Actually, it pays to take a look at the bunch of articles here.
Mostly they are pretty skeptical. Some good reasons why not, a few as to why it should.
What I find interesting, to explode the theory that going to Intel would somehow make the chips cheaper, is that apparently it's the opposite. IBM's chips are up to one half cheaper than what Intel could supply.
The experts also seem to think that it would be difficult to move the software over.
Well, I just reread Apple's Unix tech briefing paper. They don't stop mentioning about how optimized for the G5 it is. They also make a point of telling us how optimized for the Velocity Engine it is.
It would be a big step. It really seems to depend on the VE in any performance related area.
And Apple employees are active this weekend on the Apple optimization mailing list talking about future improvements to gcc on PPCs. Perhaps they missed the secret x86 memo?
What evidence? Randomly leaked statements by "industry execs"? Sorry for being a true skeptic about anything but I don't just buy fly-by-night theories because Jim-Bob the IT exec at such and such "industry" company heard something thru a chain-letter email that supposedly came straight from Steve Jobs on the HUSH HUSH and FOR YOUR EYES ONLY. Like I said before there is such a thing as shoddy reporting.
I'm also not denying anything. I see both sides of the argument but I also look at the big picture and the skeptic part of me is winning the argument.
Except that WSJ doesn't as a rule report things unless they are very, very sure about their soures.
Whatever, we'll find out tomorrow who's assumptions are right and who's are wrong.
If you're right, then great, you picked it better than I did and you can feel good about yourself for the rest of the week for free.
Speculation is fun, but you're right: we'll know a little more tomorrow, and all the good guessers can wear gold stars for the rest of the week. ;-)
I will remain quite skeptical of an Apple conversion to x86 until Steve Jobs himself says it's so -- and then I'll be waiting for a retraction before it gets to market.
Something is up with Intel, but we ain't gonna know just what until Monday.
Check it out. In case it gets moved, here's the homepage link to the article on Yahoo. But check out the homepage first as the title is "Report: Apple switching to Intel chips"
Check it out. In case it gets moved, here's the homepage link to the article on Yahoo. But check out the homepage first as the title is "[color:blue]Report: Apple switching to Intel chips[/color]"
There is not much that can be said now that everyone's head has exploded. I just have one thing to add that i think people are missing. Even if there was acomplete swithc to x86, it would insane trying to cover all the bases of mothernoards, and hardware, at least in my opinion. One of the thing i like about OSX is it either works or doesnt. For me there is no tweaking and trying to install drivers that don't work or then break your system ala windows. Or lack of any support at all like linux in some cases. But that is just my personal opinion. I would acttually like to see a dual core pentium-m powerbook next year with an altivec unit. But hey I can dream.
My bet is that Apple is getting Intel to fab the PPC.
BTW, Scoble has said that he "heard it from several different executive-level sources inside Apple." Intrepet that anyway you like.
If I bet, I would agree; the news sounds an awful lot like Intel's gonna make a lowish end PPC for a Mac Mini, Mark II, or possibly an iBook, Mark II.
Reread TFA at Scobleizer. He doesn't say that there at all, and I cannot recall him saything that in the past. Furthermore, he's posted words to the effect of "I'm going to let everyone else make fools out of themselves while I'm in Europe."
Check it out. In case it gets moved, here's the homepage link to the article on Yahoo. But check out the homepage first as the title is "Report: Apple switching to Intel chips"
C|net, the Register, the WSJ, and that Scrotum guy all saying Intel Inside?
I'm sorry for you fanboyz, but there has got to be some major truth to this one!
1)\tYou all say, "Can't be true because none of the Mac Rumors sitez have any dirt." Duh, none of these sitez have access to Apple's top-level management, where do you think this decision is being made? Further, the normal rumors (hardware/software developments) must be known to a reasonable fraction to those on the Cupertino campus, thus Thinksecret "breaks" the PM update, what 7-10 days ahead of the actual announcement (that was hardware folks, actual tangible hardware shippable at that time). Obviously, that Criminally Insane Jobs (CIJ) is keeping a tight lid on things. Finally, donÂ?t you think its plausible that CIJ would want it to leak to the mainstream media (vis-Ã*-vis his dislike of Mac rumorz sitez), to diffuse the mass suicide that would occur at WWDC 2005 were he to blindly announce this nuclear option. Imagine, the faithful all seated, ready to hear the CIJ gospel, when poof, Beelzebub appears to announce his takeover of heaven. What a bummer man. My bet is that there is utter silence, followed by a heavy dose of RDF, followed by a mass conversion of biblical proportions. And look, whose that handing out Kool Aid at the back of the conference room, why itÂ?s Andy Grove. WTF, me first, me first!
