Mac OS X Snow Leopard Does Require Intel Processors

[AidenShaw]

Microsoft's "Grand Central" will run on XP

The real problem with OS X versus say WindowsXP/Vista/7 is that even if you don't upgrade XP to Vista, almost all new software will continue to work in XP and that will probably be true when Windows7 comes out as well.
...
I'll be watching Windows7 very carefully....

Microsoft is introducing a new Grand-Central-like facility called the "Concurrency Runtime" (AKA "ConcRT" or "Concert").

This will be supported on Windows XP, Windows Vista, and Windows 7. Nice that if a developer rewrites an application to exploit cores and threading on Windows - he can get that benefit on older systems running older hardware.

He doesn't have to make a special "non-ConcRT" version for Vista and XP.

Big difference in the approach to the threading opportunity.

 

[pdjudd]

My point is that they are dumping support for financial reasons, not technical ones, as is usually the case (machines that can't run the new OS because they are too slow or otherwise unable). Personally, I find that a bit disappointing.

So? Apple is a business. It is legally obligated to it's shareholders to earn money. A great way to save money and increase earnings is to maximize its development resources on architectures it does not sell

And apple should support older machines because it helps with customer loyalty. Why should I shell out the cash for today's Mac Pro knowing that apple is more than happy to dump support while the machine is perfectly usable?

So how far back should Apple support? Should they still support Classic? I mean there are people that still use those applications...

Of course they are. But 32 bit intel is dead as well, why are you in favor of dropping support one platform on the grounds that it is "dead" while favoring support for another that is just as "dead"?

Intel 32 bit is only dead as far as its been supplanted by other Intel processors. The PPC is an architecture that had its death blow years earlier when Apple went Intel. Apple is merely saying that a certain archeture is dead. Its not based on age per se, its a platform that is darn near out of all support cycles.

Most of the comments sound like people simply take the position of "I favor apple dropping support of any machine older than the one I happen to own".

No. Its people who realize that PPC is dead and has been ever since Apple announced they were switching to Intel. Honestly, did anybody seriously think that Apple would going to continue to make an ongoing or continued investment in PPC? Heck, even Apple said they were going to be all Intel in a year or so (they beat that estimate though). The minute Apple started selling Intel computers should have been sufficient for people to realize that PPC was not going to be invested by Apple for very much longer.

And 32 bit Intel is also obsolete, they haven't sold it for years either.

*Sigh* I have already stated that 32 bit intel and 64 bit Intel are easier to support together than overhauling the system to support PPC. If you cannot see this is an argument about architecture that Apple has not sold for years, than I cannot help you. This is a PPC versus Intel support. Not a question of 32 vs 64 bit support.

Again, why should Apple make a vested interest in the PPC platform. They have already dropped support for the G3. This is a platform/architecture that Apple deliberately departed from and even announced a time frame when they planned on finishing that transfer.

Apple had to make a support cut-off somewhere They thought the first step was to cut off the PPC head first because it was a bigger obstacle. They had to maintain some rational support for older systems and they did not want to make it based on age alone. they figured that it would be better to optimize for one platform (Intel) than 2. Its too soon to say when the next cutoff, but it's soon going to involve the Intel line. Apple drops support with every OS release. They have to at some point. PPC was the easiest cut to make.

 

[Krafty]

And 32 bit intel is also obsolete, they haven't sold it for years either.

You sure? My first generation MacBook seems to work just fine no matter how obsolete it is. If you think its time for me to upgrade, I'll be waiting for a check from you in the mail for a new one.

 

[SandynJosh]

My 6 year old PowerBook G4 recently bit the dust after an unscheduled run in with the floor from a great height ;o(

Apart from the battery losing it's capacity it ran Leopard perfectly well!

My older-than-dirt G3 800MHz tiny white MacBook is still running leopard. I even had to order the system disks on CDs as it couldn't read DVDs.

I wouldn't have upgraded the OS then but I had to in order to run the version of iTunes needed to communicate with an iPod Nano V4.

While use an Intel MacBook Pro for my work. My 15 year old daughter is totally content with a computer she can write school papers with, enjoy facebook, and download her music.

On topic: To those whiners that can't quite "get it" that time moves on. I've owned Macs since the 128K, OS 1.1g, and have seen a lot of irreversible changes in that time. The current new-to-obsolescence rate is three years. Go with that, or just enjoy what utility you can get out of an obsolete product. There is nothing wrong with an old product that works for its intended use. As part of the human condition we want the latest and greatest with as little pain as possible and sometimes that just isn't going to happen.

 

[AidenShaw]

And 32 bit intel is also obsolete, they haven't sold it for years either.

Not completely true. Intel is still selling 32-bit Atom processors.

