Macintosh Moving to Intel Processors [Updated]

[GroundLoop]

Because they already know the answer. New software wil not be backward-compatible with our PPCs eventually.

Either these guys can't read, or they are just trying to irritate people. The question has been answered by at least 10 people on 40 occasions.

[cough]Universal Binaries[/cough]

Hickman

 

[840quadra]

I mean first of all they have to get this stuff off the site ASAP - the baseline is the development machine for gods sake.

I mean I'm cool with it if it makes a better computer but....

Will our current machines (my brand new 20" iMac) be totally unsupported soon? I mean they say they can have a dual but developers don't have big budgets to sit around and take care of apple every time the wind blows.

THey touted this coding thing to us Audio people a while back when they introduced Audio Units - they said it takes seconds to make a VST plug-in a AU plug in and demonstrated it and blah blah blah ..... It took (and is still taking) years to get all of our plug-ins and Audio software working.

Say goodbuy to Pro Tools - they have got to be done with all this crap by now. LE still isn't supported by Tiger even though Mark Altecruz and Craig Linnsen (Apples 2 Audio Czars) said Pro Tools would be fully supported the day Tiger shipped.

If I can go to Compusa and buy a PC for 1299 that has the same junk inside that my Mac will have for $3K-4k I'm going to really have to check my head.

I love the experience as a whole but that's just silly. Then to have to rebuy all my software to work with the new x86 processor when I just rebought it all to work with OS X then AU. I am not made of this kind of money and bug testing time.

I'm so confused - Apple please post a FAQ to make some sense of this. I have 5 days to return that iMac - I may just do it and play it safe for a while - I already have too many G4 G5 potential paperweights.

P@ul

Remember that this is intended as a software development box. Who is to say the next Generation Powemac isn't a Dual Xenon 64bit system. It is still a ways out before we see the first intel Powermac, and intel is not stopping advancement in their technology on June 6 2005.

 

[J-Ray1000]

Yes- but for how long will they continue to use Universal Binaries?

FOR-EV-ER!

Why not? Jobs' whole point is he doesn't want to be hardware-dependent. If the software is pliable, he could jump to AMD or wherever if Intel starts sucking wind.

 

[MacRohde]

Adobe and MS might release UBs for the foreseeable future, but who says the little developers, who really make the Mac experience will? I doubt they will continue to support PPC - they will move to Intel. Everyone trumpeting UB has the be all, end all solution doesn't understand. Why on Earth would people like the WeatherPop people invest in PPC?

Therefore, there's a good chance that software smaller than Office and Adobe's stuff, this time next year, will be Intel based.

The real question is what they will do in the meantime. They have a year in which Mac sales and sales of their software are going to plummit. I'm sure a lot of Mac developers and users are sick of these arbitrary desicions.

I myself won't be buying a new PPC based machine, but if I can find an iBook on the cheap, will buy it and use it til the new Intel based machines come out.

Well since it's no more work to create a UB than to creat a x86 only executable I would wager that for the foreseeable future you will not be left to dry even if you invest in a Mac today.

 

[Dr.Gargoyle]

There is no need to have a x86->PPC translation program (rosetta or otherwise) because all new apps will be built as Universal Binaries (containing support for both ppc and x86). A developer would have to go out of their way to make an app x86-specific.

in that case I missed that. Do you have a link to Apple where I can read about it?

 

[bayol05]

Webcast

Here is the link to the Keynote Stream....it is not yet up, but it says it will be sometime today...
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc05/

 

[admanimal]

and all x86 apps will run on PPC? Do you have a link to verify that?

Well, it is up to the developer to supply the application as a universal binary. They were all very good about this during the Fat Binary days, so I would imagine now would be no different. And since all of their software currently runs on PPC anyway, I would think it would be little or no work for them to do so.

All universal binary applications will run on both PPC and x86, however. (That's basically the definition of being a Universal Binary).

 

[Kaiser Phoenix]

This is great

As people have already mentioned it, i wont go on about details so i think the move is such an awesome idea! Faster, cooler, cheaper etc.

Also its great for me coz I bought a powerbook last year this time and this means that now it has lasted for a year and it will last for another year until they release the new laptops which means i wont be feeling so dissapointed coz i was abit scared about them releasing a G5 pb earlier, but now thats not going to happen so i guess i bought at a good time, the 1.5ghz model.

This is great news, absolutely.

 

[840quadra]

Here is the link to the Keynote Stream....it is not yet up, but it says it will be sometime today...
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/wwdc05/

thanks.. I will have something to watch tonight at work!

On a side note, I am watching the 2004 keynote currently, and the stream is really choppy. It feels like there is allot of traffic on their webiste currently also. I wonder if the developers can watch the stream now?

 

[sAvAgE69]

LOOK Satan just bought Ice Skates

THis is just Classic. So when can we get Windows for Macintosh?

I just had to


on a more serious note. The POWER architechure is far superiour but the funny part is Apple is Raving about the G5 as the Fastest first 64 bit desktop well that was incorrect.
I am a Anti Microsoft kind of person and Run Linux. But I remember reading about the Intel Processors in Mac magizine man did they ever slam Intel. Well Let's call the kettle black. this is a shocker

 

[Dr.Gargoyle]

Hey guys I have a good idea what kinds of technologies we will see in the new Apple hardware. Just go to this site, imagine a nicer looking case and OSX running on it...

www.dell.com

Apple won't be able to keep anything secret anymore on the hardware side. That will be a nice thing.

