There is no public information regarding system requirements for Panther yet. That said, it would be ridiculous for Apple to ship Panther as a 64-bit only OS when there are no 64-bit chips shipping yet.
You can't sell an OS if no one has the hardware to run it.
The majority of current Apple computers use the G4 chip. I seriously doubt Apple would ship an OS in the near future that won't run on the G4.
From what I heard on some IRC channel, Apple can't even stop supporting G3 (remember, they are still selling G3 iBooks). So I expect Panther will run on G3 and G4 without any problems. Technically, there is absolutely no reason why not.
From what I heard on some IRC channel, Apple can't even stop supporting G3 (remember, they are still selling G3 iBooks). So I expect Panther will run on G3 and G4 without any problems. Technically, there is absolutely no reason why not.
Dropping OS Support for G3s will be announced just prior to the Summer of -04, with the major update in LATE Autumn of that year being the first that requires a minimum of a G4. The reason for that decision is that it will be too much work to support such a wide set of hardware "drivers", ranging from early G3s to the 970+ successor. The latter will contain so many new coding options (to express it simply) that it will demand a major coding effort - on the other hand it will be more than worth it because it will enable a number of new OS features that have hitherto been lying as mere ideas in the "To do when sufficient cycles are available" In box.... Some of these have been lying there since before Pink! and the G4s will only JUST have enough juice (and only so when coding parts of it specially for the vector engine) to work them - about the same as the early iMacs running 10.1.5. The computing power necessary to run the upcoming metatags addition to OSX is minor in comparision...
engpjp
PS - The roadmap for OSX has recently firmed up considerably after the (surprisingly, even for IBM) positive sampling results. Apple now has a strong belief in the PPC9xx family's ability to scale according to expectations, and to gain advantage from IBM's huge fundamental research program - and with the war ending and massive revenues coming in from the oil/rebuilding starting within three-four months Apple WILL be able to hold its position in the computer sales.
Dropping OS Support for G3s will be announced just prior to the Summer of -04, with the major update in LATE Autumn of that year being the first that requires a minimum of a G4. The reason for that decision is that it will be too much work to support such a wide set of hardware "drivers", ranging from early G3s to the 970+ successor. The latter will contain so many new coding options (to express it simply) that it will demand a major coding effort - on the other hand it will be more than worth it because it will enable a number of new OS features that have hitherto been lying as mere ideas in the "To do when sufficient cycles are available" In box.... Some of these have been lying there since before Pink! and the G4s will only JUST have enough juice (and only so when coding parts of it specially for the vector engine) to work them - about the same as the early iMacs running 10.1.5. The computing power necessary to run the upcoming metatags addition to OSX is minor in comparision...
engpjp
PS - The roadmap for OSX has recently firmed up considerably after the (surprisingly, even for IBM) positive sampling results. Apple now has a strong belief in the PPC9xx family's ability to scale according to expectations, and to gain advantage from IBM's huge fundamental research program - and with the war ending and massive revenues coming in from the oil/rebuilding starting within three-four months Apple WILL be able to hold its position in the computer sales.
Dropping OS Support for G3s will be announced just prior to the Summer of -04, with the major update in LATE Autumn of that year being the first that requires a minimum of a G4.
Dont agree. They are still selling G3 powered computers troughout this year, probably to MWSF next year, and they HAVE to support these customers longer than half a year.
Quote:
Originally posted by engpjp
The reason for that decision is that it will be too much work to support such a wide set of hardware "drivers", ranging from early G3s to the 970+ successor. The latter will contain so many new coding options (to express it simply) that it will demand a major coding effort - on the other hand it will be more than worth it because it will enable a number of new OS features that have hitherto been lying as mere ideas in the "To do when sufficient cycles are available" In box.... Some of these have been lying there since before Pink! and the G4s will only JUST have enough juice (and only so when coding parts of it specially for the vector engine) to work them - about the same as the early iMacs running 10.1.5. The computing power necessary to run the upcoming metatags addition to OSX is minor in comparision...
