Mac OS X Snow Leopard Drops PowerPC Support

[kabunaru]

I think people should forget about Snow Leopard now. In a year we will be all laughing at these comments made. By then, Apple will release Snow Leopard for both Intel and PPC and everybody will be happy.

 

[gehrbox]

No many of these apps are newer versions than on 10.5.3 and are still universal. Therefore we can safely assume that Apple has in fact recompiled them for the 10.6 DP. The fact that they have not disabled building for PPC indicates that they are still wanting to support PPC.

Be careful using the word assume. Apple does have builds of 10.5.x that you do not.

 

[newfoundglory]

Guys, its seems quite clear this is an optimized version of Leopard. It doesnt take a genius to work out there is not much more optimizing that can be done on the PowerPC platform - hey, didnt Apple just do this with 10.5 Leopard anyway?!?!?!?! Apply spent a long time getting OS X 10.5 to run smooth even with the slower G4's. I know this, because I have a G4 Mac mini.

But I have a theory. There WILL be a PowerPC version of 10.6. and the reason for this is quite simple - to keep the PPC folk (like me) happy.

10.6 will be optimized for everything Intel - 4 or 8 cores, new extended instruction sets etc. There is simply NO FURTHER WORK TO DO for PowerPC. It cant be made faster or better. The chip technology simply isnt there.

I hope Apple releases an Intel-only 10.6, and a PowerPC-only version of 10.6. PowerPC users may see minor speed increases (eg Safari) but no new features. Non-universal-no-fat-binary apps mean more disk space for all involved.

 

[Cloudane]

why named snow?

'Cause there's snow new features. Boom boom.

Tough luck G5 users, but as I've said all along those who bought them after the Intel announcement instead of holding off, were asking for trouble. Believing Apple would keep them worthwhile for more than a couple of years was naive, at best! But hey, you've still got Slow Leopard It'll help Apple to differentiate between the PPC and Intel chips a little more in their pitch to get you to move on.

I like how people are thinking PPC support might suddenly come back during the development, kind of like when a person you know dies and you think "maybe it wasn't that person" maybe this maybe that etc. RIP PowerPC

 

[Anuba]

If apple is abandoning PPC, they are sending the message to devs to do it too. You really think if apple dumps it in 2009, there will still be many PPC apps in 2011?

They sent out that message a long time ago, even though they didn't spell it out... Devs who use XCode will have noticed how it's been getting increasingly difficult to optimize for PPC over the last couple of years.

 

[EagerDragon]

I hope Apple releases an Intel-only 10.6, and a PowerPC-only version of 10.6. PowerPC users may see minor speed increases (eg Safari) but no new features. Non-universal-no-fat-binary apps mean more disk space for all involved.

I do not see Apple developing a PPC version since the majority of PPC users would not want to buy 10.6. Outside of ZFS which a lot of people do not need, it provides no advantage to PPC users, basically it is the same as 10.5.

If there were all sorts of features, yes, but 10.6 is pretty feature less so why would a PPC user buy 10.6 if it was available?

But it does seem to me that Apple will be going to 10.7 fairly quickly after 10.6 comes out (8 to 12 month later). I expect 10.7 will be the one going after Windows 7. OSX 10.6 is the foundation build for 10.7, the first 100% 64 bit OS that for the first time takes full advantage of the hardware. 10.6 will be a snoozer features wise, the flashy features will be in 10.7 then.

 

[Anuba]

Looks like we have troll that sneaked onto the forum. I don't get why people do that. As a Mac user, I have never felt the urge to hangout on PC forums and stir up trouble. I suppose some folks have nothing better to do with their lonely desperate lives.

As a Mac and PC user, I have never felt the urge to refer to critics of the respective platforms as "trolls", because I'm not tethered by any platform loyalty and don't feel obliged to blindly defend one or the other.

 

[GeeYouEye]

What I don't understand is why PPC users think they even need Snow Leopard. It's not a new major OS version like Jaguar, Tiger and Leopard, it's not even Leopard deluxe. The mission statement says no new features. It will only address speed and stability. Ditching PPC support is the very fundament of that process, it allows them to clean out tons of legacy ballast and focus all their efforts on streamlining and fine tuning the Intel code.

Heck, tons of people are still on Tiger, Intel Mac owners included, and it's not like Snow Leopard is coming tomorrow. It's ONE YEAR away. 10.5 will receive more updates and will serve you fine until at least 2010, and do you honestly see yourselves still clinging to your PPCs in the fall of 2010, when the youngest of PPCs will be 5 years old and the oldest will be, uh, like really reeeeally old?

Contrary to popular perception, not all Mac developers are rich and have x thousands to drop on a new development machine. While Leopard doesn't have much in the way of end-user features, the developer feature set is HUGE!

Then why no official announcement to the Developers? This is probably the biggest indicator that PPC support is at least still an option. Developers won't want to waste time and money trying to get things to compile into universal binaries under Snow Leopard if Snow Leopard isn't going to support PPC.

Indeed.

