Technically, there is nothing to stop a Classic environment from working. Kind of like that emulator for the Mac that allows you to run pre-System 7 stuff. Will Apple want to keep Classic going? "Apple ][ Forever!" (remember that?) Time for corporate Apple to stop supporting an OS that hasn't been updated for 5+ years.
I think Apple wants Classic dead, and I think the big developers also want it to go. You can't run Word 5.1 forever, you can't spell M$ without $.
No, there is no evidence that clasic will die, but seeing as steve jobs said that the transition from OS 9 to OS X ended with Panther, Apple will prolly take out classic support in Leopard, and no sooner. If they do take it out, it will prolly be available as an add on plug in later.
All this says is that right now, Rosetta won't run Classic apps. Maybe Apple plans to introduce an entirely different emulator for Classic, but didn't tell anyone yet. Or maybe they plan to add Classic support to Rosetta at a later point in time. There's just no way to tell at this point, with the release of OSx86 a year in the future.
Phil Schiller stated their research showed very few people still used classic and that it was low on their list of priorities. They could do it but I doubt they will. Classic is dead.
Name an app that doesn't run on Rosetta. Please. I can't think of any.
Here is a big one: EyeTV. They have highly optimized code that "Requires a G4 or G5 processor." They are like the #1 TV solution for mac.
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
Question: Jobs opened Word and Excel using Rosetta, which, given the constraints listed above, makes sense. But he also opened Photoshop, which presumably uses Altivec. Why did Photoshop run?
I may be wrong here, but were altivec and G5 support were added by plugins to photoshop. It seems it can do just fine without them too.
G3's have plenty of power to display simple video. In fact, some of the early versions of EyeTV worked great on G3's. Then around version 1.6 they added optimized code which required a G4 or better.
I think the upshot is that Rosetta will allow anything to run that would run on my PowerBook G3 Pismo or a G3 PowerMac - except Classic apps and 68k code.
How many OS X application won't run on a G3?
MS Office and Virtual PC does (processor speed excepted), Adobe's CS2 states a G4 or G5 but that's what Steve demo'd in the keynote it just ran (maybe they state G4 but it'll run on a fast enough G3?).
I'd watch for Apple listing their compatibility for PPC applications on Intel...
Rosetta is a clever thing but won't be needed by most of us. Intel based machines are at least a year away and much longer for PM replacements. Either way Intel machines will only replace PPC machines when they represent an IMPROVEMENT in performance, otherwise why change?
So lets say that the first Intel Based PM I buy is in 2006/7 probably 7. I will be on Photo Shop CS4 by them and it will be a FAT binary and so will MS office and Dreamweaver, it will be interesting to see how long it will take Quark to react (OSX nearly killed them as they were too slow and many users jumped ship).
I can't see many of the apps I use using Rosetta, but it is comforting to know it is there if I need it. In two years time current processors are likely to mean that today's benchmarks are an irrelevance.
The most interesting thing is that we are likely to see a new enlcosure, anyone who has seen the inside of the Intel machine can see that we just don't need that monster case any longer.
The other interesting consequence of the change is that there are a great many peripheral cards and it will be interesting to see how Apple reacts and if it will support them. (Sound and video cards for example)
lots of old old games (classics) won't run anymore
also, I have some pro apps (Pagemaker etc) that I use to open old old files, etc...
And I dont want to shell out to Adobe and EXTRA few hundred $ for some "plug ins" to open these things... grrrr...
well, you can do what i'll do: keep your current computer, keep all of those older apps running, and string an ethernet cable to your network to transfer files back and forth. if you really want convenience, put them both under your desk and get a kvm.
The most interesting thing is that we are likely to see a new enlcosure, anyone who has seen the inside of the Intel machine can see that we just don't need that monster case any longer.
well, the case WAS built to hold a 10,000 BTU air conditioning unit (exaggeration and humor, there, btw).
but hey, if they do want to keep it, maybe we can get more slots, drive bays, etc. in there and really trick that bad boy out!
I think we've got a whole lot unneeded worrying going on here.
Nearly every developer who has current code that REQUIRES a G4 or G5 (usually because of Altivec) is already using XCODE which means they can recompile thier Altivec optimizations for SIMD quite easily.
So lets say that the first Intel Based PM I buy is in 2006/7 probably 7. I will be on Photo Shop CS4 by them and it will be a FAT binary and so will MS office and Dreamweaver, it will be interesting to see how long it will take Quark to react (OSX nearly killed them as they were too slow and many users jumped ship).
I think that Quark will react pretty quickly. I've seen an early beta of QXP7 and they are started to use the Mac OS X technologies.
Quote:
Originally posted by Addison
The most interesting thing is that we are likely to see a new enlcosure, anyone who has seen the inside of the Intel machine can see that we just don't need that monster case any longer.