It's possible that many of the new features would require altivec to work at reasonable speeds, but to say that it will take a major coding effort to make it run reasonably on current G3 models is pushing it a bit far I think. Apple simply can't leave customers behind this way, and with new apps often requiering the latest and greatest os to run, that would make a lot of customers angry.
Even if some features would run slow on a non altivec computer, simply making them run could make a lot of customers thinking about buying new hardware, especially if the new features are cool and useful. Locking customers out are simply going to make a lot of them !
Apple simply can't leave customers behind this way, and with new apps often requiering the latest and greatest os to run, that would make a lot of customers angry.
Even if some features would run slow on a non altivec computer, simply making them run could make a lot of customers thinking about buying new hardware, especially if the new features are cool and useful. Locking customers out are simply going to make a lot of them !
Angry? That seems like a rather unhealthy response. 'Disappointed', 'surprised', or 'perplexed' would be better reactions.
Anger? Why don't you just settle this with a fist fight or a law suit?
It seems strange that anyone could get 'angry' simply because a company releases a new product.
Dropping OS Support for G3s will be announced just prior to the Summer of -04, with the major update in LATE Autumn of that year being the first that requires a minimum of a G4. The reason for that decision is that it will be too much work to support such a wide set of hardware "drivers", ranging from early G3s to the 970+ successor.
Sorry, I don't buy it. The G3 -> 970+ uses the same basic instruction set, with layers of enhancements which are used as applicable and available.
Quote:
The latter will contain so many new coding options (to express it simply) that it will demand a major coding effort
See above. This doesn't make sense unless they're going to completely change the underlying instruction set... in which case we'd lose the entire PPC range.
Quote:
- on the other hand it will be more than worth it because it will enable a number of new OS features that have hitherto been lying as mere ideas in the "To do when sufficient cycles are available" In box.... Some of these have been lying there since before Pink! and the G4s will only JUST have enough juice (and only so when coding parts of it specially for the vector engine) to work them
So they disable some features on G3s or G4s. They do this *now* with Quartz Extreme, for example. I have a Pismo, my wife a recent iBook. She has options I don't, with 10.2.5. This is nothing new.
Don't expect dropping G3 support in the OS for at least 12-18 months after Apple sells its' very last G3 based unit. Now, if you know something we don't, like say the Power{Mac,Book} lines are going to 970 and i{Book,Mac} lines are going to G4 *this summer*, then you might have a potential of being correct, but as it currently stands, with reasonable speculation, we're looking at 2005 before such a move can even be considered. There's just plain no reason why to do it, from a technical level. IOKit offers the abstraction from hardware they need for those mobo drivers you mentioned. A G3 based mobo with IOKit support extensions will still work as long as IOKit does. It may not be *fast*, but it'll work.
Dropping OS Support for G3s will be announced just prior to the Summer of -04, with the major update in LATE Autumn of that year being the first that requires a minimum of a G4. The reason for that decision is that it will be too much work to support such a wide set of hardware "drivers", ranging from early G3s to the 970+ successor. The latter will contain so many new coding options (to express it simply) that it will demand a major coding effort - on the other hand it will be more than worth it because it will enable a number of new OS features that have hitherto been lying as mere ideas in the "To do when sufficient cycles are available" In box.... Some of these have been lying there since before Pink! and the G4s will only JUST have enough juice (and only so when coding parts of it specially for the vector engine) to work them - about the same as the early iMacs running 10.1.5. The computing power necessary to run the upcoming metatags addition to OSX is minor in comparision...
engpjp
PS - The roadmap for OSX has recently firmed up considerably after the (surprisingly, even for IBM) positive sampling results. Apple now has a strong belief in the PPC9xx family's ability to scale according to expectations, and to gain advantage from IBM's huge fundamental research program - and with the war ending and massive revenues coming in from the oil/rebuilding starting within three-four months Apple WILL be able to hold its position in the computer sales.
