Mac OS X Snow Leopard Does Require Intel Processors

[AidenShaw]

Microsoft doesn't just support, it enhances

Microsoft is not a good comparison (unfortunately they are the only one) since they have continuous investment with millions of more people - the difference if scale is ridiculous. They bend over backwards to support legacy systems years after they should be retired because it is demanded of them by their customers.

Microsoft doesn't just support legacy systems, it continues to enhance them to increase their value and ensure that they can connect with newer systems.

For example - Microsoft is rolling out a Grand Central Dispatch feature with Windows 7 - it's called "ConcRT" (pronounced "concert", for "concurrency runtime).

ConcRT, however, will be supported on Windows 7, Windows Vista, and Windows XP. Older systems with multiple processors will get the advantages of the new technology - sweet.

It is especially sweet for the developers. They can add multi-threading optimizations to their Windows products - and know that their market is virtually every Windows system that's running.

If a vendor has a product for Apples, then any GCD enhancements can only be used by the few (at first) people running 10.6. They'll have to build a second, non-GCD version for 10.5 and older systems. Yuck.

Yes, Microsoft's approach to support is very different .

 

[zweigand]

Yes, Microsoft's approach to support is very different .

It has to be, they are making their money on software, not hardware.

 

[Eidorian]

It has to be, they are making their money on software, not hardware.

Apple might not admit it but we know they cashed out on their hardware profit already. It has been mentioned before but they can afford to make the upgrade price $29 for a single license and $49 for a family. They can still make some money on being modest on how Snow Leopard is a touch up update on Leopard.

 

[zweigand]

Apple might not admit it but we know they cashed out on their hardware profit already. It has been mentioned before but they can afford to make the upgrade price $29 for a single license and $49 for a family. They can still make some money on being modest on how Snow Leopard is a touch up update on Leopard.

They are not making it $29 because of the amount of work that went into SL. If they were, it would be $129 just like the rest of the updates. They priced it at $29 to make sure people upgrade. Apple knows that the benefits of this update only come if developers update their code and lose backward compatibility. They don't want developers to have to face the dilemma of "features and performance" vs "larger customer base". Developers can assume that everyone running Leopard will either update automatically …or can easily be persuaded to in order to run an important application. (minus the PPC stragglers that should be updating soon anyway)

These are not trivial changes. This is a sea change. 64-bit, multi-core, and GPU enhanced computing. Apple wants developers on board …they want the partners behind OpenCL to see that it's a worthy cause …and they want to start using all this sweet new technology in their own friggin apps.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Apple announced its plans to switch to intel 4 years ago this month and the first G5s debuted 6 years ago this month. I think its about time to stop catering to the Power PC with new operating systems and it is as good of a time as ever with an inexpensive OS upgrade that is designed to increase efficiency for a majority of its user base.

...

In other words, I'm selfish and only care about myself therefore I will get on a message board and tell those stupid PPC users that they should just shut up and go buy a new computer like Apple wants them to and stop complaining. For goodness sake, a 4-year old computer is WORTHLESS! They are incapable of browsing, word processing and doing basic things like e-mail! All PPC users who have towers should just go buy a Mac Pro for $2600 and shut up.

Well, at least that post would be HONEST instead of skating around your own selfish needs and pretending like you give a hoot about anyone but yourself when you state how stupid people were to buy PPC Macs 3 to 4 years ago when they just "knew" that Apple would desert them in less than 3 years, despite the fact that computers from 8 years ago are fully capable of doing 85% of the task out there. After all, how much CPU power does one need to watch a DVD or browse the web when a 400-some odd MHz iPhone can do it.... No, I'm afraid a G5 Quad from 3 years ago is FASTER than many Intel machines out there, but they don't make Apple big money so screw those users! The ONLY TRUTH is that Apple wants to FORCE you to buy another computer.

There is no other reason to drop PPC after a mere 3 years from the last G5 Quad being sold. No computer becomes worthless in 3 years. Straw mans like saving hard drive space are such a freaking JOKE it's unbelievable when you can get 1.5TB for a mere $120. Given Apple's current development system, it'd probably have been easier to KEEP PPC support than get rid of it from a technical standpoint, but from a financial one why even support hardware that is less than 1 year old? Oh wait. My MBP from last October won't have H.264 hardware acceleration. I guess they really don't even support their own NEW hardware. Apple = Greed.