I would expect that a future Power Mac model would have a lot more stuff than the test system - more RAM slots, a GPU and so on.
um, by the way, did i miss the part fo the keynote where steve said that every currently shipping mac will cease to exist when Intel-based Macs start shipping?
yeah, exactly. keep your (at that point) old machine, run everything you need to, and shuttle files back and forth. and this assumes you buy a rev a version of the intel-mac, which, if you do, you are braver soul than I. i like stories of people saying they will wait on upgrading FOR A YEAR when these machine sstart shipping, whent hey don't even know WHAT that machine will be (for example: "gosh, i need a high-end desktop, but maybe i'll wait a year for those intel-based macs..." time passes... "what do you mean the first intel-based mac is an imac?!?")
Comments
I think Apple wants Classic dead, and I think the big developers also want it to go. You can't run Word 5.1 forever, you can't spell M$ without $.
Originally posted by wmf
Name an app that doesn't run on Rosetta. Please. I can't think of any.
Here is a big one: EyeTV. They have highly optimized code that "Requires a G4 or G5 processor." They are like the #1 TV solution for mac.
Originally posted by BRussell
Question: Jobs opened Word and Excel using Rosetta, which, given the constraints listed above, makes sense. But he also opened Photoshop, which presumably uses Altivec. Why did Photoshop run?
I may be wrong here, but were altivec and G5 support were added by plugins to photoshop. It seems it can do just fine without them too.
Originally posted by Ebby
Here is a big one: EyeTV. They have highly optimized code that "Requires a G4 or G5 processor." They are like the #1 TV solution for mac.
You're sure that's not simply because the G3 is too slow to decode the stream in realtime?
Originally posted by cubist
I think the upshot is that Rosetta will allow anything to run that would run on my PowerBook G3 Pismo or a G3 PowerMac - except Classic apps and 68k code.
How many OS X application won't run on a G3?
MS Office and Virtual PC does (processor speed excepted), Adobe's CS2 states a G4 or G5 but that's what Steve demo'd in the keynote it just ran (maybe they state G4 but it'll run on a fast enough G3?).
I'd watch for Apple listing their compatibility for PPC applications on Intel...
So lets say that the first Intel Based PM I buy is in 2006/7 probably 7. I will be on Photo Shop CS4 by them and it will be a FAT binary and so will MS office and Dreamweaver, it will be interesting to see how long it will take Quark to react (OSX nearly killed them as they were too slow and many users jumped ship).
I can't see many of the apps I use using Rosetta, but it is comforting to know it is there if I need it. In two years time current processors are likely to mean that today's benchmarks are an irrelevance.
The most interesting thing is that we are likely to see a new enlcosure, anyone who has seen the inside of the Intel machine can see that we just don't need that monster case any longer.
The other interesting consequence of the change is that there are a great many peripheral cards and it will be interesting to see how Apple reacts and if it will support them. (Sound and video cards for example)
Originally posted by ZO
crap...
lots of old old games (classics) won't run anymore
also, I have some pro apps (Pagemaker etc) that I use to open old old files, etc...
And I dont want to shell out to Adobe and EXTRA few hundred $ for some "plug ins" to open these things... grrrr...
well, you can do what i'll do: keep your current computer, keep all of those older apps running, and string an ethernet cable to your network to transfer files back and forth. if you really want convenience, put them both under your desk and get a kvm.
done and done.
Originally posted by Addison
The most interesting thing is that we are likely to see a new enlcosure, anyone who has seen the inside of the Intel machine can see that we just don't need that monster case any longer.
well, the case WAS built to hold a 10,000 BTU air conditioning unit (exaggeration and humor, there, btw).
but hey, if they do want to keep it, maybe we can get more slots, drive bays, etc. in there and really trick that bad boy out!
Nearly every developer who has current code that REQUIRES a G4 or G5 (usually because of Altivec) is already using XCODE which means they can recompile thier Altivec optimizations for SIMD quite easily.
Originally posted by Addison
So lets say that the first Intel Based PM I buy is in 2006/7 probably 7. I will be on Photo Shop CS4 by them and it will be a FAT binary and so will MS office and Dreamweaver, it will be interesting to see how long it will take Quark to react (OSX nearly killed them as they were too slow and many users jumped ship).
I think that Quark will react pretty quickly. I've seen an early beta of QXP7 and they are started to use the Mac OS X technologies.
Originally posted by Addison
The most interesting thing is that we are likely to see a new enlcosure, anyone who has seen the inside of the Intel machine can see that we just don't need that monster case any longer.
I would expect that a future Power Mac model would have a lot more stuff than the test system - more RAM slots, a GPU and so on.
The test system is a very basic PC.
yeah, exactly. keep your (at that point) old machine, run everything you need to, and shuttle files back and forth. and this assumes you buy a rev a version of the intel-mac, which, if you do, you are braver soul than I. i like stories of people saying they will wait on upgrading FOR A YEAR when these machine sstart shipping, whent hey don't even know WHAT that machine will be (for example: "gosh, i need a high-end desktop, but maybe i'll wait a year for those intel-based macs..." time passes... "what do you mean the first intel-based mac is an imac?!?")