All thats missing is... ****CONFERMED******
(sp mistake intentional)
Hey its Kormac! under the guise of engpjp. or its Kormac's crack dealer. Get me some of that yum yum yum fantasy drug that lets me see the future
With the war ending and massive revenues coming in from the oil/rebuilding starting within three-four months Apple WILL be able to hold its position in the computer sales.
I never knew Apple was set to profit from the war. Does Halliburton or Bechtel buy lots of Apple computers?
Will Apple's slogan be "Halliburton rebuilt Iraq with a Mac and ranked in billions, think of what it can do for your buisness."
Apple could make switcher comercials with Iraqis talking about how after they switched regimes they decided to switch operating systems also. "Why stay with a dictitorial operating system? Switch to Mac."
Or "Slaughter civilians, slaughter the competion: use a G4!"
Come on. G3s are still selling, and despite what some people on this forum are saying, they aren't that slow either. Apple will not introduce an operating system next year that won't work on hardware from this year. And they won't do it in 2005 either, unless they have a very good reason ("driver support" isn't - have you really looked at all theoretically supported models?).
Thing is, how does anyone know the G4 will even still be in production come a year from now?
Everyone looks to that day when the iBook gets its G4, but if things unfold like they seem, Motorola will be all but in shambles soon. It seems more likely that IBM would just keep going with the G3 technology and add a vector unit -- would be a great processor, given they re-badge it.
No, Apple won't be so bold to abandon the G3 or G4 anytime soon. The mods required to go to 64-bit are miniscule (I mean in terms of the OS).
Come on. G3s are still selling, and despite what some people on this forum are saying, they aren't that slow either. Apple will not introduce an operating system next year that won't work on hardware from this year. And they won't do it in 2005 either, unless they have a very good reason ("driver support" isn't - have you really looked at all theoretically supported models?).
Exactly! Even if Apple introduce new processor intensive features (etc) there is no reason why the base-os wouldn't be perfectly usable on current macs, even G3's. Apple is working hard making the whole os more responsive and that would help the G3's performance as well as the G4 and 970.
More and more features are being accelerated with altivec and that results in even better performance on altivec enabled computers (even more so on the 970 that the G4), but Apple will still make sure that these features are available on G3's with "reasonable" performance.
I wonder if 10.4 will run on a G3. It sounds like the iBooks will have G4s by then, but still, if I bought an ibook this Summer, it would suck if the next os wouldn't support my 1year old iBook.
I wonder if 10.4 will run on a G3. It sounds like the iBooks will have G4s by then, but still, if I bought an ibook this Summer, it would suck if the next os wouldn't support my 1year old iBook.
I wonder if 10.4 will run on a G3. It sounds like the iBooks will have G4s by then, but still, if I bought an ibook this Summer, it would suck if the next os wouldn't support my 1year old iBook.
While nobody can know for sure... I'd assume OS X will support* the G3 for some time to come.
*Disclaimer - But don't expect Apple to hold back on giving future versions of OS X (even including Panther perhaps) new features that the G3 will NOT be able to make use of. It would be silly to think that Apple will hold back on adding new features to the OS just becuase the G3 can't support them.
Apple has already shown us that it WILL do just that (push forward with features that not ALL OS X supported boxes can make use of) with Quartz Extreme.
<rant>
The last thing I wanna hear is more people BMC (bitch moan complain) that Apple has abandoned them because 'insert some cool new OS X feature' is only supported on G4's and 970's or on 970's alone. Yea I know I'm talking to the wall here... people will always BMC and I guess I just have to learn to ignore it... It would be nice however if people who do BMC would just grow up and learn that just like life itself an OS doesn't stand still after you made a computer purchase.
Comments
You can't sell an OS if no one has the hardware to run it.
