Official: Mac OS X Snow Leopard doesn't support PowerPC Macs

1234568»

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 160
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trboyden View Post


    Given Apple's history on dumping outdated technology, an elimination of PowerPC after 2+ years of Intel availability seems reasonable and is to be expected. Afterall Macs stopped booting OS 9 as soon as 10.2 was released in 2003 and eliminated Classic Mode altogether just two years later with the introduction of Intel Macs. Here's a link to the cNET UK article: http://news.cnet.co.uk/software/0,39...9189808,00.htm



    Intel Macs weren't made until 2006. That makes it closer to 3 years between 10.2. More than four years between 10.1 and 10.4 on Intel.





    Quote:

    As a Mac user you should expect these things by now. Apple lives on the bleeding edge; they'd be dead by now if they didn't. They depend on Mac users buying new Macs every two years and you'll get no sympathy from them if you don't. That's pretty much the idea behind the Airbook. They figure after two years you'll need a new battery and you'll just go get the newer version of the Airbook to be current with the latest technology.



    Unless the battery is defective, it should last three or four years. I know it's pushing it, but I have a five year old notebook that's still using the original battery. Replacement battery for the Air probably won't be an expensive service through a reputable shop.



    Quote:

    It's not about right or wrong, it's just business. Don't like it, go buy a Windows PC.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JoeDRC View Post


    Exactly, all computers have a short lifespan, in my eyes, 3 years is old enough.



    Two years is about two times more often than even high-spenders do on average, it's really close to four years. Overall market, home users replace their computers on average once every 5 years or so. My dad used my old workstation until it was nine years old. I am still using a workstation at my workbench that's maybe about six years old now.



    Your advice goes against the "value argument" that Mac fans use in saying that their machines last longer and are thus getting more value. It's quite hard to argue the value if the machines cost more and have to be abandoned sooner for support reasons.
  • Reply 142 of 160
    joedrcjoedrc Posts: 86member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post




    Your advice goes against the "value argument" that Mac fans use in saying that their machines last longer and are thus getting more value. It's quite hard to argue the value if the machines cost more and have to be abandoned sooner for support reasons.



    There's a fair point there and I know that machines don't stop working after just two years, but, as an individual, I usually upgrade computers in about 2 years after purchasing it.



    I will however be prepared to eat my words as this is my first mac, and consequently i'll have to wait a few years until I can truly say whether I want to change...



    I imagine Leopard will get updates etc. even when 10.7 is out.
  • Reply 143 of 160
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    Two years is about two times more often than even high-spenders do on average, it's really close to four years. Overall market, home users replace their computers on average once every 5 years or so. My dad used my old workstation until it was nine years old. I am still using a workstation at my workbench that's maybe about six years old now.



    Your advice goes against the "value argument" that Mac fans use in saying that their machines last longer and are thus getting more value. It's quite hard to argue the value if the machines cost more and have to be abandoned sooner for support reasons.



    I'd like to see your evidence that even high spenders only replace their computers every 4 years. I have 3 Macs in my house and the oldest one is under 2 years old. My company replaces computers routinely about every 3 years.



    More importantly, there's nothing that says that a computer needs to run the latest operating system. Those 9 year old Macs will continue to work just fine (barring something like a hard disk failure) for quite a while. Home users, in particular, don't need most of the features that Snow Leopard will offer (unless you have an Exchange server set up for your home email). They're going to be quite happy with Leopard (or even Tiger) for quite some time.
  • Reply 144 of 160
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JoeDRC View Post


    I imagine Leopard will get updates etc. even when 10.7 is out.



    The won't be getting point updates that far ahead, but security, firmware and app updates will come like they do now in Tiger.
  • Reply 145 of 160
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    I'd like to see your evidence that even high spenders only replace their computers every 4 years. I have 3 Macs in my house and the oldest one is under 2 years old. My company replaces computers routinely about every 3 years.



    Yes, because one data point per user type is applicable. I said average, there are those that replace earlier, others replace later.



    A lot of businesses do replace every three years. Looking around a bit, I've seen three to eight years for educational institutions. But I was referring to home users.



    Page 42 & 44 of this paper:



    http://www.rotman.utoronto.ca/market...t%20Cycles.pdf



    It was 3.5 years as of 2004 for high end models, with a pretty good upward trend still. The low end was 4.5 years, trending upward just as much.



