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.
PowerPC Support in Mac OS X 10.6 After All?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm a little disappointed they dropped it this time...but I would have fully expected it for 10.7 That'd be what, 2011 at least? 5 years since the last PPC sold...it'd be very reasonable to expect it then.
It's also possible PowerPC instruction set would make implementing Grand Central more complicated, or not worth trying at all:
If atomic operations in PowerPC architecture are different (or scarce? it's RISC after all) enough and GCD wouldn't be efficient because of this, it would also mean all parts of OS X rewritten to use Grand Central wouldn't be available to PowerPC users, so short of a few new features like Dock Expose they'd be getting a Leopard with very little, if any, performance improvement.
The above is my own speculation, not overly reliable since I've never programmed for PowerPC. But GCD implementation would surely have to be very different, and if it wasn't there, it wouldn't be possible to compile code using GCD interfaces for PowerPC. Having to develop everything separately for an architecture no longer used would be costly.
If atomic operations in PowerPC architecture are different (or scarce? it's RISC after all) enough and GCD wouldn't be efficient because of this, it would also mean all parts of OS X rewritten to use Grand Central wouldn't be available to PowerPC users, so short of a few new features like Dock Expose they'd be getting a Leopard with very little, if any, performance improvement.
The above is my own speculation, not overly reliable since I've never programmed for PowerPC. But GCD implementation would surely have to be very different, and if it wasn't there, it wouldn't be possible to compile code using GCD interfaces for PowerPC. Having to develop everything separately for an architecture no longer used would be costly.
Those G5s available less than two years ago are really having a tough time with Leopard.
Although I use the latest technology from Apple for my business I am replying to this silly comment on a bottom end iBook G4. 15 days since reboot (due to Software Update) which runs day and night without issues.
System Software Overview:
System Version: Mac OS X 10.5.7 (9J61)
Kernel Version: Darwin 9.7.0
Boot Volume: Macintosh HD
Boot Mode: Normal
Model Name: iBook G4
Model Identifier: PowerBook6,7
Processor Name: PowerPC G4 (1.5)
Processor Speed: 1.33 GHz
Number Of CPUs: 1
L2 Cache (per CPU): 512 KB
Memory: 512 MB
Bus Speed: 133 MHz
Boot ROM Version: 4.9.3f0
Serial Number (system): 4H5361FJSE7
Sudden Motion Sensor:
State: Enabled
Version: 1.0
Just a comment on the cost of the hardware. I view the extra cost of the hardware as in effect a 'donation' to the development of OS X. If OS X was priced at the level of a Microsoft Windows OS, the cost to buy Leopard would be several hundreds of dollars each. I'd not like to get a cheap piece of crap machine for a $600.00 operating system and I sure wouldn't want Apple to not be able to continue developing OS X because they couldn't afford to.
Yeah I realize that not all the money goes to development but I look at it like paying taxes in the 'real world'. If you want cops to be able to stop crime, you gotta pay for it. If you want someone to come over and put the fire out in your home, you gotta pay for it.
Perhaps that's too simplistic but I guess I'm getting tired of the bitching on the high cost of the hardware. Either you want the best operating system around or you don't and either you want to contribute to the development of said or you don't. If enough people don't and Apple goes under you can't bitch because Apple died, although I know that you will.
Meanwhile in the 'real world' the rich gated communities are bitching because there isn't enough cops and fire people to save their McMansions and yet they still don't want to pay taxes. You can't have it both ways. Someone has to pay for it. If the rich won't and the poor can't then you can't complain when the area goes down the crapper...
F
fishcove
Guest
If you'd read a little farther on in the thread you'd have discovered this:
The
They could work it like the 'Aero' GUI for Vista. If you got the power, it runs. If not, it doesn't. On Vista many people to my knowledge stop Aero and have a perfectly functioning system that looks eerily like XP...
Except Apple doesn't WORK like Microsoft. Apple doesn't CRIPPLE their OS just to get it to run on older machines.
"But..."
Lack of OpenCL support on older models is the fault of the respective hardware companies.
The only problem with with this approach is it goes against everything Apple wants Snow Leopard to be. Disregarding the technological difficulties of optimising for multiple architectures, Snow Leopard has been designed to be the fastest and most efficient version of OS X to date, quite the opposite of what Vista is. Apple realised long ago that the large majority of users don't particularly want flashy new features, but just want an operating system that can keep up with the pace of their work. By completely dropping PowerPC support, Apple has not just disabled a few core features to ensure compatibility, they have instead stripped out all outdated code to provide the best user experience for their current generation of products.