I don't expect my comments to change anything. Apple is what it is. But it constantly AMAZES me how Apple supporting fanatics blindly accept everything that Apple does EXCEPT when they are the ones getting screwed personally by Apple. Then suddenly the whole world shifts and they find themselves the ones being berated by the fanatics for not buying Apple Care or for buying a Mac at a certain time when they KNEW that a new one was coming out later that year sometime....(like new computers aren't constantly coming out or something). Frankly, a simple reply of "That's too bad for PPC users" wouldn't tick anyone off. It's this callous "You should get over it and just go buy a new computer" attitude that ticks us off. I *DID* buy a new computer last Fall. My MBP isn't going to be used as a server, though. My PowerMac is more than capable of serving audio/video files around my house. It's Apple that is trying to make it worthless. For those that think regular Leopard is good enough, they don't consider that Snow Leopard means that Universal binaries will dry up because developers in the Mac community usually cannot be bothered to support older operating systems. Just look at all the current software that won't run under Tiger anymore and the differences between Leopard and Tiger are a LOT smaller than that between Leopard and Snow Leopard, IMO.

The ironic thing is, of course, if I had bought an 8-year old PC I could still easily use it as a server for a long time to come because iTunes is available for XP as is Safari, etc. How much longer will it be available in its newest versions for Leopard? Who knows. Apple supports older versions of Windows than it does its own operating systems. What does THAT say about buying Apple hardware? They want Windows users to buy from the iTunes store but they want Mac users to buy new computers? LOL.

The moral of the story is buy PC hardware and hack it if you must to run the Mac OS. It'll at least still run Windows when all is said and done. I could install Ubuntu on this PowerMac in the future, but Apple doesn't support Linux for iTunes so it won't help my audio/visual server much. And of course, PPC machines don't run Windows.

 

[pdjudd]

They are not making it $29 because of the amount of work that went into SL. If they were, it would be $129 just like the rest of the updates. They priced it at $29 to make sure people upgrade. Apple knows that the benefits of this update only come if developers update their code and lose backward compatibility. They don't want developers to have to face the dilemma of "features and performance" vs "larger customer base". Developers can assume that everyone running Leopard will either update automatically …or can easily be persuaded to in order to run an important application. (minus the PPC stragglers that should be updating soon anyway)

Thats why I think they kept compatibility for the early 32 bit Intel chips. Apple figured that it wasn't worth supporting PPC any longer - Apple Care for those guys was either over or nearly over. Apple figured that tiger was the bare minimum cut off point. If people using older versions of OSX hadn't updated to tiger than forget it. Obviously, Apple used Tiger as a transition point for the first Intel users, but Apple knew that most of these guys had probably upgraded to Leopard - After all Apple had already encouraged people to upgrade last November. PPC was an easy decision, but Apple figured that since they already had to build 32 bit support for Applications anyway, the core solo and core duo folks could at least take advantage of something of Snow Leopard. Apple's mindset with Snow Leopards pricing was "lets get everyone that has already upgraded to Leopard on Intels a good reason to upgrade to the latest version even if the benefits are small. Heck, I have a core 2 duo and I won't benefit all that much.

 

[uberamd]

In other words, I'm selfish and only care about myself therefore I will get on a message board and tell those stupid PPC users that they should just shut up and go buy a new computer like Apple wants them to and stop complaining. For goodness sake, a 4-year old computer is WORTHLESS! They are incapable of browsing, word processing and doing basic things like e-mail! All PPC users who have towers should just go buy a Mac Pro for $2600 and shut up.

Their computer is not ANY less capable after Snow Leopard comes out than it was before snow leopard, is it? It can still do what its used for now, and will forever be able to do what you use it for now.

Example: Ford released a sweet front grill on the 2003 Ford Expeditions. Did those who bought a 2002 Ford Expedition complain tirelessly because they can't get that sweet looking grill on their 2002 models? Um, no. Their car is JUST as functional as it was in 2002, but designs have moved on. They can keep their 2002, or buy the 2003 if it means that much to them.

 

[zweigand]

Apple supports older versions of Windows than it does its own operating systems. What does THAT say about buying Apple hardware? They want Windows users to buy from the iTunes store but they want Mac users to buy new computers?

If apple didn't support WinXP how many Windows users would be buying iPods and iPhones?

How much hardware would Apple sell if they ported Snow Leopard to PPC?

As a stockholder, I'm happy.

 

[diamond.g]

If apple didn't support WinXP how many Windows users would be buying iPods and iPhones?

