Apple isn't trying to screw up PowerPC users. The "learn-to-play" feature takes a lot of resources a PowerPC Mac can't handle (I'll admit - Apple's forgotten they made Quad-Core G5s). Proof is this feature doesn't support Intel Core Solo Macs, it seems indeed a performance issue.
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.
More Evidence Apple is Shifting Towards Intel-Only Software Releases?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Its something that has to happen. Apple deserves a lot of credit for having the balls to make this move. This is one of the main things that holds Microsoft back, the refuse to give up backwards compatibly for crap released 10 years ago.
I know lots of PPC users will be upset, but iLife 08' works fine and if you really want the new features, its time to upgrade. Chances are, a lot end intel mac will still be faster then your aging PPC.
I know lots of PPC users will be upset, but iLife 08' works fine and if you really want the new features, its time to upgrade. Chances are, a lot end intel mac will still be faster then your aging PPC.
This seems an odd place to start. What is it about a the Learn to Play feature that would eat up enough CPU that it could not run on even a low end G3? I imagine all that is required for a lesson is playing some QuickTime file. Why not include a low-res version?
Could it be that the lesson is actually listening to the pitch and timing of your guitar playing to detect wrong notes or out of time playing? If so that would be great.
If they are listening to the guitar with the internal mic then this shows why you cannot support old hardware forever. It would prevent you from adding features like this that requires a lot of "compute power".
XP gets support until 2014. Yep, Apple definitely sucks in this category. Nintendo blows them away. But until Apple users stop seeing refusal to support their customers as a 'commitment to advancedness!', it will continue.
You need to listen to what you are talking about. XP gets support until 2014 - it was designed for and runs on x86 processors. If tomorrow the world stopped used x86 processors and went to SPARC processors, Microsoft WOULD NOT rewrite XP to work with it. Microsoft WOULD continue to release security updates and stability updates for it and ensure as many apps as possible still run on it. Likewise, 10.4, 10.5 will continue to get updates for years to come. Just because they aren't going to add support to the newest OS, doesn't mean they aren't supporting it.
I don't see what is so hard to comprehend. Your G5s will continue to run Leopard forever. Most applications will be Leopard compatible for years to come as well. In fact most apps I see are still Panther compatible to give you a feel for backwards compatibility.
This of course brings up the important point Microsoft isn't a PC manufacturer, they are an OS developer. Apple does both so they get stuck looking like the bad guys here.
No, Windows 2000 has support until April 2009. Microsoft supports their OSes, period. Not because the follow-on sucked. You can go read their product support life-cycle page if you like. Then fax it to Apple.
So I guess we can expect all the 32-bit Intel Macs to be dropped?
No, 10.4 loses updates as soon as SL ships, according to Apple's own announced Policy of Customer Punishment.manowarwi said:
Yes, our Dear Leader is smart & wise, and he gets smarter & wiser every day! But don't ever say, our Dear Leader, wasn't so smart, or so wise, yesterday.
in fact, the Learn to play features of Garageband 09 do work on G4, apple just don't let you download them but if you find a way to download the lessons, you'll be able to learn to play too (tested on my powerbook g4 1,7),
...iMovie 09 also work on my powerbook...
...iMovie 09 also work on my powerbook...
Is anyone else amazed at the slowness of this news? I knew this a week or so ago when I was looking up the requirements to make sure it could run on my dad's iMac G5 2 Ghz. L2P was the only thing he couldn't run, and since I don't see him learning to play a guitar or piano, I figured that was fine.
I do think the original post was kinda stretching it. This kind of thing happens all the time in the computing world. Eventually new features make use of new hardware, and you can't support every computer that was ever made. This had more to do with processor power than PPC vs. Intel.
I do think the original post was kinda stretching it. This kind of thing happens all the time in the computing world. Eventually new features make use of new hardware, and you can't support every computer that was ever made. This had more to do with processor power than PPC vs. Intel.
I find it so funny that people think dropping PPC support is a good idea. As a programmer, I know that my code ends up more bug free and better optimised the more platforms I support. If you only code for Intel chips you can end up with some really nasty bugs. Most of the OS is written in C and as such, the compiler should take care of much of the optimisation and the developers may focus on handling some core tasks with hand tuned code but that isn't really something you need to do often.
It has been relatively easy to write efficient, portable 32/64 bit code for many years. If Apple is dropping PPC support, or even support for 32 bit Core Duo they are doing it for marketing reasons, not for any good programming reasons.
It has been relatively easy to write efficient, portable 32/64 bit code for many years. If Apple is dropping PPC support, or even support for 32 bit Core Duo they are doing it for marketing reasons, not for any good programming reasons.