2)\tWhatÂ?s the ratio of PC to Mac developers? Probably not to dissimilar to there respective market shares? How much work is it to port x86 appz to x86 appz? Zero! Their x86 binaries, are they not? Yes, I know, there are Â?littleÂ? things like the GUI and what not, but I will assume that CIJ will make every effort to make this as seamless as possible. The same argument goes for gamez. Hardware incompatibilities? What hardware incompatibilities, its x86 peripherals on x86 systems! Jeez, as it stands now, PC peripheral companies make just about 100% of Mac peripherals anyway! What about Mac only (especially Apple Corp.) developers? How about a 25-fold increase in potential sales due to the PC to Mac installed base? IsnÂ?t this enough incentive. If not, then go develop for Linux. Its do or die, sink or swim, put up or shut up, read Â?em and weep, game over! Do you get it now? You have been assimilated; the dark side has got you by the cahones!
3)\tWTF, whereÂ?s the vaunted PowerBook G5, whereÂ?s the vaunted PowerMac Quad G5 (with PCIe, etc.), whereÂ?s the 970GX or 970MP? Yes, I know heat and production issues. WhoÂ?s making/selling dual core CPUÂ?s/desktopÂ?s now? Who will likely be the first to 65nm and then 45nm? Intel and AMD! I can fully understand why CIJ is pissed off! PowerBook? More like SlowerBook to me! ItÂ?s what, like 12-24 months behind the PC laptops now? And Counting! Why must I wait several months (years?), while my PC brethren get the latest hardware, and at a substantially lower price point? Can you say market share? I fully blame IBM; Apple must by now be such a 3rd tier player in their eyes (after itÂ?s own hardware needs and now the 3 game console makers). WhatÂ?s the installed PC base? 300-400 million. Over what time span? 10 years? 20 years? How many PS2Â?s have been sold? 90 million. Over what time span? 3-4 years? Do the math! Oh, and forget about Cell on Mac, not going to happen now!
4)\tBTW, IÂ?ve personally owned/purchased Macs over the past 12 years. My choice! Not because of the hardware, but because of the software. To paraphrase Slick Willie, Â?ItÂ?s the OS, stupid.Â?
5)\tHowever, my work environment requires that I use PCÂ?s, and I have done so for over the past 20+ years. Their choice! Times change however, and I can no longer afford the luxury of the Mac price point experience. Unfortunately, my next purchase will be a 64-bit dual-core AMD laptop, which is likely to cost under $2K! Hey Andy, how about another cup of Kool Aid? See yah, donÂ?t want to be yah! IÂ?m off to the crack house, then the meth lab, then the head shop, and then a final stop at the S&M Barbie Ho House!
6)\tTrool, trool, trool your boat. Gently down the streamÂ?.
The wallstreet journal source is solid, very solid. You'll see come monday. It took me about a two weeks to be convinced of such a huge ordeal, but i know now ;-)
Quote:
Originally posted by chris v
"...according to CNET Networks Inc.'s News.com and The Wall Street Journal."
The wallstreet journal source is solid, very solid. You'll see come monday. It took me about a two weeks to be convinced of such a huge ordeal, but i know now ;-)
It took you 2 weeks to be convinced? Was this in the news 2 weeks ago already? I though this just came out a few days ago.
C|net, the Register, the WSJ, and that Scrotum guy all saying Intel Inside?
I'm sorry for you fanboyz, but there has got to be some major truth to this one!
