work. That's why it's called "Snow Leopard." It's pretty much the same as "Leopard!"

10.7 will be the first time PPC owners actually miss out on new features.

I agree

i bought a ppc mac in nov 2005.

Sucks to be you ..... seriously my sympathies. That is an awkward and annoying situation to be in.

Is that the sound preferences in the dock? How did you get this there?

LOL drag and drop?

 

[swagi]

Yeah sure...I'll take the Flamebait.

Really I just wish all the whinney PPC users would just roll over and drop out of the Mac sceen. Apple should have dropped PPC support years ago after intel hardware doubled real world performance. That doesn't mean not to support PPC on a stable version of OS/X but to simple not to support development for future revisions.

Frankly continued PPC support is a waste of good money!



Dave

Guess we have a switcher here

No, really, without any personal sentiment in this argument, I could care less about Snow Leopard.

I'm currently in a tough decision: Should I roll back my machines to Tiger or to Panther. 10.3.9 was a real stable OS. Tiger is usable, soetimes a little clunky compared to Panther, but still quite solid.

Leopard sux big time on my Powerbook. Mail frequently crashes, 10.5.5 killed my old Flash MX that still worked in 10.5.4 (and I don't feel the need to upgrade) - so - in effect I can only pray to MF god, that Snow Leopard will finally bring some stability back.

Compared to Leopard on my PB I can honestly say, that Vista 64-bit is a godsent on my other machine. And that is my real honest feeling about this. I really hesitate to upgrade the Intel machines, as they are working machines, and my PB is private. 10.5 offers nothing to me, so I guess I'll wait til the dust settles with 10.6.3 and then upgrade my work machines.

Your stupid PPC-bashing has nothing to offer, except showing your ignorance. If you get the chance, try out a 1 GHz Powerbook with Panther. Maybe then you'd realize how much of a hog Leopard is.

So back on topic: Maybe Snow Leopard will finally get rid of all this stupid stuff. It's so bloody annoying that QuickTime has gotten worse with every iteration. Same applies to iTunes. Less function more bloat seems to be Apple's current mantra.

*calms down, because he's still so balantly pissed, that he can't cut, edit and create MP3s from Quicktime anymore*

On a side note I'll wait for Nehalem for the next Laptop upgrade. But I'm looking forward to rolling back my Powerbook to the pristine software condition with a clean system restore from Panther. I'll then compare both systems on everyday tasks

 

[contractcooker]

Props to you for doing that...at least you aren't selling crack to buy a new Mac Pro!

HMMMMMM..... now there's an idea.... lol

 

[contractcooker]

College is the best time to get employment. Even better if it's on campus.

I'm waiting for 10.5.6 and ogling the Blu-ray drives for my Q6600 tower.

Yeah, seriously what's apple's deal with blu-ray?

 

[contractcooker]

Actually - I purchased my g5 quad in january 2006 so it's more like 2 1/2 - 3 years... Enough to piss off some people including me. That's not much time considering I spent $11,000 on the workstation at the time loaded up. They should support power pc systems a bit longer... A year or so...

DUDE.... why the hell did you buy an $11,000.00 PPC mac in 2006? I mean... if it was worth it to you for the extra processing power then... there's your answer and your probably have enough money to shell out for a new $11,000 MacPro.... (mouth watering).... If you just bought it to have the best machine then you sir, are stupid. Everyone knows that the mid-range is the best place to purchase hardware (as far as processes per unit price) The only reason to spend that much money would be if you made enough more money from the increased speed that it justified the exhorbitant price tag

 

[xrayzed]

I feel the pain of the PPC owners, not least because I have a G4 iBook.

Having said that, the current move away from PPC is pretty much on the timetable I expected. In my case I factored it in to my purchase decisions.

I bought my iBook around the time the Intel changeover was being announced. I knew that I was buying an obsolescent machine, but I either had to go for a PC solution that didn't offer what I wanted (Mac OS + apps such as FCP) or had to wait until the Intel chips were on the market.

Weighing up the options I went for the G4 iBook on the theory that by the time PPC was being dropped from support I'd be ready for my next purchase. My next buy will be a desktop, so I'm leaning towards waiting until the next iMac upgrade, and possibly even waiting until Snow Leopard comes out.

That will give me the processing power to do the more graphics-intensive work I'd like, will let me run Windows (my wife needs it for work, while I have squillions of Windows games I couldn't bear to part with). My iBook still works fine on Tiger and I can keep that for word processing, email and such when I'm not at home or work.

