Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Macintosh Moving to Intel Processors [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
DavidCar:
Your question about Objective C runtime as compared to .NET runtime....
Well, the similarity ends at about the point you get past the word runtime.
Objective C runtime is as much a shared library of common services as it is a true runtime, like the Java Runtime engine. It's a means of move the binding to a late rather than early stage (in case 'binding' isn't not quite clear, any functions brought into use after the program is compiled is "late" or "dynamic" binding, all the functions that were in place FOR compilation are "early" binding, sometimes called "static" binding - one prime example of late binding code are plugins, those add-on code blocks you drop into a browser, like Flash Player or some such).
The Obj-C runtime, which I think is the same as Cocoa runtime in your question, are both based on one language (which itself is a hybrid from C to Objective C). The .NET runtime is a byte code language common to a range of other languages, all made by MS (well, Borland is in there now, too) - anything that compiles the Bytecode runs inside this thing, it manages memory, handles all kinds of connectivity services - and will eventually be the central "hub" of the "new" Windows OS.
Your question about Objective C runtime as compared to .NET runtime....
Well, the similarity ends at about the point you get past the word runtime.
Objective C runtime is as much a shared library of common services as it is a true runtime, like the Java Runtime engine. It's a means of move the binding to a late rather than early stage (in case 'binding' isn't not quite clear, any functions brought into use after the program is compiled is "late" or "dynamic" binding, all the functions that were in place FOR compilation are "early" binding, sometimes called "static" binding - one prime example of late binding code are plugins, those add-on code blocks you drop into a browser, like Flash Player or some such).
The Obj-C runtime, which I think is the same as Cocoa runtime in your question, are both based on one language (which itself is a hybrid from C to Objective C). The .NET runtime is a byte code language common to a range of other languages, all made by MS (well, Borland is in there now, too) - anything that compiles the Bytecode runs inside this thing, it manages memory, handles all kinds of connectivity services - and will eventually be the central "hub" of the "new" Windows OS.
I think that what we will mostly see is that the x86 native versions comes along with the general update cycle of those particular apps.skellener said:
This was also the case with most apps at the introduction of OS-X.
It really depends, I think, on how easy it is. If it's a simple recompile then we'll see them as point upgrades. If it's a major rewrite (eg from Codewarrior) then no doubt the vendor will be making some upgrades simultaneously.Mac-Xpert said:
Dilemna
Hello,
Having read the first few hundred comments on the Intel-change (very interesting, by the way), I'm still not sure what to do. I'm working on my 5 (!) year-old 400Mhz PPC and am really in need of a new Mac. I was determined to buy the big 2x2,7Ghz, but -as I understand- now would be the worst time. Am I correct and should I crawl forward on my ancient apparatus?
Thanx!
Hello,
Having read the first few hundred comments on the Intel-change (very interesting, by the way), I'm still not sure what to do. I'm working on my 5 (!) year-old 400Mhz PPC and am really in need of a new Mac. I was determined to buy the big 2x2,7Ghz, but -as I understand- now would be the worst time. Am I correct and should I crawl forward on my ancient apparatus?
Thanx!
This is not the worst time ever, nor the best time ever. It's always been and always will be a matter of what it costs you to wait and what it costs you not to wait. Each year there are new machines with better price/performance, so presumably you save money by purchasing later instead of now, but it also "costs you" in pain and suffering or lack of productivity to go months or years with an out-of-date machine that prevents you from getting your work done or from using up-to-date software.lumine said:
The bottom line may be your own deadline, e.g., the start of a new school year or a new project or the point where your tolerance for an old machine has run out. If you buy a low-end machine, like a Mac mini, iBook, or iMac, you risk less than if you buy a top of the line PowerBook or Power Mac. Given the age of your Mac, any new Mac should give you a speed boost that could last you years before you are "forced to switch" to a new hardware line.
Another tradeoff: It's cool to have the latest and greatest, but early adopters of the Intel Macs may have to go through some growing pains and conversion headaches we and Apple might not yet have anticipated.
Apple has to keep Macs attractive to buyers before the Intel-based machines are out, and purchases now are not automatically ill-advised, but simply the same tradeoff we always have - buying something now that will help you immediately versus doing without and waiting for the latest and greatest that's coming next to get more power for less money.
Finally, you might find the MacRumors Buyer's Guide helpful if you are interested in a particular Mac model.
There is a lot of guesswork involved for buyers at the moment. It'll be the end of 2007 before all the Macs are switched across, so which macs are coming first? which are last? Could you wait till 2007 for a new PowerMac?lumine said:
I'm going to make an assumption... When an Intel equivalent of any Mac comes out, it will be similarly priced/spec'd to its predecessor (it'll simply be Intel instead of PPC - and naturally it'll be one generation faster too).
If that's right then the question is - is the current machine good for your needs?