They also have some older chips that are "extended life" for embedded systems, where Intel guarantees availability for many years.

 

[Bye Bye Baby]

Inevitable and sensible. Despite only owning PPC machines I can understand and appreciate that it was time for Apple to move on, and time for me to buy some new kit

Yes it is true. And I agree. Even though I own a Powerbook G4.

 

[aafuss1]

Bet it'll refuse to install on systems with less than 1GB of RAM (like my Core Solo Mac mini).

 

[FF_productions]

For the whiners, you knew PPC was going to be phased out in June of 2005. It's Mid-2009, how long did you guys expect them to support you? Leopard's not good enough for you guys?

 

[Eidorian]

Not completely true. Intel is still selling 32-bit Atom processors.

They also have some older chips that are "extended life" for embedded systems, where Intel guarantees availability for many years.

It's disturbing that Intel sold certain Atom models without 64-bit support. You could almost say the same with VT. That's changing now with Windows 7 and AMD's pressure. The new E6xxx line and future Celeron E3xxx are going to support VT on a budget scale.

AMD has been doing that for years instead of pushing users up to more expensive processors for more features.

 

[castlema]

My girlfriend, brother, parents and I all have Intel Macs so I'm not sad.

Get rid of your PPC Mac already! It's time to switch to Intel! It's sooooo much better! You won't regret it, I swear!

Many of us do not have the option to upgrade hardware. I will probably never get rid of my G5 beause I still use Classic programs that have long since be orphaned and were never re-written for OSX.

Many schools are in the same place, dependent of software purchased in the 1990's with grant money and now they find themselves with an IT department which tells them if you want new hardware is has to be Windows even if this means that you have to give up software you use every day.

 

[uberamd]

I read this thread, and was laughing almost the entire time. Those crying about the loss of PPC support are clueless, its almost funny. Your PPC system will NOT be obsolete (I am typing on a PowerMac G5 dual 1.8GHz), it will still work just fine but you won't have the Snow Leopard stuff, big deal. If you want the latest and greatest OS, get some more current hardware. Apple doesn't owe customers anything because it never agreed to support PPC forever. The Intel move was announced before many of you got your PPC stuff anyway, so that was your own fault.

And I absolutely LOVE the people tossing out made up statistics about PPC users.

 

[TheSpaz]

Many of us do not have the option to upgrade hardware. I will probably never get rid of my G5 beause I still use Classic programs that have long since be orphaned and were never re-written for OSX.

Many schools are in the same place, dependent of software purchased in the 1990's with grant money and now they find themselves with an IT department which tells them if you want new hardware is has to be Windows even if this means that you have to give up software you use every day.

Do you realize how backwards that sounds? Any Intel Mac can run Windows natively. Hardware has nothing to do with Windows. Windows is software. Also, what Classic apps are you still using that don't have an OS X version or equivalent software? I'm not sure what you do, but I'm sure you can find other software to use that is compatible with OS X. It's time to move on man... you have to change some day.

Oh, and I forgot to say: Why do you feel the need to upgrade to Snow Leopard then anyway? If you *need* the G5 for old Classic apps, then you sure as heck can live with an older operating system right?

 

[nuckinfutz]

Jeezus people

By the time Sept rolls around the youngest PPC computer will be nearing 4 years old. That's a typical hardware refresh cycle for many company.

Out with the old in with the new.

 

[Truffy]

Apple will continue to support Tiger, Leopard, etc

No they won't. Apple supports each OS version (in terms of security fixes etc) for the lifetime of the following OS. This means that they are currently supporting Tiger and Leopard. But once SL comes out they will (likely) cease to support Tiger. And once 10.7 is released Leopard support will similarly cease.

 

[Mitch1984]

I thought it was 64 bit only thought they cleared all the lagacy stuff out of snow leopard.

 

[*LTD*]

Unfortunately, that line pretty much destroys any possible credibility you might have thought you had and labels you as an Apple fanboy. Sorry.

Oh, and I've used an Apple computer since 1983 and even I wouldn't make that claim! LOL

I'm not here for anyone's approval. I'm here to make my comments and that's it.

And I don't hide the fact that I'm an Apple "fanboy."

MS makes it so damn easy, year after year.

 

[3.1416]

I really feel sorry for those that bought G5 Quads.

Why? Those were released after the Intel announcement; anybody who bought one should have known they were getting a dead-end architecture and shouldn't have counted on more than a few years of support. I'm actually surprised Apple added 64-bit PPC support in Leopard.

In effect, I believe Apple has just killed support for nearly half their user base. Good job Apple. You just shrunk your user base from 9% to 4-5%

I'm pretty sure well over half of active Macs are Intel. Supporting PPC in Snow Leopard wouldn't double the number of users who could take advantage of it; it *would* double the amount of testing and support required.