LMAO.....funny. It somehow captures how I feel right now. I wonder how Apple is going about asking for a hefty premium on their computers now, since they basically will be just as all other computers.

 

[iMeowbot]

Because they already know the answer. New software wil not be backward-compatible with our PPCs eventually.

Right, because you won't have enough memory or speed in your old machine to handle it. That kind of obsolescence, the kind that has nothing to do with the instruction set, is what will break compatibility.

 

[nylon]

Guaranteed that first Mac's on Intel will be the new Powerbooks and boy I can not wait for that. I will be saving up for one of those starting today.

This was inevitable and good on Steve for having the balls to make the transition.

Go Apple!!

 

[jZilla]

Why? If it's good enough for Steve Jobs, why isn't it good enough for Mac users everywhere?

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.

here's the point. Some of us like the "different" bit of "Think Different".

That doesn't mean "no way Intel" it means we are concerned that Jobs is creeping towards a Dell-type scenario - ie all about the bottom line. Many of us like a company that was the BMW of the industry rather than the Ford.

 

[BlairMALL]

Thank you!

Can someone explain exactly why noone should be worried about future software not running on their recently bought 3k+ machine, better than phrases like: "trust apple" "apple knows" or "if it's good enough for steve it's good enough for you"

Yes, my thoughts exactly. I would like an honest/simple explanation of what we can expect as far as the future of software on the PPC G5 variety. I really want to buy and Apple. I think the experience is unmatched. I've looked at Dells and will never go that route.

 

[ruud]

in that case I missed that. Do you have a link to Apple where I can read about it?

Go to developer.apple.com and read the universal binary doc that's right there on the front page.

 

[MacRohde]

Could someone please post this link again? I'm not sure which you are referring to and I would be interested to read it myself.

Here you go:
Apple throws the switch, aligns with Intel

What you're looking for is on page 2 of the article:

"After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."

However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said"

 

[Sun Baked]

Hm that is an interesting find. I wonder if they will use a BIOS or what?

Oh well, one more step towards just another PC in a pretty case.

Probably no need for Apple to use their own chipset either, just make sure the motherboard has all the I/O goodies that we expect.

 

[DakotaGuy]

For those who think you can run Windows on a IntelMac, I doubt it. But, I think someone out there will write WINE for IntelMac and just run windows binaries instead of running windows, then the binary.

YES!!! Counter-Strike for Mac!!!

I am sure Microsoft Virtual PC will run easier then ever without taking any performance hit. Right now Virtual PC emulates the Intel (x86) processor. Once Apple has x86 Intel processors in them, what is there to emulate? VPC will be better then ever. It should run with the exact same benchmarks as if you were running Windows on a PC.

Think of it this way. You can run Windows on a PPC Mac today...you will SURELY be able to run it on an IntelMac.

 

[leekohler]

Either these guys can't read, or they are just trying to irritate people. The question has been answered by at least 10 people on 40 occasions.

[cough]Universal Binaries[/cough]

Hickman

Uh- no. I CAN read and I'm NOT here to irritate you. I just simply don't believe that this will be the case with all software written after the Mactels come out. Remember when Apple said they would continue to develop OS 9 after OS X? That little statement proved to be false real quick.

 

[admanimal]

Yes, my thoughts exactly. I would like an honest/simple explanation of what we can expect as far as the future of software on the PPC G5 variety. I really want to buy and Apple. I think the experience is unmatched. I've looked at Dells and will never go that route.

READ THE LAST 2 PAGES OF THE THREAD!!!!! Please.

 

[kikuchiyo]

Well since it's no more work to create a UB than to creat a x86 only executable I would wager that for the foreseeable future you will not be left to dry even if you invest in a Mac today.

I call BS: the developers would still need at least a PPC and an Intel machine to bug test and develop. That's already double the amount of hardware they need now. Plus you can't simply recompile complex software. Portions (not whole programs, but parts) will have to be rewritten.

Small developers aren't going to waste their time on stuff like that. They will move to Intel and PPC Macs will be left in the lurch, as far as new software is concerned. Not that it may matter: I know people still using OS9, but I don't want to be left up the creek like that: my current PC is 3 years old and with a new graphics card could run just about anything. I'm not going to buy a disposable mac brand new.

 

[m-dogg]

Sometimes I forget the diverse demographics of MR forum members...and then a subject like this comes up to remind me of the wide variety of ages/maturity levels. Chill out everyone - The sky is not falling, and the Mac you thought was 'so awesome' yesterday did not mysteriously turn into a useless lead paperweight during the keynote.

Apple is not doing this just for the heck of it. They feel that Intel is the best long term solution to providing high-quality chips. I love my G5, but if that chip is headed for a dead end a year or two down the road (or right now in the portable line), then they need to find a new plan.

When they say low end Macs will get Intel chips first, I take that to mean G4-based products. I'm willing to bet that the first Intel Mac will be a PowerBook.

This is a very exciting time! And look at it this way, we know already that next years WWDC is going to be crazy - Let the rumors begin! Time to start up the 'what do you think will be new at WWDC 2006' and 'PowerBook Pentium M next Tuesday' threads...

 

[noel4r]

Men, I just bought a Dual 1.8 I thought that's gonna last me at least 3 years. Now what?

 

[Dr.Gargoyle]

I think so too. Why buy a mac now when this switch is happening in a year?

I am not in the market for a new Mac right now. I am happy with my trusty PM G4. What worries me is that most people will hold their shopping until the new chips are out. That will hurt Apple bad since 47% of their profit comes from computer sales.