[B]I still say it will be orphaned. If they stick to his timetable, and transition their whole product line to Intel by Jan. 2007. then after that point it is orphaned. As in, no further development on that platform.
Nonsense. When Apple fully transitioned their software base to PowerPC, did they immediately stop supporting 680x0? No. In fact, 68040 Macs could use every Mac OS up to version 8.5, which came out 4.5 years AFTER the first Power Mac.
And in any case, they said the transition will be done by the END of 2007, not the beginning. STOP PANICING PEOPLE.
[B]Will I be able run all of the new pc games on the mac with that rosetta program?
Rosetta will let you run your current Mac software on the Intel-based Macs. You will still need a Windows environment (Virtual PC) to run Windows programs.
Quote:
Does this mean that we will have access to pro video cards?
Access to pro video cards will depend on the types of slots in the new Macs and whether or not the card developers write drivers for the Apple system.
Quote:
Are macs going back to single processor?
Initially, I would presume so.
Quote:
What about programs that had alot of altivec enhancements?
Well, their Intel versions will have to be reworked to either take advantage of the extra processor cycles or to link into SSE/MMX.
Quote:
Why would they spill this now? Hardware sales are gonna tank until next June.
Well, I think they're hoping that those who buy lots of Macs will see that this is a good thing (which it is), and that Apple's history is replete with transitions that did NOT orphan users (the PowerPC transition being the most relevent) and that Fat Binaries are a good solution. I'd imagine that if Mac sales do go south, they'll unveil the first Intel-based machines earlier.
Quote:
Are they going to put those ugly, "Intel Inside" stickers on the new macs?
I hope not. A nice logo like they used to do for the PowerPC architecture wouldn't be bad, though. And Intel will pay them to do that.
6. I bet OSX for PPC is done. We will get 10.4.xx updates, but no 10.5 Leopard.
Steve said the PPC Macs will be supported for many years so I expect 10.5 and 10.6 will be compiled and available for PPC Macs because:
1) Apple will still be selling them, at least the G5s, in 2007.
2) People will want to upgrade their OS to take advantage of the new features.
3) If there are OS X features that are Leopard specific and there is no Leopard for PPC then ISVs and Apple will lose revenue because PPC users will not be able to purchase software that will need/can use those technologies.
I think you will need a G5 to install 10.7 because by the time it comes out the G4s will have been discontinued long enough that Apple can stop supporting that chip.
Why do people seem panicked that this will be so fundamentally different than the 680x0 to PowerPC transition, which was a BREEZE?
Ah, did you actually live through this? As a developer? Basically, it spelled the death of the job I was working then, because management was not willing to put that much effort into continuing to develop for the Macintosh platform. And there still not as much software available for OS X as there was for OS 7.
It was a breeze I guess for consumers who only run Office software.
Nonsense. When Apple fully transitioned their software base to PowerPC, did they immediately stop supporting 680x0? No. In fact, 68040 Macs could use every Mac OS up to version 8.5, which came out 4.5 years AFTER the first Power Mac.
And in any case, they said the transition will be done by the END of 2007, not the beginning. STOP PANICING PEOPLE.
I'm not panicking. I raising legitimate issues and fears that Apple did not address. Just because Jobs said things doesn't make them so. How about you stop being an apologist, stop playing word games, and answer some of the freaking points people have raised.
Steve said the PPC Macs will be supported for many years so I expect 10.5 and 10.6 will be compiled and available for PPC Macs because:
1) Apple will still be selling them, at least the G5s, in 2007.
2) People will want to upgrade their OS to take advantage of the new features.
3) If there are OS X features that are Leopard specific and there is no Leopard for PPC then ISVs and Apple will lose revenue because PPC users will not be able to purchase software that will need/can use those technologies.
I think you will need a G5 to install 10.7 because by the time it comes out the G4s will have been discontinued long enough that Apple can stop supporting that chip.
Supported mean you'll get bugfix updates to 10.4.x
Unless someone has a direct quote from Apple stating 10.5 will be released for legacy PPC systems, they probably will try to strongly imply 10.5 will be released for PPC without actually publicly committing to the fact in order to try to salvage sales of their exisiting legacy machines still in the pipeline over the next year or so.
