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
that is assuming Apple survives this transition, since the sales of the PPC will be a bit low from now on... (huge understatement)ropbo said:
Okay, so I'm completely confused on what is totally happening...
Is the Intel chip going to be x86?
The processor is supposed to be able to emulate the old processor and run the old programs, right?
Will new programs be able to run on old processors in much the same way as they did in the 680x0/PPC switch?
Someone please offer some answers.
Is the Intel chip going to be x86?
The processor is supposed to be able to emulate the old processor and run the old programs, right?
Will new programs be able to run on old processors in much the same way as they did in the 680x0/PPC switch?
Someone please offer some answers.
Abercrombieboy said:
Wow, so in other words you'd have to do it the legal way?
j/k. If you can buy Hybrid CDs of Windows/OSX software, I'm not sure why one couldn't ship Hybrid DVDs of x86 and PPC software, especially as it sounds like they won't be that different.
All of you, stop overreacting. now.
~Earendil
Sun Baked said:
But I don't WANT to see more Apple consumer innovation. I want to see MAC innovation. All I've heard from Apple for the last few years was iPod this, and iPod that. Now that the iPod has become the sucess it has and sales are starting to plateau, I was looking forward to Apple Computer doing something with Macintoshes again. Now, we're all going to be in a holding pattern for the next couple years.
Why? If it's good enough for Steve Jobs, why isn't it good enough for Mac users everywhere?iGary said:
It seems to me that any Mac enthusiast who condemns Apple and/or Steve Jobs for making the Switch to Intel for CPUs has officially crossed the line into hyperzealotry. Objectively, IBM/Motorola can't provide what Intel can... so you can either adapt to what's going to work best, or you can remain mired in an obsolete solution but maintain your "purity" (i.e., total non-affiliation with Intel).
That is assuming Apple survives this transition, since the sales of the PPC will be a bit low from now on... (huge understatement)ropbo said:
Brian Hickman said:
Seriously. The head of the Mac unit at Microsoft got on stage at the keynote and said they are going to use UB in Office in the future. What more proof that their systems are going to be supported do these people need? Apple is going to be selling PPC based Macs until at least the middle of 2007, so UB has got to last until at least 2008 or '09.
Abercrombieboy said:
This is what I am wondering. Will the software two years from now still work on my Powermac G5? What about games? I'll be pretty pissed off if I can't run software and games on my computer a few years down the road from now. I don't have money to keep buying computers every two years.
Abercrombieboy said:
These two seemingly different systems will be able to run the *same* software, rest assured! You won't have to purchase different versions
Abercrombieboy said:
Jobs demonstrated Tiger on an Intel P4 3.6 stock computer..
Granted Apple may build in a hardware layer for Mac only but whoever gets their hands on the Tiger version that was run at WWDC today you WILL see OSX on a PC in 2 months
I think people would like to know for sure before they buy a 3k system... I would at least.Laurent said:
Abercrombieboy said:
Well, my little Blue and White is really showing its age - an iMac now would last through the transition and into the time when the Intel machines are reaching Rev. B and C releases, which is about the time I'd consider buying a new Mac anyhow...
Don't think you'll need to worry too much about a PPC and x86 version of Office - if M$ really uses XCode 2.1 then you should be able to buy one version and install it on both machines (of course, M$'s tendency is to overload stuff with their own BS, but hey, two years ago we were also all saying Apple would never switch to Intel).
If Apple is going to release PPC machines through 2006, then realistically consumers will expect at least 3-year lifespan out of them until needing a new machine. I'm guessing then that PPC software might be available though 2009 or even longer if universal binaries really are the magic bullet Steve claims they are.
I'm shocked I have to say. I never REALLY expected to see OS X on a x86 machine. That said, provided Apple doesn't allow other PCs to use OS X (which is what I've heard) I see no reason to object to something that will ultimately provide faster, better and possibly cheaper computers to Apples customers.
That said I'm starting university in September. As such I'm planning on purchasing a PowerBook in September. I don't run very resource intensive programs. I just wanted a laptop that would last a long time and ran OS X. I don't want Windows. I'm fed up with Windows PCs. I am pretty certain I will still buy a PowerBook, but I am worried. My course lasts 4 years. Will the PowerBook last 4 years? I don't know. I have a sneaking suspicion that Apple will try to support G4s for that long (considering that most people get a new computer every 3 or 4 years and that Apple isn't releasing x86 Macs for another 12 months) and that so will software makers, but I am worried, nonetheless, that at some point during my university career I may find my PowerBook no longer cuts the proverbial mustard. 4 years is a long time, and there is a possibility I may continue on to Masters (which would yield another year of study) on a students budget would I be able to afford the possible change of laptop? I suspect I would, but it would not be a situation I'd like to put myself in.