    I'm not really convinced computers need to be replaced that often, it really depends on the use. I think it's ostensibly done because of maintenance, I'm not sure if the cost of maintenance really goes up that much for the fourth year.
  • Reply 146 of 160
    enzosenzos Posts: 344member
    A comment posted on David Zellers column at.. http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/busi...l_purr_ov.html



    >They did hand out a developer's preview of Snow Leopard. You will hear more about this as details trickle out over time but the NDA is pretty strict. However, I will say the speed improvements are stunning. The entire system utilizes the core OS technologies (Image core, animation core, etc) so it is super small and blindingly fast. The basic operating system (without libraries, etc) would fit on a floppy disk. The engineering coming out of Cupertino these days is amazing.

    > - Posted by: dave | June 12, 2008 11:52 AM
  • Reply 147 of 160
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by enzos View Post


    A comment posted on David Zellers column at.. http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/busi...l_purr_ov.html



    ...The entire system utilizes the core OS technologies (Image core, animation core, etc) so it is super small and blindingly fast.



    I've been slapped down a couple of times for saying this, but now put these core functions in dedicated hardware accelerators and Apple will deliver performance that we can't even imagine. I believe it's coming.
  • Reply 148 of 160
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post


    I've been slapped down a couple of times for saying this, but now put these core functions in dedicated hardware accelerators and Apple will deliver performance that we can't even imagine. I believe it's coming.



    My HW authentication idea gets shot down too and that is a much easier proposition. I can't wait to see exactly what Snow Leopard will be offering and what come of the P.A. Semi acquisition.
  • Reply 149 of 160
    pascal007pascal007 Posts: 111member
    A) Nobody seems to have mentioned it, but for anyone owning a business, there are good reasons to change desktop every 3 years and laptops every 4 years. These good reasons have a name too : tax deductions !



    B) On another subject, there is something really weird about this discussion about the importance of supporting older hardware : people with older computers usually are not up-to-date freaks. Many times, if you go in a home with an older computer (Mac or Win) and you check the OS or the installed software, you'll see that the computer's software is totally out-of-date. And if you dare saying that their software should be updated, you'll often get a blank look and a reply along the lines of "why should I update ? It does what I want !" What can be replied to this perfectly valid and respectable argument ? Nothing ! Considering such a mindset, however, why should Apple go out of their way to support old Macs when their owners are not even interested in keeping up-to-date ???



    C) Finally, I want to say this : not being supported by the latest version of the OS does not mean that your computer is going to implode. Let's say that my PowerBook G4 allows me to do everything I want and is sufficiently fast for my needs. So what if it only runs Tiger ? Tiger is still a very good and stable OS... FWIW, it's still way better that Vista ! OK, I may not be able to run the latest and greatest software, but in the end I may not lose much not being able to do so : the latest and greatest would probably run too slowly on my older hardware anyway...
  • Reply 150 of 160
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Pascal007 View Post


    A) Nobody seems to have mentioned it, but for anyone owning a business, there are good reasons to change desktop every 3 years and laptops every 4 years. These good reasons have a name too : tax deductions !



    While much of what you say has merit, smart people don't run their business for tax deductions. In fact, many large corporations judge their managers solely on PRE-TAX results to avoid allowing deductions to mess up your decision making.



    Even if you want to let tax deductions skew your decision making, it lessens the cost of the computer over several years, but does not gain you anything. Essentially, if you buy a $1,000 computer, you'll get about a third of it back over the next 5 years. If buying a computer makes sense, that's a nice bonus. If buying a computer doesn't make sense, the tax deductions rarely change that.
  • Reply 151 of 160
    mcarlingmcarling Posts: 1,106member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by internetworld7 View Post


    10.5 will continue to be improved and supported by Apple for several years to come. It's the NEXT OS after 10.6 that you need to think about. That is most likely going to be a screaming kick butt OS with a ton of new features worth upgrading to. Obviously 10.7 will not support PPC either but hopefully by that time most Mac users are on Intel Macs. So Snow Leopard really isn't a big deal at this point.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Pascal007 View Post


    Besides, supporting the PPC, doesn't mean that they have to do so with an OS numbered 10.6. They could easily choose to continue to update 10.5 for as long as they support 10.6...



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JoeDRC View Post


    I imagine Leopard will get updates etc. even when 10.7 is out.



    It would certainly be possible for Apple to continue to develop 10.5 after the release of 10.6, however, it would be a nutty business decision because Apple can retire most of the PPC hardware they are running when they stop developing 10.5. Between the release of 10.6 and the release of 10.7, only the security team will need to keep PPC hardware around. Once 10.7 has been released, even the security team can retire their PPC hardware. Keeping all that old hardware around is very expensive and running through all the regression testing takes a lot of time. Also, Apple would like customers to replace their PPC Macs sooner rather than later.
  • Reply 152 of 160
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    I would bet that there is a PPC build, there almost has to be as they were selli ng them as new like 18 months ago.