How much hardware would Apple sell if they ported Snow Leopard to PPC?

As a stockholder, I'm happy.

With respect to needing Windows it kind of makes Apple hypocritical. If they are as good as they claim to be they shouldn't need Windows to post these record profits.

 

[AidenShaw]

If Apple...

With respect to needing Windows it kind of makes Apple hypocritical. If they are as good as they claim to be they shouldn't need Windows to post these record profits.

If Apple were a computer company, right.

A consumer gadget company, however, can't ignore the 90% of the market that is not using Apple computers.

 

[uberamd]

With respect to needing Windows it kind of makes Apple hypocritical. If they are as good as they claim to be they shouldn't need Windows to post these record profits.

Cheap shot. They saw an opportunity for $ and took it. Maybe if the Zune supported Mac they would have actually sold a few?

 

[Eidorian]

Cheap shot. They saw an opportunity for $ and took it. Maybe if the Zune supported Mac they would have actually sold a few?

That's what I keep telling people.

 

[diamond.g]

If Apple were a computer company, right.

A consumer gadget company, however, can't ignore the 90% of the market that is not using Apple computers.

Oh, I like my Apple stuff. I just find it amusing that Apple is able to take pot shots at it's cash cow, and no one finds it in the least bit hypocritical.

Cheap shot. They saw an opportunity for $ and took it. Maybe if the Zune supported Mac they would have actually sold a few?

Eh, Microsoft doesn't need to support Zune on the Mac, when they have Apple falling all over themselves to support Exchange.


(I consider that a cheap shot.)

 

[uberamd]

Eh, Microsoft doesn't need to support Zune on the Mac, when they have Apple falling all over themselves to support Exchange.


(I consider that a cheap shot.)

Touche, sir.

 

[zweigand]

With respect to needing Windows it kind of makes Apple hypocritical. If they are as good as they claim to be they shouldn't need Windows to post these record profits.

Eliminating 90% of potential buyers is probably not the best way to try and start a technology revolution. But what do I know?

 

[Quillz]

Now that Snow Leopard is Intel-only, it will probably put the folks who develop Xslimmer out of business.

 

[flopticalcube]

Now that Snow Leopard is Intel-only, it will probably put the folks who develop Xslimmer out of business.

There is always the stripping of x86 and x64 binaries.

 

[Tallest Skil]

Now that Snow Leopard is Intel-only, it will probably put the folks who develop Xslimmer out of business.

Never underestimate the ability of Apple to make an architecture change.

If Steve had his way, they'd make their processors in-house.

 

[zweigand]

Now that Snow Leopard is Intel-only, it will probably put the folks who develop Xslimmer out of business.

I'd feel much worse for all the developers with screen recording software.

 

[NoSmokingBandit]

Now that Snow Leopard is Intel-only, it will probably put the folks who develop Xslimmer out of business.

No way dude. Most of the fluff i fund in apps are the extra language files. Granted, they are going to compress these in SL, but its still extra used space. Most of Apples apps like iTunes, iCal, and Mail have enormous language files and they get slimmed down a huge amount.

 

[chrono1081]

Wow

After seeing all these posts about people being pissed that snow leopard wont work on 4 year old machines you have to ask yourself...

HOW ARE YOU SUPRISED!?!?!?

In the computer world generally new stuff doesn't run well on older hardware. Its been this way for ages whether it be Windows, Mac, whatever. Thats just the nature of computers.

Maybe it wasn't possible to create snowleopard the way it was designed to run on the power pc architecture and they HAD to use intel only. They are very different systems but it seems like everyone on this board is a computer science major and somehow still thinks otherwise.

I'm all for innovation in the computer industry. If you keep trying to support old legacy systems all the time you'll never move forward. (I'm looking your way microsoft)

 

[iEdd]

After seeing all these posts about people being pissed that snow leopard wont work on 4 year old machines you have to ask yourself...

4 years isn't that old, and most people are complaining about machines that will still be ≤3 years old when SL comes out.

It seems in the Windows world, you pick the most stable OS, like a 5 year old version of XP and leave it at that, as updating (eg. Vista) will make you worse off. Using macs my whole life, the standard is you buy a computer and get the latest update ASAP for 5 years or so until the computer can't really do day to day tasks (maybe 8 years for a Powermac/Mac Pro). Certainly is reasonable to expect 5 years of updates for a Powermac G5 before end-of-life-ing it. My original guess from the start was 10.7 was going to be the first Intel only.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Their computer is not ANY less capable after Snow Leopard comes out than it was before snow leopard, is it? It can still do what its used for now, and will forever be able to do what you use it for now.

