Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac OS X 10.6 to Drop PowerPC Support?

Markleshark said:
More than enough time to warrant dropping PPC support, IMHO.
Click to expand...

Exactly what do you people base comments like this on? I picked up this 2001 dual-cpu G4 last may for 1/10th its original cost, threw in an 18x DVD drive and Tiger and other than newer games, it runs everything I need it to run. It's 6 years old! According to your math, it was worthless 2 years ago. I can make it 1.8 GHz for $250 and throw in a video card that will run Doom3 at lower resolutions for $120. Heck, if it were an iMac I couldn't do ANYTHING with it (mid-tower please Apple!). I can run Logic Pro 8 on it with a Firewire breakout box. What exactly about it makes it worthless after this magic 4 year number that you're proposing to do to Power G5 Quads and the like as well as older machines?

It's an OS. Artificial limitations are pointless. That's a lot of $129 sales lost if Apple does indeed choose to remove PPC support. But Apple is the one that chose PPC in the first place. It does make me wonder why they didn't just go to Intel instead back in 2000 instead of supporting a platform some say should no longer be supported period. Maybe PPC should have died with OS9?

Basically, I think it comes down to people who have or can afford to replace their equipment with the latest and greatest look down on other Apple users that need a longer shelf life for their investment. It's the same thinking that says we don't NEED a mid-priced tower because you can just buy a new iMac every year or every other year instead ($$$$). That's great if you can afford it.
 
At any rate this is based on idle speculation, not even rumour.

Can't we just get excited/pissed off about 10.5 and leave this until November at least - the share price will start dropping if we are not careful!
 
There's no reason to keep support for G5 and drop G4. The reason G3 was dropped is because it lacked AltiVec support. G4 and G5 offer essentially the same internal feature set, with speed being the only real differentiator.

Keeping PPC support in the OS won't mean keeping support in applications. We're already seeing games and such that are marked as Intel only. Eventually more devs might start leaning this way (not because you can save 12MB of app space though, that's nothing). I would hope that Apple wouldn't lead the way on this trend though.

There's a little part of me that hopes Apple's hardware line eventually goes mixed processor. I'd love to have an updated-but-still-dirt-cheap Mac mini, for example. Server class machines might be another place. As others have said, they're committed to keeping ARM support.

If nothing else, the threat of being able to switch CPUs easily may help keep preferential treatment with Intel.
 
I dunno. That would leave a lot of machine with an installed user base open to experimenting with Linux and whatever else might be available at that time.
My old G3 ibook still runs OSX pretty well. I think a level was reached a few years ago where most home users had enough power to do whatever they'd want to with their computers. between graphics cards getting really fast and processors running in tandem or at high speeds, I think there is a lot of life left in the PPC line.

I'm betting that Apple will offer apps that require faster speeds to run soothly, more than artificially limiting the user base.
 
Yea I'm sure the backwards compatibility is such an unnecessary procedure for the products of way back when... Well at least it'll encourage people to upgrade their computers... but I'm sure there are going to be a lot of people complaining as usual.
 
LizKat said:
Apple is going to pivot on names for the next go. It shoulda-coulda-woulda been a lion, I guess, after Leopard. But at least in English that's such a tepid name for the King of Beasts.

So it will be Leo, also conveniently a constellation, and a beauty at that. It will look great in the promos! Picking the name of a constellation opens the door for all those other great celestial monikers to tag future OS releases. Orion! Aries! Libra!

I am definitely making this up, btw.
Click to expand...

Sounds kinda good though..

Mac OS 10.7 Gemini !!! :cool:
 
The OS's get so burdensome anyway. My old G4 was already quite taxed by 10.4. I can't imagine 10.5 being worthwhile for it. So 10.6 will most likely be even worse and more cumbersome.

If you are still using a G4 in 2010, you probably won't need it to run the latest software anyway.

10.6 = Lynx
10.7 = Bobcat
10.8 = Housecat
10.9 = Polecat
10.10 = Tomcat
 
Obviously they'll keep developing a PPC version of future releases for internal experimentation and a huge "just in case" scenario. They're not going to abandon writing PPC for the OS - if they had that mind set, they would have never had the opportunity to do a huge processor switch over in the last few years. Nobody likes to play catch up. Apple will do anything to protect its interests.

I hope, though, they do devote all their resources to writing better and better code for the Intel release and drop official support for PPC in 10.6.

My guess is that 10.6 will be "Lion." I can't think of any other big felines, unless I missed some suggestions in the forum. Mac OS 11 will be something different....
 
Jumping the gun.... but...

morespce54 said:
Yes, but not everybody (outside MR) changes computer every 4 years (or less)...
Click to expand...

Correct. And of that subset how many of them upgrade their OS every release?

How many of them who don't upgrade their HW but "have" to upgrade their OS after 4 years? I'm guessing that would be a pretty small number as typically the people who keep their hardware that long are not the type of people who "have" to upgrade to the newest OS.