1)\tYou all say, "Can't be true because none of the Mac Rumors sitez have any dirt." Duh, none of these sitez have access to Apple's top-level management, where do you think this decision is being made? Further, the normal rumors (hardware/software developments) must be known to a reasonable fraction to those on the Cupertino campus, thus Thinksecret "breaks" the PM update, what 7-10 days ahead of the actual announcement (that was hardware folks, actual tangible hardware shippable at that time). Obviously, that Criminally Insane Jobs (CIJ) is keeping a tight lid on things. Finally, donÂ?t you think its plausible that CIJ would want it to leak to the mainstream media (vis-Ã*-vis his dislike of Mac rumorz sitez), to diffuse the mass suicide that would occur at WWDC 2005 were he to blindly announce this nuclear option. Imagine, the faithful all seated, ready to hear the CIJ gospel, when poof, Beelzebub appears to announce his takeover of heaven. What a bummer man. My bet is that there is utter silence, followed by a heavy dose of RDF, followed by a mass conversion of biblical proportions. And look, whose that handing out Cool Aid at the back of the conference room, why itÂ?s Andy Grove. WTF, me first, me first!
2)\tWhatÂ?s the ratio of PC to Mac developers? Probably not to dissimilar to there respective market shares? How much work is it to port x86 appz to x86 appz? Zero! Their x86 binaries, are they not? Yes, I know, there are Â?littleÂ? things like the GUI and what not, but I will assume that CIJ will make every effort to make this as seamless as possible. The same argument goes for gamez. Hardware incompatibilities? What hardware incompatibilities, its x86 peripherals on x86 systems! Jeez, as it stands now, PC peripheral companies make just about 100% of Mac peripherals anyway! What about Mac only (especially Apple Corp.) developers? How about a 25-fold increase in potential sales due to the PC to Mac installed base? IsnÂ?t this enough incentive. If not, then go develop for Linux. Its do or die, sink or swim, put up or shut up, read Â?em and weep, game over! Do you get it now? You have been assimilated; the dark side has got you by the cahones!
3)\tWTF, whereÂ?s the vaunted PowerBook G5, whereÂ?s the vaunted PowerMac Quad G5 (with PCIe, etc.), whereÂ?s the 970GX or 970MP? Yes, I know heat and production issues. WhoÂ?s making/selling dual core CPUÂ?s/desktopÂ?s now? Who will likely be the first to 65nm and then 45nm? Intel and AMD! I can fully understand why CIJ is pissed off! PowerBook? More like SlowerBook to me! ItÂ?s what, like 12-24 months behind the PC laptops now? And Counting! Why must I wait several months (years?), while my PC brethren get the latest hardware, and at a substantially lower price point? Can you say market share? I fully blame IBM; Apple must by now be such a 3rd tier player in their eyes (after itÂ?s own hardware needs and now the 3 game console makers). WhatÂ?s the installed PC base? 300-400 million. Over what time span? 10 years? 20 years? How many PS2Â?s have been sold? 90 million. Over what time span? 3-4 years? Do the math! Oh, and forget about Cell on Mac, not going to happen now!
4)\tBTW, IÂ?ve personally owned/purchased Macs over the past 12 years. My choice! Not because of the hardware, but because of the software. To paraphrase Slick Willie, Â?ItÂ?s the OS, stupid.Â?
5)\tHowever, my work environment requires that I use PCÂ?s, and I have done so for over the past 20+ years. Their choice! Times change however, and I can no longer afford the luxury of the Mac price point experience. Unfortunately, my next purchase will be a 64-bit dual-core AMD laptop, which is likely to cost under $2K! Hey Andy, how about another cup of Cool Aid? See yah, donÂ?t want to be yah! IÂ?m off to the crack house, then the meth lab, then the head shop, and then a final stop at the S&M Barbie Ho House!
6)\tTrool, trool, trool your boat. Gently down the streamÂ?.
Big endianess is an issue only if the developer bypasses normal read/write API to write or read in data. I imagine that is negligible in the real world.
Well you can imagine all you like, but in reality the number of issues that arise in a port like this is surprising, even to those of us who have been doing it for decades. If the code was written simultaneously for multiple platforms, it will be easily portable between those platforms. The more platforms, the easier it is to port. Any time a new platform comes along (and OSX on x86 is a new platform), however, you're going to have some troubles. If you don't believe that you simply haven't been programming or porting code long enough.
Comments
Mostly they are pretty skeptical. Some good reasons why not, a few as to why it should.
What I find interesting, to explode the theory that going to Intel would somehow make the chips cheaper, is that apparently it's the opposite. IBM's chips are up to one half cheaper than what Intel could supply.