Rosetta will let you run your current Mac software on the Intel-based Macs. You will still need a Windows environment (Virtual PC) to run Windows programs.
This is what i'm worried about. no wonder MS is happy. On the Mac-Intel machines VPC will run a LOT faster than on a Mac-PPC machine. MS sees added sales of VPC and therefore added Windows licences. Some developers might even go "hey, use VPC if you want to run xxx on the Mac. There's hardly any speed difference!"
This could make developers stop developing using the Mac APIs (Cocoa).
On the other side, this suddenly opens up the Mac to a shitload of new applications that will run (through VPC) as fast (or almost) as the Mac specific (and probably non existant) counterpart...
I actually think it's PPC only or PPC/Intel Fat.. I don't think there is an either or choice sans PPC.
From the video it is. There are just checkboxes for Intel and PPC, and you can choose either or both. Also, Intel will be able run PPC apps, but PPC will not be able to run Intel apps.
I actually think it's PPC only or PPC/Intel Fat.. I don't think there is an either or choice sans PPC.
There are two check boxes - one for Intel and one for PowerPC. You can tick either or a combination!
In reply to BoeManE, I don't think many companies will tell users to buy VPC. It alone costs £200 and also it's not just the speed, people run Mac OS X to avoid XP not to run both.
I have also few reflactions about the transition to Intel.
1) If Apple don't allow the installation of MacOS X on non Apple products they need a chip on the motherboard. Now what will happen if the companies makes a reverse engineering on that chip like PC compatible companies had made in the 80'. They will have no control on that.
2) If Apple allows for MacOS X licensing than they will faught on the pricing and I don't see them beat Dell. MacOS X could be, in that case, the beginning of the decline of Microsoft. (read point 3)
3) Will the windows emulator be much faster ( no intel emulator )? I think so if the emulator has direct access to the GPU via DirectX. This would mean that in case of point 2(MacOS X licensing), that the MacOS X market share would explode because of the superiority of OS X and low rate of vulnerability and viruses. More market share = more developper for the superior OS X. Microsoft would be in great trouble.
It all makes sense now. The only reason they are switching to Intel is because the G6 is already out (check out the car) and they had nowhere else to go!! lol j/k (i know its lame and has already been said but i couldn't help myself)
After actually watching the keynote I think it's interesting that they want everything as universal binary's --> Why not have something that works on both processors and bring out some killer things that run using a PPC cell, and then higher performance powermacs using intel. If you have the ability to run on both with your OS and your Apps then you can have a greater advantage in the market.
After actually watching the keynote I think it's interesting that they want everything as universal binary's --> Why not have something that works on both processors and bring out some killer things that run using a PPC cell, and then higher performance powermacs using intel. If you have the ability to run on both with your OS and your Apps then you can have a greater advantage in the market.
Eventually the software needs to take advantage of the different CPU technologies - this cannot happen if they are on two different chips.
After actually watching the keynote I think it's interesting that they want everything as universal binary's --> Why not have something that works on both processors and bring out some killer things that run using a PPC cell, and then higher performance powermacs using intel. If you have the ability to run on both with your OS and your Apps then you can have a greater advantage in the market.
I did calm down a bit last night after watching the Keynote, but this morning I am raring to go again.
Supported mean you'll get bugfix updates to 10.4.x
Unless someone has a direct quote from Apple stating 10.5 will be released for legacy PPC systems, they probably will try to strongly imply 10.5 will be released for PPC without actually publicly committing to the fact in order to try to salvage sales of their exisiting legacy machines still in the pipeline over the next year or so.
In the US I believe their is a time table for the minimum number of years a company has to support a product that they have on the market. As I recall Apple has lost a few court cases where they have not fully supported computers with newer versions of the OS for long enough. A bigger problem with not supporting PPC systems with 10.5 comes in the economics of it. Apple will want to sell updates to thier current install base when 10.5 comes out, if they dont support PPC systems with it then they can't sell the system software to the largets part of their install base.
Comments
Originally posted by D.J. Adequate
[B]I still say it will be orphaned. If they stick to his timetable, and transition their whole product line to Intel by Jan. 2007. then after that point it is orphaned. As in, no further development on that platform.