Example: Ford released a sweet front grill on the 2003 Ford Expeditions. Did those who bought a 2002 Ford Expedition complain tirelessly because they can't get that sweet looking grill on their 2002 models? Um, no. Their car is JUST as functional as it was in 2002, but designs have moved on. They can keep their 2002, or buy the 2003 if it means that much to them.

By that line of thinking a Commodore Vic 20 is still a viable computer because it can still do what it did the day it was abandoned....

For my particular primary uses, it will become completely unusable the day they no longer update iTunes for Leopard and/or when Firefox is no longer updated for it. Beyond that, most other software will be stuck in "x" version much sooner. That's fine if something like MetaX is "good enough' for you. An older version still works with Tiger. Does that mean I want to keep using Tiger when a much BETTER version is available for Leopard? No. It doesn't. Who wants to use old software? I might as well go downstairs and fire up my old Amiga 3000. It'll still run Aweb 2.x like it did back in 1999. The problem is that the Web more or less no longer uses those standards that tended to work with that browser back then. 95% of all sites are worthless with it now. The same will happen to all PowerPC machines in time just as it has already happened to OS9. Try to use OS9 browsers and e-mail clients today. They still work. That doesn't mean all sites work with them. Yeah, Photoshop 6 still works too. That doesn't mean it's as good as Photoshop CS4 and good luck finding a printer that works with it. My Brother Laser printer works, but my Inkjet does not. In a few years, the same will be true of Leopard with newer printers.

In other words, what's your point???

My PowerMac's days as an audio/visual server were always numbered, but now they're numbered a lot shorter. Heck, I just switched to Leopard for full time use a few months ago (still using Tiger because it was faster and ran Classic before that even though I have both installed (OS9 too for that matter)) but the increasing amount of arbitrary software that stopped supporting Tiger was becoming annoying (e.g. MetaX, Handbrake, Toast Titanium, etc.) plus some things like a hacked AppleTV running XBMC didn't like Tiger's SMB support at all (at least not for enabling security by directory without a password). The PowerMac's problem is not its CPU capability (still only 1/2 the speed of a brand new Intel CPU core running a 50% faster clock rate, which is more than sufficient for most apps) or its graphics card (ATI 9800 Pro is better than a GMA 950 for many things and has core graphics support). Games from a mere 3 years ago even run fine (a few from today as well like World of Goo). This computer has another 5 years in it easy. But it'll be dead in less than 2 due to Apple dropping support which will lead to Universal Binaries being dropped and thus the death of the platform. Apple thinks this will mean another sale for them, but Dell (Assembled in USA) will get my money (or I'll buy it all ala carte and assemble it myself), not Apple, whom doesn't deserve my money any longer as far as I'm concerned. I've purchased a MBP, two AppleTVs and an iPod Touch from them in the past two years, but I've had enough of them putting their profit before the customer from everything from poor included warranties (as if their prices weren't sky high enough, they insult you with the shortest warranty in the business short of pay for an extended warranty, which is like throwing money down the drai most of the time as are all extended warranties in general) to not offering the customer real desktop computer choices. I want a mid-range expandable desktop, not an iMac and the MacPro is too expensive to serve to fill that market segment.

Treat the customer badly and he won't come back.

If apple didn't support WinXP how many Windows users would be buying iPods and iPhones?

How much hardware would Apple sell if they ported Snow Leopard to PPC?

As a stockholder, I'm happy.

I would state it more as a matter of how many computers wont Apple sell in the future if they tick off all their previous customers by dropping support early in an obvious attempt to force them to upgrade a given computer before they're ready (or it's needed)??? Not everything is a measure of computer sales. Sometimes it's a question of LOST SALES. I will now buy a PC and hack it instead of buying from Apple and that is a DIRECT result of being unhappy with their product offerings and their utter lack of support for prior sales (some people's Apple Care hasn't even expired on their G5 yet for goodness sake!) You do the math. Short term profit is short-sighted. Sometimes you have to look past the next quarter and see where your return (long term) customers are at and if they're still with you or not.

As for being a stockholder, we'll see how happy you are in a couple of years, if you haven't dumped them already by then. I can't see Apple's happy days going on forever if they keep dictating to customers instead of listening to them.