    THIS IS A MARKETING MOVE: only seed devs with Intel builds because Apple wants to kill off all new PPC dev work asap. they need to support current installations for 3-4 years from install, but after that, nota.



    Hell, wait till fall 2009 to release and it would be like 3-ish years since PPCs shipped so they would have a solid case for no support in 10.6
  • Reply 153 of 160
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by a_greer View Post


    I would bet that there is a PPC build, there almost has to be as they were selli ng them as new like 18 months ago.



    I believe the last Mac to be discontinued was the Power Mac in August 2006. But I think all the other PowerPC Macs are over 2 years at this point. Add another year for Snow Leopard to be released and you have 3 years.



    Quote:

    THIS IS A MARKETING MOVE: only seed devs with Intel builds because Apple wants to kill off all new PPC dev work asap.



    In your argument's favour, there is the fact that the SDK is only supported on Intel Macs.





    Quote:

    they need to support current installations for 3-4 years from install, but after that, nota. Hell, wait till fall 2009 to release and it would be like 3-ish years since PPCs shipped so they would have a solid case for no support in 10.6



    [/quote]

    From a financial standpoint, delaying Snow Leopard by 3 months would give a window of 3 years, but there is an aspect that is being missed here. Just because they are releasing Snow Leopard as Intel only doesn't mean they have to stop point releases on Leopard. This is supposed to be a relatively feature-less release that is designed to add performance and efficiency, not bells and whistles.
  • Reply 154 of 160
    straskstrask Posts: 107member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bedouin View Post


    I think many of us feel bitter about the death of PPC for two reasons.



    First, it's a defeat or sorts. PPC was something Apple had a personal investment in. It was made, to some extent, for us (though, obviously not exclusively). x86 never felt good enough for Macs because it wasn't custom, it wasn't something made specifically with us in mind. The move to x86 just marked this feeling of mediocrity, and the failure of PPC: the great hope.



    I don't like to see Apple at the whims of someone like Intel who has so many other interests. Not to say the situation was any better with Motorola and IBM. Perhaps this acquisition of PA Semiconductor will bring us back to the glory days when a 400mhz G3 beat the pants off a Pentium II. That's what a lot of us wish for.



    We have the upper hand the OS arena, and even in the design arena -- but when it comes to hardware, we have the same stuff the generic PC folks have. It's so similar, that the PC folks are throwing OS X onto any old beige box. A lot of us want to go back to the days when everything about Mac was better -- period, not just the OS and looks of the machines.





    Oh, it is quite the other way around. Apple now has a 66% share of PC sales $1,000 and up. Intel relies on Apple to drive the commercial market for cutting edge innovation. What Apple has done with Intel is less like a defeat than a conquering of rival territory, like Pixar did with Disney.



    As far as 5 years of support goes, Apple better take a generous definition of the word "support" or people will be lining up to sue. I myself, as the owner of a G5 Quad, will not feel supported unless the multi core innovations of Snow Leopard are adapted for these multicore machines.
  • Reply 155 of 160
    inkswampinkswamp Posts: 337member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bedouin View Post


    I think many of us feel bitter about the death of PPC for two reasons.



    First, it's a defeat or sorts. PPC was something Apple had a personal investment in. It was made, to some extent, for us (though, obviously not exclusively). x86 never felt good enough for Macs because it wasn't custom, it wasn't something made specifically with us in mind. The move to x86 just marked this feeling of mediocrity, and the failure of PPC: the great hope.



    I don't like to see Apple at the whims of someone like Intel who has so many other interests. Not to say the situation was any better with Motorola and IBM. Perhaps this acquisition of PA Semiconductor will bring us back to the glory days when a 400mhz G3 beat the pants off a Pentium II. That's what a lot of us wish for.



    We have the upper hand the OS arena, and even in the design arena -- but when it comes to hardware, we have the same stuff the generic PC folks have. It's so similar, that the PC folks are throwing OS X onto any old beige box. A lot of us want to go back to the days when everything about Mac was better -- period, not just the OS and looks of the machines.



    Wow, no offense, but I'm glad most Mac users aren't this precious about things. This reminds me of the people who moaned and moaned endlessly about the happy face startup going away with the switch from OS 9 to OS X. Seriously, how does it really matter?