This is a very different situation to someone running a business with a large PPC install base, of course. The issues with EOL on PPC may have been foreseeable, but that doesn't make the problems involved with upgrading any less painful for these people.

 

[Inconsequential]

Everyone got on IBM for not being able to break 3.0 GHz three to four years ago.... well look at where we are today with Intel. We JUST broke 3.0 GHz in the last year. Everyone is moving to multi-core for performance boosts. IBM could have done the same and actually is doing the same.

Except the clock for clock performance on the C2D/C2Q are better than that of the G5 and whatever the G6 was going to be?

I for one am glad apple went Intel.

As for 10.6, its about time PPC is dropped. Allows apple to code for one instruction set.

Its not like 10.5 is rubbish is it.

Im also for apple dropping PPC support.

 

[diamond.g]

Everyone got on IBM for not being able to break 3.0 GHz three to four years ago.... well look at where we are today with Intel. We JUST broke 3.0 GHz in the last year. Everyone is moving to multi-core for performance boosts. IBM could have done the same and actually is doing the same.

What is funny is Intel can probably break the 4 GHz barrier pretty easily. They just have no real reason to.

 

[apsterling]

The clock speed is only as good as the other speeds in the computer. Slow RAM? Too bad, your computer will only run as fast as it can read and write to memory.

4Ghz is overkill until RAM is faster.

 

[Mackilroy]

Guess we have a switcher here

I'm so glad you're one of those who believes that if someone doesn't care or want Snow Leopard on PPC that they're automatically a switcher.

Personally, I've been using Macs since 1994, and if PPC Macs don't get Snow Leopard I'm not going to worry too much about it –*we have two Intel and two PPC Macs in my house and they all get along fine with Leopard, thank you.

As far as Rosetta being optional, that's good for me, as all my apps are now Intel-only or Universal.

 

[diamond.g]

The clock speed is only as good as the other speeds in the computer. Slow RAM? Too bad, your computer will only run as fast as it can read and write to memory.

4Ghz is overkill until RAM is faster.

Ram isn't the problem, disk access is.

 

[Eric S.]

Apple has always been a forward facing company.... even to a fault.

I was able to run 68K programs from as far back as 1986 on the latest OS version right up until Apple killed Classic in 10.5. That's the kind of backward compatibility one used to expect from Apple.

As for 10.6, its about time PPC is dropped. Allows apple to code for one instruction set.

I would guess that 95% or more of OS X is C or C++ code that is common to PPC and Intel. Testing all the various hardware platforms is the real resource hog here.

Let's face it, Apple is trying to move people off the old hardware and get them to buy new systems, because that's where they make their profits. Once PPC machines are are abandoned they will next find ways to orphan the early Intel boxes.

 

[AngerDanger]

 

[Ashka]

I'll still feel sad for all the PPC users if ALL PPC Macs are at the end of their upgrade path with OSX 10.5.? ~ Still no definite Yay or Nay from Apple.

I bought my 14" iBook March '06 before the intel Macs were even in the Country (New Zealand) Apple Care continues until March 2009.

 

[AidenShaw]

...don't be surprised...

Once PPC machines are are abandoned they will next find ways to orphan the early Intel boxes.

If 10.6 is 64-bit only, Apple will have orphaned all of the Core Duo and Core Solo Intel boxes.

And, In Aiden's Opinion (IAO) - that would be a good thing.

Apple should never have sold *any* 32-bit Intel chips when the 64-bit laptop chips were only a few months later.

 

[sporadicMotion]

Ya know, reading this thread just makes me miss the 68k days... things just worked. Dear god, making a boot disk was as simple as copying the System and Finder over to a floppy and bang, instant boot dist. Photoshop was snappy, HyperCard was a fun little tool, anyone else remember using FirstClass BBS software (which is still around... I know SFU was using it as recently as 2006). Ah the good ole days back when fashion wasn't the reason to buy a Mac... back then Apple understood sticking by its customers. Don't get me wrong, I still vastly prefer Apples OS over the other options out there... but why cut off full OS updates for the people that are on Macs that are 2 years old? PPC isn't that far behind us and they still make great productive machines... as many people here know first hand.

The really unfortunate part about this is simply this: the people on the PPC machines are the classic Mac users in a lot of cases. They're the ones who are accustomed to being able to buy a Mac and having it stay a useful and valid machine for close to five years. They're the ones that were willing to shell out the extra money (I remember the pain and joy of dishing out near $8000 (CAN) for a Quadra 900) just to use an OS that they believed in and enjoyed using. There really is no reason why Apple should halt support for PPC when there is still a large customer base out there using G4 and G5 machines... especially in a time when the average persons pocket book is feeling a little lighter.