Personally I think
1) the PowerMacs are good performers and still worthwhile. If I was in the market for a PowerMac I'd be more focussed on timing it with the next G5 revision.
2) Do you need Windows compatibility? Obviously Virtual PC will be much faster on an Intel based Mac (once Virtual PC is released). And you might be able to dual-boot Windows or run it side-by-side (note the Mac may use EFI, and Windows doesn't support EFI till Longhorn). All in all - Windows compatibility will be great in 2007, who knows about 2006.
3) I agree with most predictions that in general, 2006 is the year of G4 switches, and 2007 is the year of G5 switches.
A lot of maybes, ifs and buts eh?
Buying a Mac at this time
The bottom line may be your own deadline, e.g., the start of a new school year or a new project or the point where your tolerance for an old machine has run out. If you buy a low-end machine, like a Mac mini, iBook, or iMac, you risk less than if you buy a top of the line PowerBook or Power Mac. Given the age of your Mac, any new Mac should give you a speed boost that could last you years before you are "forced to switch" to a new hardware line.
Another tradeoff: It's cool to have the latest and greatest, but early adopters of the Intel Macs may have to go through some growing pains and conversion headaches we and Apple might not yet have anticipated.
Apple has to keep Macs attractive to buyers before the Intel-based machines are out, and purchases now are not automatically ill-advised, but simply the same tradeoff we always have - buying something now that will help you immediately versus doing without and waiting for the latest and greatest that's coming next to get more power for less money.
--------
There is a lot of guesswork involved for buyers at the moment. It'll be the end of 2007 before all the Macs are switched across, so which macs are coming first? which are last? Could you wait till 2007 for a new PowerMac?
I'm going to make an assumption... When an Intel equivalent of any Mac comes out, it will be similarly priced/spec'd to its predecessor (it'll simply be Intel instead of PPC - and naturally it'll be one generation faster too).
If that's right then the question is - is the current machine good for your needs?
-----------------
Thanx guys! You present good arguments..
My old machine is litterally costing me money (I'm a graphic designer) as I have to wait seconds or minutes for every somewhat complicated action. In itself a good reason to buy a new Mac.
The longer one thinks about it, the more you come to realize that buying a Mac always presents the same problem: Your machine is out of date the moment you purchase it anyway! There may indeed hardly be a difference between now and the past. But it can still be a great improvement.
So right now, I'm thinking of buying a 2 x 2,5 (as there may be some models left), saving out about 400,- tot the 2 x 2,7...
See ya! (in a manner of speaking)
The bottom line may be your own deadline, e.g., the start of a new school year or a new project or the point where your tolerance for an old machine has run out. If you buy a low-end machine, like a Mac mini, iBook, or iMac, you risk less than if you buy a top of the line PowerBook or Power Mac. Given the age of your Mac, any new Mac should give you a speed boost that could last you years before you are "forced to switch" to a new hardware line.
Another tradeoff: It's cool to have the latest and greatest, but early adopters of the Intel Macs may have to go through some growing pains and conversion headaches we and Apple might not yet have anticipated.
Apple has to keep Macs attractive to buyers before the Intel-based machines are out, and purchases now are not automatically ill-advised, but simply the same tradeoff we always have - buying something now that will help you immediately versus doing without and waiting for the latest and greatest that's coming next to get more power for less money.
--------
There is a lot of guesswork involved for buyers at the moment. It'll be the end of 2007 before all the Macs are switched across, so which macs are coming first? which are last? Could you wait till 2007 for a new PowerMac?
I'm going to make an assumption... When an Intel equivalent of any Mac comes out, it will be similarly priced/spec'd to its predecessor (it'll simply be Intel instead of PPC - and naturally it'll be one generation faster too).
If that's right then the question is - is the current machine good for your needs?
-----------------
Thanx guys! You present good arguments..
My old machine is litterally costing me money (I'm a graphic designer) as I have to wait seconds or minutes for every somewhat complicated action. In itself a good reason to buy a new Mac.
The longer one thinks about it, the more you come to realize that buying a Mac always presents the same problem: Your machine is out of date the moment you purchase it anyway! There may indeed hardly be a difference between now and the past. But it can still be a great improvement.
So right now, I'm thinking of buying a 2 x 2,5 (as there may be some models left), saving out about 400,- tot the 2 x 2,7...
See ya! (in a manner of speaking)
lumine said:
If you are losing money because of your computer you must have some enormous plate in front of your head. Seriously, upgrading to a mac mini for $ 600 will get you a blazing fast machine that'll get you past the next three years the least, based on the assumption you are not using very demanding applications (when you are holding out with the 400 MHz for so long). Man, I just don't understand people that are holding out to get The Ultimate Machine. There is no TUMMY. Not now not tommorow. There will always be something better around the corner. Please do yourself and us a favour, stop posting and start buying!
On a minor note: let's get this baby past 3000 threads
- Status