I understand Apple doing this but... Actually they said it before so that's to be expected but I have a problem with only "part" of the suite being Intel only.
I would expect them to switch the whole suite to Intel completely, but not bits and parts. I guess universal is no good (enough) anymore...
I would expect them to switch the whole suite to Intel completely, but not bits and parts. I guess universal is no good (enough) anymore...
Let me reword that.
That's why Snow Leopard will be Intel 64-bit architecture only.
Can you give us any reasons as to why, minus the fact that people with Core Duos won't be happy?
You can't tell us that Apple cares about keeping compatibility with old models.
Original iMac (inclusive), ADC connector, Mini DisplayPort connector... the list goes on.
Evidence?
I thought this was already cut in stone - err, marble? Either way, I'm eager to upgrade from the old "sawtooth". She's pushing 10 if she isn't already..
I thought this was already cut in stone - err, marble? Either way, I'm eager to upgrade from the old "sawtooth". She's pushing 10 if she isn't already..
It's also a reason that Windows is such a bloated problematic OS. It has to much backward support for old machines and old applications. My machine at work is still running Office 97 which is 11 years old. Well it is time to update. Sorry boss, but an 11 year old app is outdated and two versions have come since then.
Should I run XP on a 486? Slow, slow, slow. There comes a time when you have to move on. I can't run VisiCalc on any machine I own. I can't run Lotus 123 either. There just comes time when you have to say good bye and move on. Keep the code slim and neat not twisted and bloated to support every machine you ever made. Should I complain that my Apple II doesn't run OS X? Or my old Digital Rainbow 100 doesn't run Windows?
Hell Soon my TV isn't going to be able to receive over the air signals without a lousy little add on box in a big corporate grab of the public airwaves. Times change and it is time to move on.
This is true, and I expect Apple will continue to build OS X internally on PPC and possibly other CPUs like Cell and Sparc. (Just like they kept x86 builds around when everything was PPC). But there's a huge difference between having the capability to build for different platforms and actually shipping commercial products on those platforms. The latter requires much more time and expense for testing and support, and Apple quite reasonably figures those resources could be better spent elsewhere.
Endless legacy support is the reason for Windows security problems. If Windows 7 cuts the cord, they will have a much more secure system. And more stable.
If a company still needs to support 16 year old machines, they have other problems.
Wonderful News
This is WONDERFUL NEWS!!!!!
My $2,500, less than 3 year year old Power Mac is Junk!!! Sure hope Apple soon drops support for Intel Core Solo and Core Duo... They are Ollllllllddddddd and JUNKY compared to new chips...
Guess we'll just buy a new machine every 1 1/2 - 2 years. Gooooo Steve!!!!!
This is WONDERFUL NEWS!!!!!
My $2,500, less than 3 year year old Power Mac is Junk!!! Sure hope Apple soon drops support for Intel Core Solo and Core Duo... They are Ollllllllddddddd and JUNKY compared to new chips...
Guess we'll just buy a new machine every 1 1/2 - 2 years. Gooooo Steve!!!!!
if you use a PPC as your main computer now, you need to get yourself into a apple store this year, i cant speak for the G5, but my ibook is a dog that needs to be buried/ recycled, or sold to someone to dumb to know the difference. the youngest PPC will be 3 in august. i dont want apple to keep compiling code for two proccesors, they can use that manpower on somthing more useful.
Are you like this in real life, or do you get your thrills from insulting people on this forum?
You are aware that some of the most powerful CPU's are actually PPC chips? Or did this piece of information slip your small mind?
I have no problem with Apple moving on. My 10 year old Dual Core G4 machine kicks the early Intel Mac notebooks everytime. The G5 quads even more so.
Some people here actually use Macs to make money not just to look cool infront of their little friends.
Ahhh Yes, as a matter of fact there Fanboy, much of it will...
Want an example???? Soon Apple will release iTunes updates that require "OS X 10.6.1 or higher.... I won't even be able to sync my iphone to < 3 year old PowerMac G5......
And that's just one example....
You can now return to your "everything is perfect is Steve's world" blindness...
You're calling me a fanboy? really? come on. Go search through my older posts, newb, and you'll see that I most definitely am not. Since when will your phone stop syncing? That has _never_ in the history of an iPod happened. Never has it been supported, then after an update no longer been. Maybe you won't be able to sync the latest and greatest iPhone, (this will be two or three iPhone generations down the line as they won't drop Leopard support for quite some time) but your current iPhone will continue to sync.
Hell here's a post I made just yesterday.