The majority of current Apple computers use the G4 chip. I seriously doubt Apple would ship an OS in the near future that won't run on the G4.
Originally posted by costique
From what I heard on some IRC channel, Apple can't even stop supporting G3 (remember, they are still selling G3 iBooks). So I expect Panther will run on G3 and G4 without any problems. Technically, there is absolutely no reason why not.
Dropping OS Support for G3s will be announced just prior to the Summer of -04, with the major update in LATE Autumn of that year being the first that requires a minimum of a G4. The reason for that decision is that it will be too much work to support such a wide set of hardware "drivers", ranging from early G3s to the 970+ successor. The latter will contain so many new coding options (to express it simply) that it will demand a major coding effort - on the other hand it will be more than worth it because it will enable a number of new OS features that have hitherto been lying as mere ideas in the "To do when sufficient cycles are available" In box.... Some of these have been lying there since before Pink! and the G4s will only JUST have enough juice (and only so when coding parts of it specially for the vector engine) to work them - about the same as the early iMacs running 10.1.5. The computing power necessary to run the upcoming metatags addition to OSX is minor in comparision...
engpjp
PS - The roadmap for OSX has recently firmed up considerably after the (surprisingly, even for IBM) positive sampling results. Apple now has a strong belief in the PPC9xx family's ability to scale according to expectations, and to gain advantage from IBM's huge fundamental research program - and with the war ending and massive revenues coming in from the oil/rebuilding starting within three-four months Apple WILL be able to hold its position in the computer sales.
Originally posted by equinox
Hi,
just want to know if Panther will run on my G4-32 or only on the new 970-64?
Thanks,
Peter
It would piss me off to say the least if they did that! But as Brad mentioned no point doing so if their isnt the h/ware to support it!
Originally posted by engpjp
Dropping OS Support for G3s will be announced just prior to the Summer of -04, with the major update in LATE Autumn of that year being the first that requires a minimum of a G4. The reason for that decision is that it will be too much work to support such a wide set of hardware "drivers", ranging from early G3s to the 970+ successor. The latter will contain so many new coding options (to express it simply) that it will demand a major coding effort - on the other hand it will be more than worth it because it will enable a number of new OS features that have hitherto been lying as mere ideas in the "To do when sufficient cycles are available" In box.... Some of these have been lying there since before Pink! and the G4s will only JUST have enough juice (and only so when coding parts of it specially for the vector engine) to work them - about the same as the early iMacs running 10.1.5. The computing power necessary to run the upcoming metatags addition to OSX is minor in comparision...
engpjp
PS - The roadmap for OSX has recently firmed up considerably after the (surprisingly, even for IBM) positive sampling results. Apple now has a strong belief in the PPC9xx family's ability to scale according to expectations, and to gain advantage from IBM's huge fundamental research program - and with the war ending and massive revenues coming in from the oil/rebuilding starting within three-four months Apple WILL be able to hold its position in the computer sales.
yawn, not another one of these guys
Originally posted by engpjp
Dropping OS Support for G3s will be announced just prior to the Summer of -04, with the major update in LATE Autumn of that year being the first that requires a minimum of a G4.
Dont agree. They are still selling G3 powered computers troughout this year, probably to MWSF next year, and they HAVE to support these customers longer than half a year.
Originally posted by engpjp
The reason for that decision is that it will be too much work to support such a wide set of hardware "drivers", ranging from early G3s to the 970+ successor. The latter will contain so many new coding options (to express it simply) that it will demand a major coding effort - on the other hand it will be more than worth it because it will enable a number of new OS features that have hitherto been lying as mere ideas in the "To do when sufficient cycles are available" In box.... Some of these have been lying there since before Pink! and the G4s will only JUST have enough juice (and only so when coding parts of it specially for the vector engine) to work them - about the same as the early iMacs running 10.1.5. The computing power necessary to run the upcoming metatags addition to OSX is minor in comparision...