If the cost envolved in continuing developing for PPC is less than the profit they would make selling to users with 4 year old machines that have to have the latest OS then the will continue to make PPC versions. If not, then they won't.

Personally I don't see them dropping support for G4/G5 with 10.6. But I do see many more features on the horizon that will require Intel based machines both from Apple and Third parties.
 
longofest said:
By late 2009, it would have been 4 years since the last new PPC mac was sold.
Click to expand...

Actually this is completey FALSE.

I purchased a BRAND NEW 1.5ghz 12" Powerbook in August of 2006. It would be four years in 2010.

I purchased a BRAND NEW 1.5ghz Mac Mini G4 in
SEPTEMBER of 2006.

I expect at least seven years of updates as needed on my computer purchases. I expect Apple to support my PPCs until 2013, sorry.

I used my 145b Powerbook (PURCHASED NEW in July 1994) until August 2001 and the Powerbook was still great -- it was the Kingston memory upgrade chip that failed and I had lost the original four mb chip. That was seven great years.

I don't appreciate forced obsolescence from Apple if we cannot run the latest OS on our beloved machines. I am STILL currently buying a last generation PPC iBook 12" because they are GREAT machines.
 
Moof1904 said:
That sucks. There's a lot of life left in the PPC Macs.
Click to expand...
And there still will be well after 10.6 ships sometime in 2009/2010 or even 2011. Your Mac does not stop working when a new OS comes out. And by 2011, your 2006 PowerPC will definitely start to seem a bit long in the tooth anyway. It'll probably still run just fine but five years is a good run.
 
32-bit

For some reason, I am really more worried about 32-bit being dropped in the next release then the G5s. The G4 is probably gone anyway and all the current Intels are 64-bit. Although, all but the early Intel portables could be upgraded.
 
From what I remember Steve saying, after 10.5 Apple will slow down the OS releases. My guess is they will be doing a lot of under the hood work with the file system, etc making some major changes to keep OS X a head of its time.

While it seems like Apple could/would do such as a thing as drop PPC support, I think it's fairly unlikely unless the adoption rates of Intel are really high. The biggest thing for them is to have the user base on the same OS, so dropping the iMac G5 for instance doesn't sound like a good idea. What's the point anyways? It's not Windows Vista! PowerPC chips should have plenty of power to run 10.6.....it's not like OS X requirements are steep!
 
Let 'em go...

-hh said:
I agree that this is a trial balloon, and while its probably aimed at developers, it is strategically a bad idea right now in the context of the current consumer market.

Specifically, there's a ton of consumer market share sitting on the fence, asking themselves the old "will I get screwed if I change from Windows to Mac?", so for Apple to even tolerate any suggesting of dropping of legacy support at this time is strategically damaging.


Yeah, OK. So let's continue to support floppy disks, serial ports, DB9 ports, parallel ports, and PPC processors because you don't want anyone to be left behind. What "fence sitter" is waiting to see if PPC processors are going to be supported into the second decade of the 21st century? They only know Intel because they've had those stupid stickers on every box since the beginning of time. Move on.
Click to expand...
 
Sounds like a silly idea, I don't really believe it. I think G5s will be supported for at least the next couple of versions.
 
California said:
Actually this is completey FALSE.

I purchased a BRAND NEW 1.5ghz 12" Powerbook in August of 2006. It would be four years in 2010.

I purchased a BRAND NEW 1.5ghz Mac Mini G4 in
SEPTEMBER of 2006.

I expect at least seven years of updates as needed on my computer purchases. I expect Apple to support my PPCs until 2013, sorry.

I used my 145b Powerbook (PURCHASED NEW in July 1994) until August 2001 and the Powerbook was still great -- it was the Kingston memory upgrade chip that failed and I had lost the original four mb chip. That was seven great years.

I don't appreciate forced obsolescence from Apple if we cannot run the latest OS on our beloved machines. I am STILL currently buying a last generation PPC iBook 12" because they are GREAT machines.
Click to expand...

Please....

You expect to keep your 7 year old computer to run the latest software? :rolleyes:

And good luck getting Developers to write code just for you...


We all heard the rumors about Apple going to Intel chips. You should have listened and waited to buy your new computer.

Cuz thats I what I did...
 
Funny how such worthless speculation can spawn so many replies... :D

One thing: there is no way 10.6 will be available before 2010.

Let's review the release dates:
24 March 2001: 10.0 Cheetah

29 September 2001: 10.1 Puma (=6 months later..)

23 August 2002: 10.2 Jaguar (=11 months later...)

24 October 2003: 10.3 Panther (=14 months later...)

29 April 2005: 10.4 Tiger (=18 months later...)

October 2007: 10.5 Leopard (=30 months later...)