Have a heart Apple.

 

[smartalic34]

If 10.6 is 64-bit only, Apple will have orphaned all of the Core Duo and Core Solo Intel boxes.

And, In Aiden's Opinion (IAO) - that would be a good thing.

Apple should never have sold *any* 32-bit Intel chips when the 64-bit laptop chips were only a few months later.

I dont think 10.6 will be 64-bit only, but looking towards the future, I would be perfectly okay if 10.7 was 64-bit only. all I want is a leaner, faster leopard, and once I have that, I'll be content as long as my core duo MBP shall live.

 

[TwinCities Dan]

I dont think 10.6 will be 64-bit only, but looking towards the future, I would be perfectly okay if 10.7 was 64-bit only. all I want is a leaner, faster leopard, and once I have that, I'll be content as long as my core duo MBP shall live.

I was about to type up a response to AidenShaw and sporadicMotion, but then I read your comment and I thought a prop would suffice...

+1 for smartalic34

 

[swagi]

I'm so glad you're one of those who believes that if someone doesn't care or want Snow Leopard on PPC that they're automatically a switcher.

Personally, I've been using Macs since 1994, and if PPC Macs don't get Snow Leopard I'm not going to worry too much about it –*we have two Intel and two PPC Macs in my house and they all get along fine with Leopard, thank you.

As far as Rosetta being optional, that's good for me, as all my apps are now Intel-only or Universal.

No, you misunderstood me, sorry.

If SL is one major stability overhaul, I'm all over it. Problem is, they should really enhance the stability in 10.5 as well, and that includes PPC machines.

Maybe I should put it another way: Leopard is the weakest OS X I personally used since 10.0.0. And yes, I really think the very limited 10.1 build with little features was MORE STABLE than Leopard, at least in my personal experience.

If they officially leave PPC in the dust, I could care less, as long as they start building high quality computers and OS's again. And I think it's freaking annoying, that they will ship a so called update of what Leopard should have been in the beginning!

*Disclaimer: Bit the bullet with 10.2.0, 10.3.0 and 10.4.0. All had their hiccups, I know, but 10.5.0 was the greatest freaking mess I ever experienced on an Apple machine - and it still remains with 10.5.5*

I just went for the flamebait considering PPC users. During the PPC times we may had inferior chips in our computers, but we had a rock solid OS bundled with great and FUNCTIONAL software. Now we have fast processors as everyone else, our OS and bundled software is deteriorating with every new build and we are just becoming the same mainstream as Windows Vista.

I never thought I would think that way, but honestly Apple's direction of the last years makes me really anxious to follow the Linux distros (Sabayon looks fine, Ubuntu o.K.) or wait for Windows 7.

 

[ztigerpaw]

I just went for the flamebait considering PPC users. During the PPC times we may had inferior chips in our computers, but we had a rock solid OS bundled with great and FUNCTIONAL software. Now we have fast processors as everyone else, our OS and bundled software is deteriorating with every new build and we are just becoming the same mainstream as Windows Vista.

I never thought I would think that way, but honestly Apple's direction of the last years makes me really anxious to follow the Linux distros (Sabayon looks fine, Ubuntu o.K.) or wait for Windows 7.

The thing is Apple use to be as mainstream as Windows back in the Apple II days. Everyone has had it with Windows & Vista. Its about time someone take there place again. No one wants another decade with them and Apple needs to grow in order to stay ahead (FYI the Intel switch). I've been waiting for this day since I jumped back into the Mac universe after sticking with Windows till, sadly, late 2005.

My guess is Leopard in a sense complete reboot of the Mac OS X platform. Which is why its almost as unstable as 10.0 and why 10.6 nothing more then what 10.1 was at the time.

 

[AidenShaw]

My guess is Leopard in a sense complete reboot of the Mac OS X platform. Which is why its almost as unstable as 10.0 and why 10.6 nothing more then what 10.1 was at the time.

If 10.6 has a 64-bit kernel, then that's another substantial "reboot" of the platform, which might not be good for stability.

Plus, a 64-bit kernel will require all new 64-bit drivers - and we all know what that can do.

So Apple will have to support 2 kernels and 2 sets of drivers - if they support the few remaining Core Duo 32-bit machines. If thed add support for the older PPC machines, that's 4 kernels and 4 sets of drivers to develop and maintain.

That's quite a development and maintenance load - compared to supporting x64 only and having only 1 kernel and 1 set of drivers.

And to make it really messy, think about the ARM build of OSX.