While software compatibility maybe an arguable point, general stability will only improve on Intels.
Stability is also affect by 3rd party software. It's possible that stability will decrease do to cheap expansion cards with crappy drivers. This is one argument MS used to explain BSODs.
Look back in history for your answer. Would you have purchased a 68k Mac after the PPC Macs were announced.
I remember that, and I was cautious about it. There were definitely some growing pains during that transition. And, coincidentally or not, Apple's market share dropped in half during that period.
Quote:
IMO, PPC Macs are probably obsolete now.
What does that mean? People who are using their Macs now will continue to use them exactly as they have been. If they get a new PPC Mac, their software will run just fine for many years to come. Developers will certainly continue to support PPC Macs, but no one knows how quickly they will support Intel Macs.
What does that mean? People who are using their Macs now will continue to use them exactly as they have been. If they get a new PPC Mac, their software will run just fine for many years to come. Developers will certainly continue to support PPC Macs, but no one knows how quickly they will support Intel Macs.
I don't see what incentive a software company has to maintain both an Intel and PPC versions of their products. No matter how big Job's RDF is regarding Apple's cross platform build system.
I don't see what incentive a software company has to maintain both an Intel and PPC versions of their products. No matter how big Job's RDF is regarding Apple's cross platform build system.
I agree. But doesn't that make my point? If you're a developer who's decided that it's too much of a pain to deal with these universal binaries, does it make more sense for you to first switch over your app to a universal binary, and then decide not to support the much larger installed base of PPC Macs, or to just dump Apple before going to all that trouble?
I hope that most developers won't think that way, but there's no doubt that some will, and that may drive some people to hold onto their PPC Macs as long as possible.
Would you rather buy the last PowerPC Mac or the first Intel Mac? Explain your answer in 500 words or less.
I'm going to get one of the last PowerPC PowerBooks. I'm going to wait and see whether Jobs announces any at Paris Expo and will then order mine... even if it's only a modest upgrade. I can forsee them updating to the 7448 (but not G5), maybe adding a faster HD, and maybe a dual-layer SuperDrive before going Intel. I know there's a lot of speculation about dual-core Yonah (etc. etc.) going on, but the PowerPC is still a great product, is stable, and I'm comfortable with its performance... and since there are bound to be bumps-in-the-road for the first MacTel units, I'd rather have a PPC product that I know will be reliable and stable for the next 3-4 years. By then the MacTel will have stabilized.
Developers of consequence will have Intel supported from day one. That, or they'll drop mac altogether.
Powerbooks may make the best candidate for an early switch -- if they get dual core chips, it's a no brainer as the powerbook is unlikely to get either a G5 or anything better than a drop in replacement for the current G4. Intel chipsets are compact, cool, and fast, and with dual cores, a future intel powerbook might come surprisingly close end of run G4 performance under Rosetta, so even if your ap isn't updated right away, you don't lose anything.
Comments
Originally posted by skatman
While software compatibility maybe an arguable point, general stability will only improve on Intels.
Stability is also affect by 3rd party software. It's possible that stability will decrease do to cheap expansion cards with crappy drivers. This is one argument MS used to explain BSODs.
Originally posted by ThinkingDifferent
Look back in history for your answer. Would you have purchased a 68k Mac after the PPC Macs were announced.
I remember that, and I was cautious about it. There were definitely some growing pains during that transition. And, coincidentally or not, Apple's market share dropped in half during that period.
IMO, PPC Macs are probably obsolete now.
What does that mean? People who are using their Macs now will continue to use them exactly as they have been. If they get a new PPC Mac, their software will run just fine for many years to come. Developers will certainly continue to support PPC Macs, but no one knows how quickly they will support Intel Macs.
Originally posted by BRussell
What does that mean? People who are using their Macs now will continue to use them exactly as they have been. If they get a new PPC Mac, their software will run just fine for many years to come. Developers will certainly continue to support PPC Macs, but no one knows how quickly they will support Intel Macs.
I don't see what incentive a software company has to maintain both an Intel and PPC versions of their products. No matter how big Job's RDF is regarding Apple's cross platform build system.
Originally posted by ThinkingDifferent
I don't see what incentive a software company has to maintain both an Intel and PPC versions of their products. No matter how big Job's RDF is regarding Apple's cross platform build system.
I agree. But doesn't that make my point? If you're a developer who's decided that it's too much of a pain to deal with these universal binaries, does it make more sense for you to first switch over your app to a universal binary, and then decide not to support the much larger installed base of PPC Macs, or to just dump Apple before going to all that trouble?
I hope that most developers won't think that way, but there's no doubt that some will, and that may drive some people to hold onto their PPC Macs as long as possible.
Originally posted by BRussell
Would you rather buy the last PowerPC Mac or the first Intel Mac? Explain your answer in 500 words or less.
I'm going to get one of the last PowerPC PowerBooks. I'm going to wait and see whether Jobs announces any at Paris Expo and will then order mine... even if it's only a modest upgrade. I can forsee them updating to the 7448 (but not G5), maybe adding a faster HD, and maybe a dual-layer SuperDrive before going Intel. I know there's a lot of speculation about dual-core Yonah (etc. etc.) going on, but the PowerPC is still a great product, is stable, and I'm comfortable with its performance... and since there are bound to be bumps-in-the-road for the first MacTel units, I'd rather have a PPC product that I know will be reliable and stable for the next 3-4 years. By then the MacTel will have stabilized.
My vote is for one of the last PowerPC Macs!
Powerbooks may make the best candidate for an early switch -- if they get dual core chips, it's a no brainer as the powerbook is unlikely to get either a G5 or anything better than a drop in replacement for the current G4. Intel chipsets are compact, cool, and fast, and with dual cores, a future intel powerbook might come surprisingly close end of run G4 performance under Rosetta, so even if your ap isn't updated right away, you don't lose anything.