    The "megahertz myth" thing was true for a while with the PPC, but as time moved forward, it became a harder and harder argument to make. Apple jumped ship at the right time. The PPC was in a death spiral and there was no reason for the entire Mac platform to go down with it.
  • Reply 156 of 160
    minderbinderminderbinder Posts: 1,703member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    More importantly, there's nothing that says that a computer needs to run the latest operating system.



    One major reason it's necessary is the ability to run the latest apps, which often requires the latest OS. As someone who is still running a machine that lost support years ago, I know first hand that while the machine is still useful in some ways, it gets more and more limited as new things are released.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by strask View Post


    As far as 5 years of support goes, Apple better take a generous definition of the word "support" or people will be lining up to sue. I myself, as the owner of a G5 Quad, will not feel supported unless the multi core innovations of Snow Leopard are adapted for these multicore machines.



    Did apple promise any length of support, much less five years? I'm not sure what anyone would sue over unless apple made a promise and broke it.



    I definitely think apple should support machines for a decent length of time (longer than 3 years) but I think if it happens it will be to keep customers happy instead of alienating them, and not because of legal obligation.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by inkswamp View Post


    The "megahertz myth" thing was true for a while with the PPC, but as time moved forward, it became a harder and harder argument to make. Apple jumped ship at the right time. The PPC was in a death spiral and there was no reason for the entire Mac platform to go down with it.



    That's only half true. The portable PPC line was definitely struggling in a huge way. But the G5 in desktops, particularly the dual and quad configurations, was very competitive, and those machines still run current OS and apps very well. The main reason for the switch was portables.
  • Reply 157 of 160
    I think the keywords here about 10.6 are Grand Central and OpenCL. The general description of Snow Leopard sounds like a weak update in laymen's terms, but it's very significant in the back-end.



    Considering their goals for 10.6, it's no wonder they're dumping PPC. Most of the PPC systems still at large probably couldn't handle the potential of what REAL multi-core optimized software will do, and they also needed to draw the line in the sand somewhere to move on from PPC anyway.



    Besides, they're not adding any major new features. 10.6 will be like the 10.5 for quad- and octo-core systems. If they're still stuck on PPC a year from now, 10.5 will continue to serve them well anyway because they're not actually missing all that much feature-wise.



    And people should also understand that since 10.6 will be optimized for multi-core systems, it's possible that it could very well run like crap on most PPC systems anyway.
  • Reply 158 of 160
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kickaha View Post


    Same here, but I'm not willing to state that it's 'Official'.



    Here's another me too.



    A more responsible headline would have been:

    Official: Mac OS X Snow Leopard Developer Preview doesn't support PowerPC Macs



    Or even better:

    Mac OS X Snow Leopard Developer Preview doesn't support PowerPC Macs



    ... but I suppose that wouldn't be as sensational now would it.

    Come on Apple Insider, you're better than that. (Or at least you can be)
  • Reply 159 of 160
    jowie74jowie74 Posts: 540member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hillstones View Post


    So stop whining and crying. Your G5 Mac will still run just fine with 10.4 or 10.5. I re-installed Tiger on my PowerBook G4 because Tiger runs better on the G4. Just because something new comes out, doesn't mean your Mac will die without it.



    I'd like to second those sentiments... I was going to write something very similar but you have saved me the effort!



    In our house we have a PowerMac Dual G4 MDD, an iMac G5 and a MacBook (1st gen). The G5 I bought this week on eBay, totally concious of the knowledge Snow Leopard is on the horizon. It is perfect for my needs and was cheap. The MacBook may get Snow Leopard, it may not. But what exactly has been advertised for Snow Leopard everyone feels like they are going to miss out on? Extra power and speed for the machines it doesn't apply to?



    Leopard runs fine on all my machines and it will continue to do so for a long time to come. I'm sure the dual G4 (which is essentially a media server - and a wind tunnel to boot) will carry on running fine in terms of OS and compatibility until the day its hardware is no longer up to the challenge.



    Bring it on Apple!
  • Reply 160 of 160
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Hornets Nest Is Officially Open...



    1 - Snow Leopard a new 'primary dot' OS X release...

    2 - Snow Leopard no new features other than gutting the ppc code...

    3 - Snow Leopard (released) in winter is something you'd never see coming...



    Could this be the sign of the devil?!?!



    Otherwise known as OS X being made available for sale to NON Apple hardware?!?!?!



    As for me, I'd have to say no. Simply because I still think this is something Apple wouldn't do prior to devils ice rink finally opening its doors for business all year round.



    Now if not *that* then why the 'major dot' advance (with no new features) is Apple expecting to be able to sell it for 129 like every other OS release and fully expect people to buy it - like they did 10.5?



    Dave
Sign In or Register to comment.