 

[Braz0s]

For the whiners, you knew PPC was going to be phased out in June of 2005. It's Mid-2009, how long did you guys expect them to support you? Leopard's not good enough for you guys?

Plus, don't complain until there's software that won't run - at all - on your PPC 10.5 unit. Not running "fast" is not a valid complaint.

 

[pdjudd]

I thought it was 64 bit only thought they cleared all the lagacy stuff out of snow leopard.

They cleaned out PPC legacy. Most of the OS is 64 bit. There are just a few apps that remain 32-bit. There is also some 32-bit legacy support for 3rd party applications that remain 32 bit. Again, I refer to this link right off of Apple's website to understand what Apple did as far as 64-bit support since people continuously do not understand what it means.

Its going to be a while before Apple removes all 32 bit application support simply because of 3rd party support. See here:

To ensure simplicity and flexibility, Mac OS X still comes in one version that runs both 64-bit and 32-bit applications. So you don’t need to update everything on your system just to run a single 64-bit program

 

[*LTD*]

Are people actually thinking Apple's user base will now shrinK??? LOL

Every time I see a comment that begins with "Congratulations, Apple, you just ________", the exact opposite happens.

Apple's user base does NOT reflect the sentiments of the Mac fansite moaning minority. Never did.

 

[pdjudd]

Why? Those were released after the Intel announcement; anybody who bought one should have known they were getting a dead-end architecture and shouldn't have counted on more than a few years of support.

We can still feel sorry... But sympathy should only go so far. Some people had to get a PPC mac for no reason other than to have a current system to run Classic. There is also people who purchased simply because their company needed to replace specific hardware now (at that time) and couldn't wait for Intel hardware much less 64 bit Intel hardware

Of course they knew that they were getting into a dead end platform (I am sure some people deluded themselves into thinking that Apple would keep PPC longer than they did, but they are the exception).

 

[Amdahl]

Previous version were 64bit as well. It's just that SL will be even more 64bit than previous versions were.

No, 10.6 is the first version of OSX that actually has a 64-bit kernel. Previous versions were 32-bit with the ability to run a 64-bit application process. All new 64-bit drivers will be required in Snow Leopard, so you Intel bigots can expect to experience hardware obsolescence as well. At least you'll deserve it for technical reasons.

If you purchased bargain computers after apple replaced them, then I don't have too much sympathy.

Good, so you're on the PPC team. Because Apple sold G5s at full price through the end of 2006. They knew the Intel systems had no software support and their serious customers needed systems that worked.

 

[zweigand]

I'm pretty sure well over half of active Macs are Intel. Supporting PPC in Snow Leopard wouldn't double the number of users who could take advantage of it; it *would* double the amount of testing and support required.

Most of those PPC Mac sales were laptops and iMacs with single core processors and ancient GPUs …systems that would get no benefit at all. There just aren't that many PowerMacs out there. Saying Apple is smacking HALF of it's users in the face with this upgrade is hilarious!

 

[pdjudd]

All new 64-bit drivers will be required in Snow Leopard, so you Intel bigots can expect to experience hardware obsolescence as well. At least you'll deserve it for technical reasons.

1) I don't really appreciate being called an "Intel Bigot". Lets keep the insults down to zero, OK?
2) Hardware gets obsoleted. That's always going to be the case regardless of the platform you are on. I fail to see your point...
3) Your first statement is wrong. Snow Leopard supports all Intel processors and still incorporates 32 bit support. If you had read my link to Apple's page, you could have seen:

To ensure simplicity and flexibility, Mac OS X still comes in one version that runs both 64-bit and 32-bit applications. So you don’t need to update everything on your system just to run a single 64-bit program. And new 64-bit applications work just fine with your existing printers, storage devices, and PCI cards.

Emphasis mine. Please read the link I have provided about 64 bit support in Snow Leopard. I have quoted it 3 times now..

While no one can speak of later OSX releases, we can speak about the next one quite well. And that one will incorporate support for 32 bit programs and drivers.

 

[pdjudd]

Most of those PPC Mac sales were laptops and iMacs with single core processors and ancient GPUs …systems that would get no benefit at all. There just aren't that many PowerMacs out there. Saying Apple is smacking HALF of it's users in the face with this upgrade is hilarious!

Agreed. Looking at all that technology that SL will offer, its hard to make the case that PPC would get much if any sort of an advantage. And that assumes that Apple was interested in PPC, something we know not to be the case. It just makes sense that Apple looked at PPC, knew that there was litlle benefit to investing much further effort into it and decided that since it would happen now or the next release, decided to drop it now and give people who can, the chance to get Leopard.

Apple of course knew that people would bitch about it, but Apple knew that they would get it no matter when it happened.