Why aren't iApps Multi-Processor Aware?

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
Probably a dumb question but I have never understood this. Would making iApps MPA be too expensive?



I anticipate iWork apps wouldn't benefit, but it seems like iMovie, iDVD, iPhoto (whose sluggish performance has been a crticism in the past), GarageBand, and perhaps even iTunes(?) would benefit and that the performance would impress consumers considering a switch to the Mac platform.



The iMac is the consumer flagship of Apple desktops, and with its Intel core-duos and increased RAM capacity,wouldn't users derive performance gains that would create a better experience and impression?



If iLife is not MPA, are the benefits from the core duo primarily related to an ability to have many apps open?



When Jobs revealed the planned switch to Intel, he said that Apple had always been developing OS X for both PowerPC and Intel, a process that obviously increased costs. Will they stop writing OS X for powerPC, and if so, would it make financial sense to instead put that effort into projects like re-writes Apple apps to make them multi-procsseor aware?



If Apple only devlops OSX for intel now, where else might that effort be applied now?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 2
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    All OS X apps are 'multi-processor aware'... and none of them are. It's handled by the OS, not the apps. The apps have to be nicely multi-threaded, however, for the OS to be able to do much with them.
  • Reply 2 of 2
    chuckerchucker Posts: 5,089member
    Indeed; all that's needed is for apps to cleverly split tasks into threads, and as far as I can tell, all iLife apps do that.
Sign In or Register to comment.