 

[zweigand]

I would state it more as a matter of how many computers wont Apple sell in the future if they tick off all their previous customers by dropping support early in an obvious attempt to force them to upgrade a given computer before they're ready (or it's needed)??? Not everything is a measure of computer sales. Sometimes it's a question of LOST SALES.

They aren't dropping PPC support to force people to upgrade, no matter what YOU may think. They came to a fork in their road and they can clearly see the dead end to one of the paths. Don't blame them for choosing not to walk all the way down that path for no reason. If there were a gem at the end that was actually worth the trouble, sure, but there's no gem left with PPC.

I will now buy a PC and hack it instead of buying from Apple and that is a DIRECT result of being unhappy with their product offerings and their utter lack of support for prior sales (some people's Apple Care hasn't even expired on their G5 yet for goodness sake!) You do the math. Short term profit is short-sighted. Sometimes you have to look past the next quarter and see where your return (long term) customers are at and if they're still with you or not.

 

[uberamd]

By that line of thinking a Commodore Vic 20 is still a viable computer because it can still do what it did the day it was abandoned....

For my particular primary uses, it will become completely unusable the day they no longer update iTunes for Leopard and/or when Firefox is no longer updated for it. Beyond that, most other software will be stuck in "x" version much sooner. That's fine if something like MetaX is "good enough' for you. An older version still works with Tiger. Does that mean I want to keep using Tiger when a much BETTER version is available for Leopard? No. It doesn't. Who wants to use old software? I might as well go downstairs and fire up my old Amiga 3000. It'll still run Aweb 2.x like it did back in 1999. The problem is that the Web more or less no longer uses those standards that tended to work with that browser back then. 95% of all sites are worthless with it now. The same will happen to all PowerPC machines in time just as it has already happened to OS9. Try to use OS9 browsers and e-mail clients today. They still work. That doesn't mean all sites work with them. Yeah, Photoshop 6 still works too. That doesn't mean it's as good as Photoshop CS4 and good luck finding a printer that works with it. My Brother Laser printer works, but my Inkjet does not. In a few years, the same will be true of Leopard with newer printers.

In other words, what's your point???

My PowerMac's days as an audio/visual server were always numbered, but now they're numbered a lot shorter. Heck, I just switched to Leopard for full time use a few months ago (still using Tiger because it was faster and ran Classic before that even though I have both installed (OS9 too for that matter)) but the increasing amount of arbitrary software that stopped supporting Tiger was becoming annoying (e.g. MetaX, Handbrake, Toast Titanium, etc.) plus some things like a hacked AppleTV running XBMC didn't like Tiger's SMB support at all (at least not for enabling security by directory without a password). The PowerMac's problem is not its CPU capability (still only 1/2 the speed of a brand new Intel CPU core running a 50% faster clock rate, which is more than sufficient for most apps) or its graphics card (ATI 9800 Pro is better than a GMA 950 for many things and has core graphics support). Games from a mere 3 years ago even run fine (a few from today as well like World of Goo). This computer has another 5 years in it easy. But it'll be dead in less than 2 due to Apple dropping support which will lead to Universal Binaries being dropped and thus the death of the platform. Apple thinks this will mean another sale for them, but Dell (Assembled in USA) will get my money (or I'll buy it all ala carte and assemble it myself), not Apple, whom doesn't deserve my money any longer as far as I'm concerned. I've purchased a MBP, two AppleTVs and an iPod Touch from them in the past two years, but I've had enough of them putting their profit before the customer from everything from poor included warranties (as if their prices weren't sky high enough, they insult you with the shortest warranty in the business short of pay for an extended warranty, which is like throwing money down the drai most of the time as are all extended warranties in general) to not offering the customer real desktop computer choices. I want a mid-range expandable desktop, not an iMac and the MacPro is too expensive to serve to fill that market segment.

Treat the customer badly and he won't come back.

What's my point? My point is exactly what I said, if you want to keep using your computer for what its used for now, you can continue to do so. BUT, if you, for whatever reason, feel like you MUST keep getting new software but NEVER update your hardware, you are out of luck. The reasoning that you can infinitely update software but never update hardware is asinine on your part. Sorry, but it is.

And you say "treat the customer badly and he won't come back." Seriously? You have NOT been an Apple customer (as far as hardware is concerned) for at least 3 years, and by the time Leopard is no longer supported it will be around 5 years likely. So you have not been a customer to Apple for a long time anyway. In other words, you no longer matter to them.