Added the fact that Steve himself has said that the major releases will be less frequent, so you can be assured that it will take 3 years before 10.6 will arrive.
So, probably late 2010, or maybe even early 2011 if there will be some other iGadget that will lengthen the development time of a new OS ;)

If it is late 2010 it would have been only 4 years ago that the latest and greatest PPC was sold... Usually you can upgrade the OS on a Mac at least twice.
I can imagine the following, though:
If Apple were to remove PPC support for new OS releases due to extra cost of keeping the binaries Universal, they might find a way to implement some of the new "goodies" of 10.6 in a paid-upgrade-software for Leopard way.
Imagine Apple having a 10.4 version of Time Machine. Or that Dashboard was made available on Panther. Or that Boot Camp was made Tiger-compatible (ah.. forgot.. it is already! :D).
Ofcourse, the under-the-hood improvements of a new OS cannot be sold, but the app-like "fun stuff" could.

Be honest, a Power Mac G5 Quad with lots of RAM and a good grfx card, is even now an über fast machine. Outperforms a much younger Mac mini or MacBook easily, so it won't be the core speed of the machine that will stop it running 10.6.
It simply will be a cost factor for Apple.

IMHO, Apple should keep the OS universal. Either secretly (like they have done for years, therefore not putting added pressure on developers to keep their apps universal too), or not. The advantage of keeping your OS universal (the just-in-case scenario which Apple has done brilliantly, and being able to use a maybe excellent IBM PPC CPU in the future) must outweigh the cost of it. It seems the hard work had been done when they started the development of the universal OS.
 
mccoma said:
For some reason, I am really more worried about 32-bit being dropped in the next release then the G5s. The G4 is probably gone anyway and all the current Intels are 64-bit. Although, all but the early Intel portables could be upgraded.
Click to expand...
Whoops... Forgot about the 32bit difference in G4/G5 in my post above. I don't see 64bitness being necessary for a while though-- especially with those 32bit Intel's out there.
 
Schtumple said:
...le always loves you to go out and buy their latest machines but still, this is pretty much saying you'll never get a long term investment in macs...
Click to expand...

I've owned my 800MHz G4 iMac for 6 years now. I'd say I got my money's worth, wouldn't you? If I were to buy an Intel Mac today, I'm pretty certain I could get another 6 years.

SpinThis! said:
What's the average Windows machine last? 4 years tops?

Just because you can't run the latest Mac OS X version doesn't mean your "investment" is going to suddenly stop working with all the software you already have.
Click to expand...

Not an entirely fair statement. Unless you buy a Mac Pro (or PowerMac) there isn't a way to upgrade your computer. I can build a VERY capable PC for half the price of a Mac Pro (granted I'll be confined to Windows, but that's my choice). Once that PC is running sluggishly (approx 4 years as you said), I can put under $600 into it and have a brand new PC. With an average Mac, you have to buy a whole new unit... sometimes buying another monitor which you may not need. Yes, I'm talking to you, iMac.

PCs are MUCH MUCH MUCH less of a risky investment solely on their upgradability. When I'm ready to buy my next Mac, I will have to do a lot of research to make sure I'm picking a model that will suit my needs for the next 6 years (my average Mac lifespan).

mccoma said:
For some reason, I am really more worried about 32-bit being dropped in the next release then the G5s. The G4 is probably gone anyway and all the current Intels are 64-bit. Although, all but the early Intel portables could be upgraded.
Click to expand...

Hmm... thus making all G4s, Core Solos and Core Duos non-upgradeable, interesting. This would certainly uncomplicate things for Apple quite a bit, but would alienate anyone who bought a Mac Mini even earlier this year! I'm fairly certain that eliminating PPC would best-simplify things for Apple and have the minimal effect on customer base.

-Clive
 
It's not the processor that's the problem

sblasl said:
Obviously this balloon is being floated now with the intent to give the market the heads up that it will need to make some decisions about how & when it wants to go about transitioning to the intel platform.
Click to expand...

Floated by whom? Apple? No, I think this is just the rumor mill trying to make predictions about what is obvious to generate hits. A new OS wont be ready for another two to three years and the PowerPC archetechture is eventually going to be dropped. It's really not hard to predict that OS X 10.6 will drop support for this leagacy architecture.

Only a moron would expect a five year old computer to run a cutting edge OS in an acceptable manner. You're 1GHz G4s are going to be pokey slow with Leopard, barely acceptable. And three years from now? I doubt the graphics subsystems in these old Macs will be able to do what a next gen OS will require. If you can't aford a new Mac by 2010 quit bitching and be happy with Tiger.
 
OS X cycles are getting longer

I'll be really surprised if 10.6 is out that fast (2009). Look at the historical releases of OS X and it's not linear, but an exponential curve. The OS is just developed so thoroughly that there's not that much more to add with each new release. I'd think 2010 at the earliest, maybe 2011.

So I wouldn't be surprised if they drop PPC support with it by that point (5-6 years since the last PPC macs were sold)

On the other hand if it doesn't cost them anything to compile it for PPC, maybe they'll keep it... Just seems like it would require more effort to optimize for both...
 
Makes sense to me. I mean I still will own 2 PPC Macs then but I wouldn't really mind. Would be ok for me. I am not even sure if I will upgrade the PPCs to 10.5
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back