It's possible that many of the new features would require altivec to work at reasonable speeds, but to say that it will take a major coding effort to make it run reasonably on current G3 models is pushing it a bit far I think. Apple simply can't leave customers behind this way, and with new apps often requiering the latest and greatest os to run, that would make a lot of customers angry.
Even if some features would run slow on a non altivec computer, simply making them run could make a lot of customers thinking about buying new hardware, especially if the new features are cool and useful. Locking customers out are simply going to make a lot of them
Originally posted by NETROMac
Apple simply can't leave customers behind this way, and with new apps often requiering the latest and greatest os to run, that would make a lot of customers angry.
Even if some features would run slow on a non altivec computer, simply making them run could make a lot of customers thinking about buying new hardware, especially if the new features are cool and useful. Locking customers out are simply going to make a lot of them
Angry? That seems like a rather unhealthy response. 'Disappointed', 'surprised', or 'perplexed' would be better reactions.
Anger? Why don't you just settle this with a fist fight or a law suit?
It seems strange that anyone could get 'angry' simply because a company releases a new product.
Originally posted by engpjp
Dropping OS Support for G3s will be announced just prior to the Summer of -04, with the major update in LATE Autumn of that year being the first that requires a minimum of a G4. The reason for that decision is that it will be too much work to support such a wide set of hardware "drivers", ranging from early G3s to the 970+ successor.
Sorry, I don't buy it. The G3 -> 970+ uses the same basic instruction set, with layers of enhancements which are used as applicable and available.
The latter will contain so many new coding options (to express it simply) that it will demand a major coding effort
See above. This doesn't make sense unless they're going to completely change the underlying instruction set... in which case we'd lose the entire PPC range.
- on the other hand it will be more than worth it because it will enable a number of new OS features that have hitherto been lying as mere ideas in the "To do when sufficient cycles are available" In box.... Some of these have been lying there since before Pink! and the G4s will only JUST have enough juice (and only so when coding parts of it specially for the vector engine) to work them
So they disable some features on G3s or G4s. They do this *now* with Quartz Extreme, for example. I have a Pismo, my wife a recent iBook. She has options I don't, with 10.2.5. This is nothing new.
Don't expect dropping G3 support in the OS for at least 12-18 months after Apple sells its' very last G3 based unit. Now, if you know something we don't, like say the Power{Mac,Book} lines are going to 970 and i{Book,Mac} lines are going to G4 *this summer*, then you might have a potential of being correct, but as it currently stands, with reasonable speculation, we're looking at 2005 before such a move can even be considered. There's just plain no reason why to do it, from a technical level. IOKit offers the abstraction from hardware they need for those mobo drivers you mentioned. A G3 based mobo with IOKit support extensions will still work as long as IOKit does. It may not be *fast*, but it'll work.
Originally posted by engpjp
Dropping OS Support for G3s will be announced just prior to the Summer of -04, with the major update in LATE Autumn of that year being the first that requires a minimum of a G4. The reason for that decision is that it will be too much work to support such a wide set of hardware "drivers", ranging from early G3s to the 970+ successor. The latter will contain so many new coding options (to express it simply) that it will demand a major coding effort - on the other hand it will be more than worth it because it will enable a number of new OS features that have hitherto been lying as mere ideas in the "To do when sufficient cycles are available" In box.... Some of these have been lying there since before Pink! and the G4s will only JUST have enough juice (and only so when coding parts of it specially for the vector engine) to work them - about the same as the early iMacs running 10.1.5. The computing power necessary to run the upcoming metatags addition to OSX is minor in comparision...
engpjp
PS - The roadmap for OSX has recently firmed up considerably after the (surprisingly, even for IBM) positive sampling results. Apple now has a strong belief in the PPC9xx family's ability to scale according to expectations, and to gain advantage from IBM's huge fundamental research program - and with the war ending and massive revenues coming in from the oil/rebuilding starting within three-four months Apple WILL be able to hold its position in the computer sales.