The experts also seem to think that it would be difficult to move the software over.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1824230,00.asp
Originally posted by melgross
Well, I just reread Apple's Unix tech briefing paper. They don't stop mentioning about how optimized for the G5 it is. They also make a point of telling us how optimized for the Velocity Engine it is.
It would be a big step. It really seems to depend on the VE in any performance related area.
It's in PDF format.Here's the page:http://images.apple.com/macosx/pdf/MacOSX_UNIX_TB.pdf
And Apple employees are active this weekend on the Apple optimization mailing list talking about future improvements to gcc on PPCs. Perhaps they missed the secret x86 memo?
Originally posted by brent1a
What evidence? Randomly leaked statements by "industry execs"? Sorry for being a true skeptic about anything but I don't just buy fly-by-night theories because Jim-Bob the IT exec at such and such "industry" company heard something thru a chain-letter email that supposedly came straight from Steve Jobs on the HUSH HUSH and FOR YOUR EYES ONLY. Like I said before there is such a thing as shoddy reporting.
I'm also not denying anything. I see both sides of the argument but I also look at the big picture and the skeptic part of me is winning the argument.
Except that WSJ doesn't as a rule report things unless they are very, very sure about their soures.
Whatever, we'll find out tomorrow who's assumptions are right and who's are wrong.
If you're right, then great, you picked it better than I did and you can feel good about yourself for the rest of the week for free.
I will remain quite skeptical of an Apple conversion to x86 until Steve Jobs himself says it's so -- and then I'll be waiting for a retraction before it gets to market.
Something is up with Intel, but we ain't gonna know just what until Monday.
Check it out. In case it gets moved, here's the homepage link to the article on Yahoo. But check out the homepage first as the title is "Report: Apple switching to Intel chips"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050605/...te/apple_chips
I wonder if this gives more weight to the story/news
Originally posted by amac4me
On the Yahoo Homepage now
Check it out. In case it gets moved, here's the homepage link to the article on Yahoo. But check out the homepage first as the title is "[color:blue]Report: Apple switching to Intel chips[/color]"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050605/...te/apple_chips
I wonder if this gives more weight to the story/news
That story wasn't original to them.
I think the articles I provided a link to above are more meaningful.
These others are just repeating each others stories. They aren't anything new.
Go to eWeek instead. They have some analysis.
Originally posted by UnixPoet
My bet is that Apple is getting Intel to fab the PPC.
BTW, Scoble has said that he "heard it from several different executive-level sources inside Apple." Intrepet that anyway you like.
If I bet, I would agree; the news sounds an awful lot like Intel's gonna make a lowish end PPC for a Mac Mini, Mark II, or possibly an iBook, Mark II.
Reread TFA at Scobleizer. He doesn't say that there at all, and I cannot recall him saything that in the past. Furthermore, he's posted words to the effect of "I'm going to let everyone else make fools out of themselves while I'm in Europe."
Hmph.
Originally posted by amac4me
On the Yahoo Homepage now
Check it out. In case it gets moved, here's the homepage link to the article on Yahoo. But check out the homepage first as the title is "Report: Apple switching to Intel chips"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050605/...te/apple_chips
I wonder if this gives more weight to the story/news
"...according to CNET Networks Inc.'s News.com and The Wall Street Journal."
They're regurgitating.
They are going to make the first CELL clone, no Toshiba, sony, royalties.
Intel will be making Dual Core Chips for Apple. BUT one core is a Pentium and one a PowerPC.....
I know not possible but that would be fun.
WOW, my first post!
My $0.02, this is a real barnburner!
C|net, the Register, the WSJ, and that Scrotum guy all saying Intel Inside?
I'm sorry for you fanboyz, but there has got to be some major truth to this one!
1)\tYou all say, "Can't be true because none of the Mac Rumors sitez have any dirt." Duh, none of these sitez have access to Apple's top-level management, where do you think this decision is being made? Further, the normal rumors (hardware/software developments) must be known to a reasonable fraction to those on the Cupertino campus, thus Thinksecret "breaks" the PM update, what 7-10 days ahead of the actual announcement (that was hardware folks, actual tangible hardware shippable at that time). Obviously, that Criminally Insane Jobs (CIJ) is keeping a tight lid on things. Finally, donÂ?t you think its plausible that CIJ would want it to leak to the mainstream media (vis-Ã*-vis his dislike of Mac rumorz sitez), to diffuse the mass suicide that would occur at WWDC 2005 were he to blindly announce this nuclear option. Imagine, the faithful all seated, ready to hear the CIJ gospel, when poof, Beelzebub appears to announce his takeover of heaven. What a bummer man. My bet is that there is utter silence, followed by a heavy dose of RDF, followed by a mass conversion of biblical proportions. And look, whose that handing out Kool Aid at the back of the conference room, why itÂ?s Andy Grove. WTF, me first, me first!