In Snow Leopard the exploit that osx86 and Phystar uses is gone because Apple has dropped Power PC support. Basicly the Power PC did not have APM chip inside it but the intel chip does. Snow Leopard activates this chip and now no one would be able to crack inside it. That's how they get OS X running on un-authorized PCs. So nuts to you below me... and I am sorry about my grammar. I was typing in a hurry.

You have no standing to speak on this, troll, even if your premises were correct. (mods: he really is a troll, or has some sort of internet munchausen syndrome. He harasses members over AIM on a regular basis. He faked a phishing email indicating he'd paid for an iPhone from Nigeria to drum up sympathy for himself, and has ignored requests that he stop bothering me.) Still, for those who may not realize that, neither Intel nor PPC chips have a TPM chip internally, nor do the motherboards on which they ship, as of late 2006.

Anyway, the big decrease in file size is due entirely to stripping out all languages but English. The apps are universal; the PPC code, not just the indicators, is still present. After all, it's only build 96. If Apple develops primarily on x86, it makes sense that they might not have finished building PPC support yet.

 

[Amdahl]

Huh? How was it sold as "brand new top-o-the-line 7.5 months ago"? I think you're confusing "Refurbished" (read: outdated) with "Brand New". The PowerMac G5 line was discontinued in August of 2006, nearly two years ago. Any G5 sold after than was most certainly not billed as top of the line, nor was compatibility promised.

I'm not talking about G5s, although it is a bigger problem for PPC. I'm talking about 10.4. It was selling at full price in Apple stores 7.5 months ago. With Apple's current policy, it will no longer get security updates in January 09 (assuming Snow Leopard ships on time.) That needs to change. Linux does it better, Microsoft does it better. Apple needs to grow up and face the realities of their market share.

 

[KingYaba]

You're damn right it has. I have the last rev dual core G5 that's a little over two years old. Support should NOT be dropped on a machine that young.

Certainly hurts the faith people have in Apple. You invest a lot of $ in a machine you expected to run up-to-date software for half a decade. Why buy a Mac Pro if they could potentially suffer the same fate? What if 10.7 is multi-touch Mac only?

 

[bobertoq]

IMO, this is good news because if PPC support is dropped, Apple can take out all the PPC code, which would save a lot of space. Anyways, this had to happen sometime.

 

[gnasher729]

How many Dual G5s are still in use? Those are the only PPC Macs that would actually benefit from Snow Leopard.

Quite to the contrary. If Snow Leopard is for stability and performance, then I expect that the artificial requirement of Leopard (867 MHz G4, but that was only enforced by the installer, Leopard runs fine on slower Macs) would be reduced. I'd say Apple can easily make 100-200 million dollars just by selling Snow Leopard to PowerPC users.

And what some people here always forget: A Macintosh is an investment. One of many reasons why Apple can get away with charging high prices is the longevity of the products and the high prices you can get for a second hand Macintosh. If Apple drops PowerPC support in 10.6, the result isn't a few whining users of outdated machines as some seem to believe. The result is that customers have to re-think their assumptions about the future value of a Macintosh they buy today. This would set a very, very ugly precedent.

What I don't understand is why PPC users think they even need Snow Leopard. It's not a new major OS version like Jaguar, Tiger and Leopard, it's not even Leopard deluxe. The mission statement says no new features. It will only address speed and stability.

So why would any Intel users think they even need Snow Leopard? If everyone is fine with Leopard, shouldn't we just close down MacRumors and all go home?

 

[Eric S.]

I do not see Apple developing a PPC version since the majority of PPC users would not want to buy 10.6. Outside of ZFS which a lot of people do not need, it provides no advantage to PPC users, basically it is the same as 10.5.

If there were all sorts of features, yes, but 10.6 is pretty feature less so why would a PPC user buy 10.6 if it was available?

Do you think that PPC users would not want the "stability" part of "speed and stability"?

Besides, many people just want the latest desktop.

 

[iJed]

Be careful using the word assume. Apple does have builds of 10.5.x that you do not.

Why? Everyone else here is just making assumptions based on little or no evidence.

At least, as a professional software engineer, I have the knowledge to make some educated guesses on this subject; which is a damn site better than the majority of posts on this forum.

 

[EagerDragon]

Do you think that PPC users would not want the "stability" part of "speed and stability"?

Besides, many people just want the latest desktop.

No, in my opinion 10.5 is stabled enough, I use it every day and have no issues. I am very happy with the current stability.

Developers are the only ones that "must have" at least 1 system up to the latest version of the OS and libraries and they can just get a mini for that and Intel systems with 8 cores been out a while if the development is going to take advantage of the extra cores.

BTW I have nothing but PPC and I am an old timer.

 

[KindredMAC]

I love how all the newbies who jumped on the Apple bandwagon after the switch to Intel chips are so nonchalant about this topic and think they can tell us old timer power users to buck up and just accept it.

Well we don't have to accept the whole thing. Like I've said before, if G5 PPC were covered it would make more sense than just dropping the entire platform.

There are plenty of PowerMac G5's out there in art depts across this country and many others that are expected to stay up to date for 5 years.

