What does that have to do with what I said? All I mentioned is that my G5 is capable of doing a lot, including running latest and newest release of OS. And if it is capable then there is no need to drop the PPC support just yet.
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
What does that have to do with what I said? All I mentioned is that my G5 is capable of doing a lot, including running latest and newest release of OS. And if it is capable then there is no need to drop the PPC support just yet.
64-bit is only good for 4+ GB of memory address, anything less and its pointless. 32-bit will be staying for a while since most consumer application do not even benefit from 64-bit.
It's not the 64-bit memory handling that Snow is about. It's about SSE. These chips weren't in the previous Intel chips. Snow needs the advanced SSE to utilize the core animation, core audio and Cocoa apps necessary to run the multi-touch layers better and much faster. So this isn't about 64-bit vs 32-bit memory wise.
It is a necessary evil. But like I said earlier there will be two versions of Leopard. This person probably has an alpha build with all kinds of stuff that won't be in 10.6 whether it's there now or not.
When the core of OS X already has to run on x86 and ARM, also supporting PPC isn't the biggest of issues: the issue is mainly in terms of testing. I don't think having to test on PPC is going to be too much effort, even for several years. I highly doubt there is a large amount of manual testing at the levels where there are different branches for different architectures, so most of the issue will be anything higher up with has different branches for big/little endian, I expect.
Software has a nastly little habit of only supporting the latest version of an operating system. I'm sure I can do without whatever new features 10.6 is sure to have (I actually don't use Spaces or Time Machine at all, but I still use Leopard), but when the software I use regularly requires 10.6 I'll be a little sad
64-bit isn't only good for 4+ GB memory support. 64-bit support on Intel also doubles the number of registers available. Seeing how PPC included 32 registers and x86 only 8, I think PPC programmers would appreciate having more registers available when moving to Intel x64. Even Apple's developer documentation notes that there are cases where the additional registers in 64-bit Intel are valuable for increasing performance.This would be a stupid onpart if implemented, since majority of the people use 4GB or less of in they MacBook (Pro), Core 2 Duo and other machines that are and are not 64-bit capable processors. Even though my SR notebook can handle 8GB of ram, the prices are no where near affordable and the iMac Core 2 Duo (White) only allow 3GB max support.
64-bit is only good for 4+ GB of memory address, anything less and its pointless. 32-bit will be staying for a while since most consumer application do not even benefit from 64-bit.
I was kinda liking the whole "optimized" talk, but supporting PPC is probably a wise idea.
But this calls for new features too, if OSX 10.6 had turned to be some kind of "speedy Intel-only" version of Leopard I guess it would've made sense to drop PPC.
I still hope they drop Carbon somehow though, I'm sorry - I don't really like the way it feels
But this calls for new features too, if OSX 10.6 had turned to be some kind of "speedy Intel-only" version of Leopard I guess it would've made sense to drop PPC.
I still hope they drop Carbon somehow though, I'm sorry - I don't really like the way it feels
I don't think that's bound to happen unless 10.6 introduces new APIs the developers are interested in, a lot of apps have gone 10.5 only because they use stuff like Core Animation and brand new APIs, but if 10.6 introduces nothing or almost nothing new there would be no reason not to support 10.5.
I wouldn't mind if they drop PPC support (and I have a G4 powerbook) sooner or later they have to stop making the operating system for older systems, yeah the G5 isn't to old but thats really the price of buying a computer; it gets outdated. then people want to cry and complain when its not supported, sooner or later they have to drop support for something, might as well be sooner. wouldn't that save apple some money? especially with more and more people buying intel macs, I don't think they sold to many PPC macs lately.
they should write the OS completely for intel chips just for stability against the windows platform. make it all it can be for intel, PPC people can still run leopard and I've never had any problems with it, if they are not getting any new features, who cares?
(of course I plan on getting an intel mac here soon, so I guess I don't care as much )
they should write the OS completely for intel chips just for stability against the windows platform. make it all it can be for intel, PPC people can still run leopard and I've never had any problems with it, if they are not getting any new features, who cares?
(of course I plan on getting an intel mac here soon, so I guess I don't care as much )
Yes, but that code has already been changed. For the most part, it should be just one codebase, compiled for two architectures. Like a Universal Binary. It's just maintenance now. If there are no new features, what's the harm in keeping PPC support?
legacy support does nothing but hold everything back in the long run. For most people, PPC code just wastes hard drive space. I think it would be easier just to drop support and be done with PPC once and for all. And I'm not just saying this because I have an Intel, I also have a PPC computer. It's just time to say goodbye.
Seems quite likely that there will be more than just a PPC/Intel version however I would not be surprised if your prediction of alpha is right.
32-bit PPC
64-bit PPC
32-bit Intel
64-bit Intel
Support for their current running OS...yes. Not a brand new OS.
You don't see Vista running PCs from 10 years ago, do you?
Yes that was an exageration since the latest PPC machine isn't that old, but you get my point.
The installed OS can be thinned out, but the install DVD you receive has support for both! Meaning less features in the OS (on the DVD). That OS is installed on your mac. See where I'm going with this?