2)\tWhatÂ?s the ratio of PC to Mac developers? Probably not to dissimilar to there respective market shares? How much work is it to port x86 appz to x86 appz? Zero! Their x86 binaries, are they not? Yes, I know, there are Â?littleÂ? things like the GUI and what not, but I will assume that CIJ will make every effort to make this as seamless as possible. The same argument goes for gamez. Hardware incompatibilities? What hardware incompatibilities, its x86 peripherals on x86 systems! Jeez, as it stands now, PC peripheral companies make just about 100% of Mac peripherals anyway! What about Mac only (especially Apple Corp.) developers? How about a 25-fold increase in potential sales due to the PC to Mac installed base? IsnÂ?t this enough incentive. If not, then go develop for Linux. Its do or die, sink or swim, put up or shut up, read Â?em and weep, game over! Do you get it now? You have been assimilated; the dark side has got you by the cahones!
3)\tWTF, whereÂ?s the vaunted PowerBook G5, whereÂ?s the vaunted PowerMac Quad G5 (with PCIe, etc.), whereÂ?s the 970GX or 970MP? Yes, I know heat and production issues. WhoÂ?s making/selling dual core CPUÂ?s/desktopÂ?s now? Who will likely be the first to 65nm and then 45nm? Intel and AMD! I can fully understand why CIJ is pissed off! PowerBook? More like SlowerBook to me! ItÂ?s what, like 12-24 months behind the PC laptops now? And Counting! Why must I wait several months (years?), while my PC brethren get the latest hardware, and at a substantially lower price point? Can you say market share? I fully blame IBM; Apple must by now be such a 3rd tier player in their eyes (after itÂ?s own hardware needs and now the 3 game console makers). WhatÂ?s the installed PC base? 300-400 million. Over what time span? 10 years? 20 years? How many PS2Â?s have been sold? 90 million. Over what time span? 3-4 years? Do the math! Oh, and forget about Cell on Mac, not going to happen now!
4)\tBTW, IÂ?ve personally owned/purchased Macs over the past 12 years. My choice! Not because of the hardware, but because of the software. To paraphrase Slick Willie, Â?ItÂ?s the OS, stupid.Â?
5)\tHowever, my work environment requires that I use PCÂ?s, and I have done so for over the past 20+ years. Their choice! Times change however, and I can no longer afford the luxury of the Mac price point experience. Unfortunately, my next purchase will be a 64-bit dual-core AMD laptop, which is likely to cost under $2K! Hey Andy, how about another cup of Kool Aid? See yah, donÂ?t want to be yah! IÂ?m off to the crack house, then the meth lab, then the head shop, and then a final stop at the S&M Barbie Ho House!
6)\tTrool, trool, trool your boat. Gently down the streamÂ?.
Originally posted by salmonstk
I got a crazy bound to be not rue idea.
Intel will be making Dual Core Chips for Apple. BUT one core is a Pentium and one a PowerPC.....
I know not possible but that would be fun.
Of course its possible ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE !!!
Here's to the crazy ones...
Originally posted by chris v
"...according to CNET Networks Inc.'s News.com and The Wall Street Journal."
They're regurgitating.
Originally posted by webmail
The wallstreet journal source is solid, very solid. You'll see come monday. It took me about a two weeks to be convinced of such a huge ordeal, but i know now ;-)
It took you 2 weeks to be convinced? Was this in the news 2 weeks ago already? I though this just came out a few days ago.
Originally posted by franksargent
WOW, my first post!
My $0.02, this is a real barnburner!
C|net, the Register, the WSJ, and that Scrotum guy all saying Intel Inside?
I'm sorry for you fanboyz, but there has got to be some major truth to this one!