Personally, I don't see the problem in dropping PowerPC with Snow Leopard. In the few years since the introduction of Intel-based Macs, adoption of these machines has only increased over time and it only makes sense for Apple to reward those customers who have recently bought Intel-based machines (and therefore increased Apple's profits) with an operating system that best fits the most popular architecture.
One tip I give to people who ask me why their computer is slow is to stick with the OS their computer shipped with. Most of the time, new OSes have features that go by completely ignored by the majority of users thereby rendering their recent upgrade pointless. For me, a good OS has to be stable, secure and feel completely at home on the system which it's installed.
To those that bitch and whine about Snow Leopard's lack of PPC support, please, just go install Tiger.
Maybe I wasn't clear enough, because it has nothing to do with power.
If we believe Apple (and I see no reason not to in this case), one of the biggest gains in performance in Snow Leopard will be by improved multithreading thanks to GCD. Its implementation uses atomic operations available in x86. I know PowerPC provides atomic operations allowing synchronization (otherwise any safe multithreading would have been impossible), but they're different and perhaps implementation of GCD wouldn't be efficient on this architecture.
If there was GCD in Intel, but not in PowerPC version of Snow Leopard, developers would have a choice: either use GCD interfaces for improved concurrency, and drop PowerPC support, or use traditional multithreading (or don't bother with multithreading) to make the app PowerPC-compatible. Now all we have to realize is that it isn't the case only with third-party apps, but also with a big part of OS X and Apple apps.
I repeat, I don't know if it's the reason, but lack of GCD support on PowerPC would in fact make Snow Leopard for it pointless.
And guess what - once Snow Leopard is out - it'll STILL run Leopard day and night without issues
This thread is a year old, it's not happening...
Oh, I didn't see that
. That's good then.
And when Snow Leopard is released you can continue using your beloved G4 - for me I'm looking at getting a cheap-as low end G4 Mini-Mac and setting it up as an mp3 jukebox for my old man. I can continue using Leopard without any problems.
What are you talking about? Question: How did you completely miss that I own 2 iMacs, one of which is my primary computer that I'm using right now?
It's not "progress"
Notice how even Microsoft still supports its old Pentiums.
Plus it's not like they're supporting all Intels anyway... it's 64-bit only leaving Intel Cores in the cold.
It's sort of a shame IBM hadn't come out with their Power6 about a year earlier, lol..
I think they should still support 745x CPUs, then drop support for all PPCs save G5s with 10.7 =)
Assuming by "they" you mean Apple, according to http://www.apple.com/macosx/specs.html 10.6 Snow Leopard is supporting ALL Intel Macs, including the Core Duo and Core Solo...
just to clarify
You own two Mac's and yet still complain? if Apple is so utterly crap as you claim - then why do you keep purchasing them? are you some sort of sadomasochist who simply keeps with Apple so you have something to complain about? if I had the amount of problems with Apple that you were complaining abut - I would have left instead of trolling through forums whinging and whining about it.
So when I miss one single post I am 'selectively reading' but when the likes of Firefly2002 keeping lying over and over again claiming that Snow Leopard is 64bit one, I don't see a single thing being said by you. Selective reading on your part or do you just find particular people on this site to pick on?
For the record (if there is one) I won't mind the PPC bits if they go missing in Snow Leopard. I have an older white plastic Imac that still runs Tiger and will for a while as it has an HP scanner hooked to it that HP kindly didn't develop Leopard drivers for. I'll keep using Tiger until either the scanner dies or the system does. She threw a power supply last month and has a flaky ethernet port but beside that, still rocks with the big boys.
You want to talk about a company leaving things for dead, look at HP! We had a Laserjet 3600 that I couldn't get to work with our macs. Worked fine with Windows but having to delete the printers and recreate them every time the printer decided to stop printing was getting old. HP is the one that really sucks as we (the Mac community) seem to be on the receiving end of the back of their hand a lot IMO...
You want to talk about a company leaving things for dead, look at HP! We had a Laserjet 3600 that I couldn't get to work with our macs. Worked fine with Windows but having to delete the printers and recreate them every time the printer decided to stop printing was getting old. HP is the one that really sucks as we (the Mac community) seem to be on the receiving end of the back of their hand a lot IMO...
It was known for "Snow Leopard" to run much more efficient than "Leopard", including if they still support the subject on GPU's acting somewhat as a co-processor, for ANY mac that runs 10.6. I think it'll be a slight mistake for Apple to completely drop the PPC support, for many out there still own G4's, like me.