All thats missing is... ****CONFERMED******
(sp mistake intentional)
Hey its Kormac! under the guise of engpjp. or its Kormac's crack dealer. Get me some of that yum yum yum fantasy drug that lets me see the future
Originally posted by engpjp
With the war ending and massive revenues coming in from the oil/rebuilding starting within three-four months Apple WILL be able to hold its position in the computer sales.
I never knew Apple was set to profit from the war. Does Halliburton or Bechtel buy lots of Apple computers?
Will Apple's slogan be "Halliburton rebuilt Iraq with a Mac and ranked in billions, think of what it can do for your buisness."
Apple could make switcher comercials with Iraqis talking about how after they switched regimes they decided to switch operating systems also. "Why stay with a dictitorial operating system? Switch to Mac."
Or "Slaughter civilians, slaughter the competion: use a G4!"
Cruise Missle has a G4 apple processor!!!!
"The G4, killer of dictators everywhere."
Come on. G3s are still selling, and despite what some people on this forum are saying, they aren't that slow either. Apple will not introduce an operating system next year that won't work on hardware from this year. And they won't do it in 2005 either, unless they have a very good reason ("driver support" isn't - have you really looked at all theoretically supported models?).
Everyone looks to that day when the iBook gets its G4, but if things unfold like they seem, Motorola will be all but in shambles soon. It seems more likely that IBM would just keep going with the G3 technology and add a vector unit -- would be a great processor, given they re-badge it.
No, Apple won't be so bold to abandon the G3 or G4 anytime soon. The mods required to go to 64-bit are miniscule (I mean in terms of the OS).
Originally posted by Chucker
Come on. G3s are still selling, and despite what some people on this forum are saying, they aren't that slow either. Apple will not introduce an operating system next year that won't work on hardware from this year. And they won't do it in 2005 either, unless they have a very good reason ("driver support" isn't - have you really looked at all theoretically supported models?).
Exactly! Even if Apple introduce new processor intensive features (etc) there is no reason why the base-os wouldn't be perfectly usable on current macs, even G3's. Apple is working hard making the whole os more responsive and that would help the G3's performance as well as the G4 and 970.
More and more features are being accelerated with altivec and that results in even better performance on altivec enabled computers (even more so on the 970 that the G4), but Apple will still make sure that these features are available on G3's with "reasonable" performance.
Originally posted by Placebo
I wonder if 10.4 will run on a G3. It sounds like the iBooks will have G4s by then, but still, if I bought an ibook this Summer, it would suck if the next os wouldn't support my 1year old iBook.
10.4 WILL run on the G3!
Originally posted by NETROMac
10.4 WILL run on the G3!
And your source is...
Originally posted by Placebo
I wonder if 10.4 will run on a G3. It sounds like the iBooks will have G4s by then, but still, if I bought an ibook this Summer, it would suck if the next os wouldn't support my 1year old iBook.
While nobody can know for sure... I'd assume OS X will support* the G3 for some time to come.
*Disclaimer - But don't expect Apple to hold back on giving future versions of OS X (even including Panther perhaps) new features that the G3 will NOT be able to make use of. It would be silly to think that Apple will hold back on adding new features to the OS just becuase the G3 can't support them.
Apple has already shown us that it WILL do just that (push forward with features that not ALL OS X supported boxes can make use of) with Quartz Extreme.
<rant>
The last thing I wanna hear is more people BMC (bitch moan complain) that Apple has abandoned them because 'insert some cool new OS X feature' is only supported on G4's and 970's or on 970's alone. Yea I know I'm talking to the wall here... people will always BMC and I guess I just have to learn to ignore it... It would be nice however if people who do BMC would just grow up and learn that just like life itself an OS doesn't stand still after you made a computer purchase.
</rant>
How's that for a disclaimer...
Dave
Originally posted by Chucker
And your source is...
...common sense