Think of it in fractions.
1 = install DVD
1/2 = PPC
1/2 = Intel
Compared to:
1 = install DVD
1 = Intel
CHING CHING!!
Apple's marketshare has grown alot lately. More so after the Intel switch. So the majority of the mac users today use Intel machines. Losing one customer, because you don't have enough money to buy a new MacPro will not be of interest them at all. Not to mention you still have 2 other intel macs which I highly doubt you would just neglect.
Let me put it straight.
I am against Apple bringing out a new OS supporting BOTH PPC and Intel!
I am NOT against Apple continuing to support PPC in the current OS' (up to Leopard)
Again, I would not say that because PPC can still be very strong, even today, even right now..
Don't you think it would piss a lot of people off if Apple decided to drop PPC only because Intel is the "new cool kid"? I don't think Apple would provoke their reputation by doing something like that. They are supposedly known for their amazing customer care and respect.
Most people who bought Powermac G5 in 2006 assumed that their machines would still be able to take them into the future for years to come.
as someone still using a PPC Mac (Rev B iMac G5) i would be disappointed but not too upset if 10.6 begins the Intel-only era. if cutting the PPC cord means a more agile (for lack of a better word) and/or unified OS (Mac/Touch) going forward, i think it is a reasonable trade off. OTOH, it's really going to make me impatient for that Nehalem-powered, LED-displayed future iMac i am waiting for
What about 2 Install DVDs, 1 Intel, 1 PPC? The installation medium is not a constraint.
just my 2 cents
that 2 bridges image in the WWDC invite mean this:
10.6 will be 2 complete separate builds
there will be a PPC version and a Intel version and you can buy either one or both f you like but they won't come as one disc as 10.5 did.
that 2 bridges image in the WWDC invite mean this:
10.6 will be 2 complete separate builds
there will be a PPC version and a Intel version and you can buy either one or both f you like but they won't come as one disc as 10.5 did.
It seems to me that Apple maybe made a mistake with making Leopard a Universal Binary. In Tiger, there were separate builds for Intel and PPC so they could be optimized separately. A Universal Binary Leopard probably limits their ability to do so somewhat. So Snow Tiger could come out as the Intel Build of Leopard with some improvements while Leopard will remain the PPC optimized build with Intel support maintained, but not necessarily optimized, for those Intel Macs that don't upgrade to Snow Leopard.
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)
I hope this is true since I'm in the same boat as many others here. Though I do have a couple of MacBooks, I have no real desire to buy a new Mac Pro to meet my needs that I use the powermac for. This is not to mention the cost of replacing it. I do realize that they will eventually drop it but I really hope the time isn't now.
I hope this is true since I'm in the same boat as many others here. Though I do have a couple of MacBooks, I have no real desire to buy a new Mac Pro to meet my needs that I use the powermac for. This is not to mention the cost of replacing it. I do realize that they will eventually drop it but I really hope the time isn't now.
You do realize that
is walking a thin path, if they ignore they PPC base (including many many companies) those customers will finally say to hell with OS 10.6 and , lets just finally make the move to Linux and not deal with .I am the same way, I can switch to unix, linux, mac os x, or windows. I mainly use my system for email, web browsing and media playing. Have been doing less content creation these days. If I had a PPC and
stopped its support, guess what my time is money and I would look towards a cheaper or free solution. knows this fact well enough, that is why they will support PPC still they feature list no longer can do so. Last thing investor and developer need is to see ex PPC users moving to Linux which means less revenue. And the quicker those developers and investors jumped on the bandwagon, the same way they will get off.I agree. The last G5 was discontinued in August 2006, meaning the only OS update they got was Leopard. I'm pretty sure they expected at least 2 updates, if not more, before being dropped. I've accepted that PowerPC machines may not get all the features. But I'd like them to fix the bugs.
Even my Starmax ran everything up to Mac OS X (although the later years were "unsupported"). That was 5 years or so.
You do realize that
i dont think that would happen. i am pretty sure people realize that their computers wont last forever
i mean i like apple ONLY for the os and that is what keeps me buying macs
but i think if there is ppc support, only the G5's would make the cut
You do realize that
I am the same way, I can switch to unix, linux, mac os x, or windows. I mainly use my system for email, web browsing and media playing. Have been doing less content creation these days. If I had a PPC and
So you expect Apple to bring out new Operating Systems that support PPC and Intel forever?
No way. Apple has never done something like that, and there's no reason to. It runs totally counter to Jobs' philosophy to have to deal with "Oh crap, I bought the PPC version for my MacBook Pro."
Won't last forever true enough, however when someone buys a computer they expect at least 5 years of usage before upgrading.
We have computers at work that are 10+ years old, and it still runs perfectly well with the software that it was intended for. The only time an upgrade is mentioned is if the part is not available anymore.
Companies are stingy when it comes to computer budgets, and 5 years is minimum, think again.
I usually upgrade every 3-6 years, however foe some reason if
released an OS that did not support my SR Intel after 2-3 years, I would eventually move to unix/linux.