Nonsense. When Apple fully transitioned their software base to PowerPC, did they immediately stop supporting 680x0? No. In fact, 68040 Macs could use every Mac OS up to version 8.5, which came out 4.5 years AFTER the first Power Mac.
And in any case, they said the transition will be done by the END of 2007, not the beginning. STOP PANICING PEOPLE.
Originally posted by mello
[B]Will I be able run all of the new pc games on the mac with that rosetta program?
Rosetta will let you run your current Mac software on the Intel-based Macs. You will still need a Windows environment (Virtual PC) to run Windows programs.
Does this mean that we will have access to pro video cards?
Access to pro video cards will depend on the types of slots in the new Macs and whether or not the card developers write drivers for the Apple system.
Are macs going back to single processor?
Initially, I would presume so.
What about programs that had alot of altivec enhancements?
Well, their Intel versions will have to be reworked to either take advantage of the extra processor cycles or to link into SSE/MMX.
Why would they spill this now? Hardware sales are gonna tank until next June.
Well, I think they're hoping that those who buy lots of Macs will see that this is a good thing (which it is), and that Apple's history is replete with transitions that did NOT orphan users (the PowerPC transition being the most relevent) and that Fat Binaries are a good solution. I'd imagine that if Mac sales do go south, they'll unveil the first Intel-based machines earlier.
Are they going to put those ugly, "Intel Inside" stickers on the new macs?
I hope not. A nice logo like they used to do for the PowerPC architecture wouldn't be bad, though. And Intel will pay them to do that.
Originally posted by alliancep.s.i
you are concerned over a sticker...come on
I think your irony sensor blinked.
Originally posted by Addison
6. I bet OSX for PPC is done. We will get 10.4.xx updates, but no 10.5 Leopard.
Steve said the PPC Macs will be supported for many years so I expect 10.5 and 10.6 will be compiled and available for PPC Macs because:
1) Apple will still be selling them, at least the G5s, in 2007.
2) People will want to upgrade their OS to take advantage of the new features.
3) If there are OS X features that are Leopard specific and there is no Leopard for PPC then ISVs and Apple will lose revenue because PPC users will not be able to purchase software that will need/can use those technologies.
I think you will need a G5 to install 10.7 because by the time it comes out the G4s will have been discontinued long enough that Apple can stop supporting that chip.
Originally posted by Fireball1244
Why do people seem panicked that this will be so fundamentally different than the 680x0 to PowerPC transition, which was a BREEZE?
Ah, did you actually live through this? As a developer? Basically, it spelled the death of the job I was working then, because management was not willing to put that much effort into continuing to develop for the Macintosh platform. And there still not as much software available for OS X as there was for OS 7.
It was a breeze I guess for consumers who only run Office software.
Originally posted by Fireball1244
Nonsense. When Apple fully transitioned their software base to PowerPC, did they immediately stop supporting 680x0? No. In fact, 68040 Macs could use every Mac OS up to version 8.5, which came out 4.5 years AFTER the first Power Mac.
And in any case, they said the transition will be done by the END of 2007, not the beginning. STOP PANICING PEOPLE.
I'm not panicking. I raising legitimate issues and fears that Apple did not address. Just because Jobs said things doesn't make them so. How about you stop being an apologist, stop playing word games, and answer some of the freaking points people have raised.
Originally posted by troberts
Steve said the PPC Macs will be supported for many years so I expect 10.5 and 10.6 will be compiled and available for PPC Macs because:
1) Apple will still be selling them, at least the G5s, in 2007.
2) People will want to upgrade their OS to take advantage of the new features.
3) If there are OS X features that are Leopard specific and there is no Leopard for PPC then ISVs and Apple will lose revenue because PPC users will not be able to purchase software that will need/can use those technologies.
I think you will need a G5 to install 10.7 because by the time it comes out the G4s will have been discontinued long enough that Apple can stop supporting that chip.
Supported mean you'll get bugfix updates to 10.4.x
Unless someone has a direct quote from Apple stating 10.5 will be released for legacy PPC systems, they probably will try to strongly imply 10.5 will be released for PPC without actually publicly committing to the fact in order to try to salvage sales of their exisiting legacy machines still in the pipeline over the next year or so.
Originally posted by MacCrazy
In Xcode 2.1 you have the option for either PowerPC, Intel or both. SO it's up to the developers. BUT I'd expect to see both for a while.