1)\tYou all say, "Can't be true because none of the Mac Rumors sitez have any dirt." Duh, none of these sitez have access to Apple's top-level management, where do you think this decision is being made? Further, the normal rumors (hardware/software developments) must be known to a reasonable fraction to those on the Cupertino campus, thus Thinksecret "breaks" the PM update, what 7-10 days ahead of the actual announcement (that was hardware folks, actual tangible hardware shippable at that time). Obviously, that Criminally Insane Jobs (CIJ) is keeping a tight lid on things. Finally, donÂ?t you think its plausible that CIJ would want it to leak to the mainstream media (vis-Ã*-vis his dislike of Mac rumorz sitez), to diffuse the mass suicide that would occur at WWDC 2005 were he to blindly announce this nuclear option. Imagine, the faithful all seated, ready to hear the CIJ gospel, when poof, Beelzebub appears to announce his takeover of heaven. What a bummer man. My bet is that there is utter silence, followed by a heavy dose of RDF, followed by a mass conversion of biblical proportions. And look, whose that handing out Cool Aid at the back of the conference room, why itÂ?s Andy Grove. WTF, me first, me first!
2)\tWhatÂ?s the ratio of PC to Mac developers? Probably not to dissimilar to there respective market shares? How much work is it to port x86 appz to x86 appz? Zero! Their x86 binaries, are they not? Yes, I know, there are Â?littleÂ? things like the GUI and what not, but I will assume that CIJ will make every effort to make this as seamless as possible. The same argument goes for gamez. Hardware incompatibilities? What hardware incompatibilities, its x86 peripherals on x86 systems! Jeez, as it stands now, PC peripheral companies make just about 100% of Mac peripherals anyway! What about Mac only (especially Apple Corp.) developers? How about a 25-fold increase in potential sales due to the PC to Mac installed base? IsnÂ?t this enough incentive. If not, then go develop for Linux. Its do or die, sink or swim, put up or shut up, read Â?em and weep, game over! Do you get it now? You have been assimilated; the dark side has got you by the cahones!
3)\tWTF, whereÂ?s the vaunted PowerBook G5, whereÂ?s the vaunted PowerMac Quad G5 (with PCIe, etc.), whereÂ?s the 970GX or 970MP? Yes, I know heat and production issues. WhoÂ?s making/selling dual core CPUÂ?s/desktopÂ?s now? Who will likely be the first to 65nm and then 45nm? Intel and AMD! I can fully understand why CIJ is pissed off! PowerBook? More like SlowerBook to me! ItÂ?s what, like 12-24 months behind the PC laptops now? And Counting! Why must I wait several months (years?), while my PC brethren get the latest hardware, and at a substantially lower price point? Can you say market share? I fully blame IBM; Apple must by now be such a 3rd tier player in their eyes (after itÂ?s own hardware needs and now the 3 game console makers). WhatÂ?s the installed PC base? 300-400 million. Over what time span? 10 years? 20 years? How many PS2Â?s have been sold? 90 million. Over what time span? 3-4 years? Do the math! Oh, and forget about Cell on Mac, not going to happen now!
4)\tBTW, IÂ?ve personally owned/purchased Macs over the past 12 years. My choice! Not because of the hardware, but because of the software. To paraphrase Slick Willie, Â?ItÂ?s the OS, stupid.Â?
5)\tHowever, my work environment requires that I use PCÂ?s, and I have done so for over the past 20+ years. Their choice! Times change however, and I can no longer afford the luxury of the Mac price point experience. Unfortunately, my next purchase will be a 64-bit dual-core AMD laptop, which is likely to cost under $2K! Hey Andy, how about another cup of Cool Aid? See yah, donÂ?t want to be yah! IÂ?m off to the crack house, then the meth lab, then the head shop, and then a final stop at the S&M Barbie Ho House!
6)\tTrool, trool, trool your boat. Gently down the streamÂ?.
I guess that's that then.
Everybody wants in...
Originally posted by asdasd
Big endianess is an issue only if the developer bypasses normal read/write API to write or read in data. I imagine that is negligible in the real world.
Well you can imagine all you like, but in reality the number of issues that arise in a port like this is surprising, even to those of us who have been doing it for decades. If the code was written simultaneously for multiple platforms, it will be easily portable between those platforms. The more platforms, the easier it is to port. Any time a new platform comes along (and OSX on x86 is a new platform), however, you're going to have some troubles. If you don't believe that you simply haven't been programming or porting code long enough.