That said I'm starting university in September. As such I'm planning on purchasing a PowerBook in September. I don't run very resource intensive programs. I just wanted a laptop that would last a long time and ran OS X. I don't want Windows. I'm fed up with Windows PCs. I am pretty certain I will still buy a PowerBook, but I am worried. My course lasts 4 years. Will the PowerBook last 4 years? I don't know. I have a sneaking suspicion that Apple will try to support G4s for that long (considering that most people get a new computer every 3 or 4 years and that Apple isn't releasing x86 Macs for another 12 months) and that so will software makers, but I am worried, nonetheless, that at some point during my university career I may find my PowerBook no longer cuts the proverbial mustard. 4 years is a long time, and there is a possibility I may continue on to Masters (which would yield another year of study) on a students budget would I be able to afford the possible change of laptop? I suspect I would, but it would not be a situation I'd like to put myself in.
Where are we going with the numbers here? I reckon a move from the g-units (yo). Maybe we'll go EXTREME and move to x's (for x86). I don't see them taking away the Power prefix, it's what lets us know it's better, like GTi on a car.
I'm putting my money on a PowerMac/PowerBook X1 or xMac/xBook being the first x86 pro computers.
I'm putting my money on a PowerMac/PowerBook X1 or xMac/xBook being the first x86 pro computers.
Best Thing Ever!!!!
Let me start of by saying that the first time I heard about this rumor I said NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!
Then it hit me!!! Apple kept Marklar going on for 5 years so they could have a choice and switch when IBM couldn't deliver. What stops them from keepin "AntiMarklar" a PPC based version alive for another 5 years after that??!!!!
That means Apple is actually keeping a plan B alive to switch processors when needed. With Rosetta and fat binaries Apple is bringing in the 3 parties onto this plan B.
This effectively means Apple will ALWAYS have the choice PPC and Intel. No other OS vendor has that capability and hedge today!!!!
People, Steve has pulled it off again. Never again will Apple be at the mercy of a chip supplier!! Best place to be in. The beauty of all this is that now both IBM and Intel know this. Nice to keep them both on their toes)
The time frames are also keeping me pretty suspicious. What if this time frame is the gun held at IBMs head?? "Boys get your act together.. Give me what I need or else!!!!!" Come Macworld Jobs could come up again on stage and either confirm the move or else say "Guess what?? IBM is back on track and we're still cranking new PPC products!!!!!!"
You can't really beat this.
Way to go Apple!!!!!!!!!!
./sherif
Let me start of by saying that the first time I heard about this rumor I said NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!
Then it hit me!!! Apple kept Marklar going on for 5 years so they could have a choice and switch when IBM couldn't deliver. What stops them from keepin "AntiMarklar" a PPC based version alive for another 5 years after that??!!!!
That means Apple is actually keeping a plan B alive to switch processors when needed. With Rosetta and fat binaries Apple is bringing in the 3 parties onto this plan B.
This effectively means Apple will ALWAYS have the choice PPC and Intel. No other OS vendor has that capability and hedge today!!!!
People, Steve has pulled it off again. Never again will Apple be at the mercy of a chip supplier!! Best place to be in. The beauty of all this is that now both IBM and Intel know this. Nice to keep them both on their toes
)The time frames are also keeping me pretty suspicious
. What if this time frame is the gun held at IBMs head?? "Boys get your act together.. Give me what I need or else!!!!!" Come Macworld Jobs could come up again on stage and either confirm the move or else say "Guess what?? IBM is back on track and we're still cranking new PPC products!!!!!!"You can't really beat this.
Way to go Apple!!!!!!!!!!
./sherif
I might be over reacting, and I hope I am wrong. I still think we will see a significant drop in Mac sales. Especially since the pro line is priced like it is.Hemingray said:
iMeowbot said:
That's not accurate. Any software developer that has dealt with this before will tell you that changing between big and little endian architectures is always a big concern. There are lots of issues to deal with, including binary file formats, bit masks, structure layout, etc. It's not difficult work and doesn't usually require massive reengineering, but it is tedious and does require a lot of testing.
If you're responsible for any non-trivial chunk of code, say more than 30000 lines, you should start planning now. All developers should start examining thier code to find where the problems will be.
- Status