 

[Flynnstone]

It does says "Developer Preview", so perhaps they are gauging the complaining.
Lots of complaining -> maintain PPC support
Little complaining -> drop PPC.

 

[iamamthelawl]

What does apple supplied video card mean? Does that mean it needs a graphics card? If not how do you have a non apple supplied card? Mod it?


KindredMAC- I agree with you. So many people jumped on the band wagon recently and are not effected but don't see that some are not willing to buy a new mac because I do not have an extra 2000 on me.

 

[SimonMW]

If they were going to drop PowerPC support, surely the first thing they'd do is go through and skinny up all the binaries.

Ah, but what if they released the updated applications as combined binaries that can be updated on existing Leopard versions with software update?

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

So if this OS is going to be Intel only, then why is the install 9GB and with DevTools 12 GB.

Sliming down the code, BS. Noted its a Dev Preview, something is still off about the size/space requirements.

 

[Flynnstone]

I hope Apple releases an Intel-only 10.6, and a PowerPC-only version of 10.6. PowerPC users may see minor speed increases (eg Safari) but no new features. Non-universal-no-fat-binary apps mean more disk space for all involved.

No, two versions of 10.6. No. This is the rad to what Microsoft is doing. Like 12 variations of Vista.

Disk space is cheap. Apps will still be universal.

 

[rjfiske]

...10.4. It was selling at full price in Apple stores 7.5 months ago. With Apple's current policy, it will no longer get security updates in January 09 (assuming Snow Leopard ships on time.) That needs to change. Linux does it better, Microsoft does it better. Apple needs to grow up and face the realities of their market share.

Aaargh and we were doing so good together.

1.) 10.4 was selling 7.5 months ago with full knowledge Leopard was imminent for over a year prior. Sleopard will be sold a year from now, putting it 19.5 months from the time frame that you're giving, and nearly 30 months from when Leopard was announced.
2.) Apple's "current" policy is somewhat irrelevant because their "current" policy is based on the assumption that its end users choose not to upgrade their OS. This won't be the case with 10.6. Some (indeed several) end users can't. I expect Apple to be looser with their policy but I could be wrong. Even if I'm not, I do not expect Apple to continue to upgrade an operating system 24 months old, sans things like Safari, which they are continuing to do. Again you seem to absolutely know more about this than I do, but as a PPC owner Apple's current policy doesn't bother me in the slightest.
3.) "Better" in what sense of the word? More and more resources to update older and older equipment? I'd rather Apple be "better" by bringing innovations that take advantage of the newest technologies... indeed I'd be pissed if they didn't do that. Apple doesn't need to grow up. Apple needs to make a really good product. The realities of their market share is that they can afford to make these vast sweeping changes knowing that a minority will be peeved and the majority will benefit.
4.) For Snow Leopard to ship on time, they'd need to ship by June '09. For them to ship 6 months early, they'd need to ship in your time frame of January '09. Petty difference but still...

Listen, I get that you're upset Tiger won't be getting regular security upgrades thanks to Snow Leopard but the reality is that neither of us can say with any certainty that this is 100% true. If it is, some will be left out but most of those users just won't care. You're an exception.. I get that. But it's not a result of Apple not growing up. It's a result of Apple picking its battles and where it spends its money. I'm okay with this even if some (like you) feel like they're getting shafted... so long as most of us (like me) see and realize the benefit.

Just my opinion. I could be wrong.

 

[iJed]

Ah, but what if they released the updated applications as combined binaries that can be updated on existing Leopard versions with software update?

This is very unlikely as at least some of these updated apps will utilise the 10.6 only APIs. Also from past experience Apple has never really done this before.

 

[TwinCities Dan]

I don't get it... If Apple will use PA Semi stuff for its portable devices (iPod, iPhones) and the OS X on these has the same kernel as the OS X on the Mac (based on what was said on the keynote), does that mean Apple will integrate x86 procs (Atom 2 since Atom is an order of magnitude away in terms of power used) on a system on chip designed by PA Semi?

I'd like to believe that most of the optimization will indeed be focused on x86 architecture but that PowerPC support will still be around for the future. To those so high on Intel right now, don't forget that the wind can change direction pretty quickly in this field, and that it would make sense for Apple to keep its options open. Now I'm sure they will keep internal builds for PPC but a complete drop still sends the wrong message to me.

This is right on, I think there will still be "in-house" builds just in case.

 

[!¡ V ¡!]

I love how all the newbies who jumped on the Apple bandwagon after the switch to Intel chips are so nonchalant about this topic and think they can tell us old timer power users to buck up and just accept it.

Well we don't have to accept the whole thing. Like I've said before, if G5 PPC were covered it would make more sense than just dropping the entire platform.

There are plenty of PowerMac G5's out there in art depts across this country and many others that are expected to stay up to date for 5 years.

I am in the "old timer" group as well, however I sold my G4 iBook and G5 iMac quite a few months ago only because I wanted to upgrade my screen resolution.

Though I still believe should support the PPC crowd with the G5.