I actually think it's PPC only or PPC/Intel Fat.. I don't think there is an either or choice sans PPC.
Originally posted by Fireball1244
Rosetta will let you run your current Mac software on the Intel-based Macs. You will still need a Windows environment (Virtual PC) to run Windows programs.
This is what i'm worried about. no wonder MS is happy. On the Mac-Intel machines VPC will run a LOT faster than on a Mac-PPC machine. MS sees added sales of VPC and therefore added Windows licences. Some developers might even go "hey, use VPC if you want to run xxx on the Mac. There's hardly any speed difference!"
This could make developers stop developing using the Mac APIs (Cocoa).
On the other side, this suddenly opens up the Mac to a shitload of new applications that will run (through VPC) as fast (or almost) as the Mac specific (and probably non existant) counterpart...
Originally posted by LGnome
I actually think it's PPC only or PPC/Intel Fat.. I don't think there is an either or choice sans PPC.
From the video it is. There are just checkboxes for Intel and PPC, and you can choose either or both. Also, Intel will be able run PPC apps, but PPC will not be able to run Intel apps.
Originally posted by LGnome
I actually think it's PPC only or PPC/Intel Fat.. I don't think there is an either or choice sans PPC.
There are two check boxes - one for Intel and one for PowerPC. You can tick either or a combination!
In reply to BoeManE, I don't think many companies will tell users to buy VPC. It alone costs £200 and also it's not just the speed, people run Mac OS X to avoid XP not to run both.
1) If Apple don't allow the installation of MacOS X on non Apple products they need a chip on the motherboard. Now what will happen if the companies makes a reverse engineering on that chip like PC compatible companies had made in the 80'. They will have no control on that.
2) If Apple allows for MacOS X licensing than they will faught on the pricing and I don't see them beat Dell. MacOS X could be, in that case, the beginning of the decline of Microsoft. (read point 3)
3) Will the windows emulator be much faster ( no intel emulator )? I think so if the emulator has direct access to the GPU via DirectX. This would mean that in case of point 2(MacOS X licensing), that the MacOS X market share would explode because of the superiority of OS X and low rate of vulnerability and viruses. More market share = more developper for the superior OS X. Microsoft would be in great trouble.
Thus if you do it will be unsupported. Apple probably will get the sale of the OS and none of the overhead of supporting it.
Originally posted by TednDi
Under the EULA for the mac OS you may not run the os on a non apple branded machine.
Thus if you do it will be unsupported. Apple probably will get the sale of the OS and none of the overhead of supporting it.
Well, that is the current EULA. Nothing that says they couldn't change it.
666 posts man, awesome, lol, you should let that marinate for a while.
Originally posted by debenm
After actually watching the keynote I think it's interesting that they want everything as universal binary's --> Why not have something that works on both processors and bring out some killer things that run using a PPC cell, and then higher performance powermacs using intel. If you have the ability to run on both with your OS and your Apps then you can have a greater advantage in the market.
Eventually the software needs to take advantage of the different CPU technologies - this cannot happen if they are on two different chips.
Oh and by the way Intel = end of Classic
Originally posted by debenm
After actually watching the keynote I think it's interesting that they want everything as universal binary's --> Why not have something that works on both processors and bring out some killer things that run using a PPC cell, and then higher performance powermacs using intel. If you have the ability to run on both with your OS and your Apps then you can have a greater advantage in the market.
I did calm down a bit last night after watching the Keynote, but this morning I am raring to go again.
Originally posted by Tuttle
Supported mean you'll get bugfix updates to 10.4.x
Unless someone has a direct quote from Apple stating 10.5 will be released for legacy PPC systems, they probably will try to strongly imply 10.5 will be released for PPC without actually publicly committing to the fact in order to try to salvage sales of their exisiting legacy machines still in the pipeline over the next year or so.
In the US I believe their is a time table for the minimum number of years a company has to support a product that they have on the market. As I recall Apple has lost a few court cases where they have not fully supported computers with newer versions of the OS for long enough. A bigger problem with not supporting PPC systems with 10.5 comes in the economics of it. Apple will want to sell updates to thier current install base when 10.5 comes out, if they dont support PPC systems with it then they can't sell the system software to the largets part of their install base.