I simply cannot stomach this transition
I've struggled to come to terms with it. When Jobs confirmed it, I was left befuddled. And as time has gone on, I have not exactly warmed up to the prospect. Try as I may I cannot stomach this transition. It makes me feel spiritually very unclean. I stopped visiting AI regularly after I bought my G5 last year, and upon catching up on that recent article that stated Apple dismantled its PPC hardware team, I felt physically ill. 
I wish I could stop worrying and learn to love Mactel, yet every time I think about it I only feel revulsion. I suppose I need a blog. . . or a beer. 
\
I wish I could stop worrying and learn to love Mactel, yet every time I think about it I only feel revulsion. I suppose I need a blog. . . or a beer. \
Comments
Originally posted by Big Mac
I suppose I need a blog. . .
Perhaps a cold shower too
The means is for Apple to stay healthy, have inspired workers, a not too small piece of the marked and not too expensive hardware platform. Since I am not an expert in how to achieve the means I trust that Apple is doing a better job than I would. If Apple thinks its nessesary to move to Intel to do so I am not the one to second guess. Especially not since the move to Intel doesn´t have a direct negative effect on my goal.
Originally posted by Big Mac
I appreciate your reply, PB. The humorous thing is, If only Apple had committed to an open hardware platform, I would not be so resistant....
You have it backwards. MacOS X, although built on the opensource Darwin implementation of BSD, is proprietary. The PPC-based Macintosh hardware platform is built on a published open standard. However, all evidence to date indicates that Intel-based Macs will not be built on a published open standard.
Frankly, whenever I dwell on this switch it makes me sick. I think I may have to divorce myself from Apple for a year or two after these first Apple PCs, these bastardized Macs, see the light of day. I'm sorry guys. I'm not trying to troll. This isn't gratifying to me. I'm just expressing my dismal view on the subject.
Originally posted by Big Mac
I've struggled to come to terms with it. When Jobs confirmed it, I was left befuddled. And as time has gone on, I have not exactly warmed up to the prospect. Try as I may I cannot stomach this transition. It makes me feel spiritually very unclean. I stopped visiting AI regularly after I bought my G5 last year, and upon catching up on that recent article that stated Apple dismantled its PPC hardware team, I felt physically ill.
I can no longer drive a Porsche - they switched to Nitchicon capacitors in the ECU computer! Just the thought of those nasty little buggers in there ruins the whole experience for me.
I think I would rather drive a Dodge than a Porsche with Nitchicon capacitors in the ECU. The Dodge uses the same capacitors, but at least I am not driving a tainted Porsche!
Originally posted by Big Mac
I really like that attempted analogy/parody, e16.
What utter nonsense!
When you take delivery of your first Intel based mac - and switch it on. Exactly how will you be able to perceive this "important change to the user's experience" ?
Do you open the case, pry off the heat sink and stare in horror at the logo on the back of the biggest chip?
Or perhaps you get a hex editor and sit glumly regarding the alien opcodes nested deep within one fork of the universal binaries?
Or do you cheat and click "About this Mac" and then burst into floods of tears as the word "Power" fails to appear?
It really makes no difference whatsoever to the user's experience. Providing that the Intel build of OS X is every bit as great as the PPC variant.
Even if you program the darn machine, if you sit writing Objective C in Cocoa all day long - trust me, you'll barely notice the difference.
Once upon a time there was a philosophical difference in the type of engineering done by Intel and a radical new upstart philosophy of so called RISC processors. For a while, it was an interesting battleground, with Apple championing this aggressive new underdog, and Intel plodding away with their aging instruction set.
But that was then and this is now. The technologies which Risc camp used were quickly embraced by Intel and AMD. These techniques allowed them to make the same sort of performance gains without the inconvenience of changing their instruction set. The war's over. Use your skill and judgement to see who won. Hint - I am still using a 3 year old 1GHz Powerbook, because it is hardly worth upgrading.
This transition moves Apple in a uniqely strong position. Currently it is regarded as a PPC to Intel move. But with the transition over, and commercial contracts fulfilled, Apple will be in a position to move to AMD, Power 5, Cell or whatever. The move also makes it possible for Apple to even consider challenging Microsoft directly in selling boxed copies of OS X to PCs.
How exactly is that bad?
Carni
Concerning your comments on user experience, I'll tell you that people will know the difference when Rosetta fails to live up to the hype for applications people rely on. People will know the difference when they find out Photoshop is substantially slower even as a native Intel application. People will know the difference when Apple's first generation Mactels have major problems due to Apple's inexperience with PC hardware environments. (Heck, even now Apple cannot get important hardware coding like G5 fan control consistently right from release to release.) People will know the difference when they see third party drivers for important devices are not Mactel compatible. And I will certainly know the difference when third parties move to phase out Mac development, despite the wonders of the universal (fat) binary.
Originally posted by Big Mac
No, Carniphage, Apple has publicly, overtly committed to marrying Intel. No exceptions, provisos or contingencies. You're simply engaging in wishful thinking. I wish I could believe you, but there's no evidence to support your optimistic vision.
Concerning your comments on user experience, I'll tell you that people will know the difference when Rosetta fails to live up to the hype for applications people rely on. People will know the difference when they find out Photoshop is substantially slower even as a native Intel application. People will know the difference when Apple's first generation Mactels have major problems due to Apple's inexperience with PC hardware environments. (Heck, even now Apple cannot get important hardware coding like G5 fan control consistently right from release to release.) People will know the difference when they see third party drivers for important devices are not Mactel compatible. And I will certainly know the difference when third parties move to phase out Mac development, despite the wonders of the universal (fat) binary.
Cry more, noob.
Originally posted by Big Mac
No, Carniphage, Apple has publicly, overtly committed to marrying Intel. No exceptions, provisos or contingencies. You're simply engaging in wishful thinking. I wish I could believe you, but there's no evidence to support your optimistic vision.
Yes of course they have. They have a commercial deal. Which at some point will end. It's like a marriage but not all marriages last forever.
Concerning your comments on user experience, I'll tell you that people will know the difference when Rosetta fails to live up to the hype for applications people rely on. People will know the difference when they find out Photoshop is substantially slower even as a native Intel application. People will know the difference when Apple's first generation Mactels have major problems due to Apple's inexperience with PC hardware environments. (Heck, even now Apple cannot get important hardware coding like G5 fan control consistently right from release to release.) People will know the difference when they see third party drivers for important devices are not Mactel compatible. And I will certainly know the difference when third parties move to phase out Mac development, despite the wonders of the universal (fat) binary.
Ah it's Rosetta you are worried about!
Well I can understand that, but Rosetta is a temporary thing. No one will be using Rosetta for more than a year or so because all developers of significance will be making the transition to native universal binaries.
The most significant application which will not be ready at the launch of PRO machines will probably be Photoshop. And yes if someone has a job which relies on the program, I would advise them to hold fire until
a) Adobe get their act together and finish the port
or b) Wait until an intel machine appears which can match the performance.
But no one is forcing anyone to buy a new machine at gunpoint, The PPC powermac is still quite usable you know.
My guess is that Adobe will release a halfway-house build. Still PPC code - but with SSE3 filter code from the PC version.
I note your hardware concerns - but really there are one or two engineers out there who do know how to put together intel PCs
Carni.
Don't you think that the Intel processors to be used in future Apple gear as soon as possibly January may be fast enough in Rosetta to be comperable in performance to the G4? It has been said many times over in various forums and people that I talk to that the Pentium M blows the doors off a G4.
That's said, it's obvious that everysoftware run under Rosetta woulb be painful in an experience user point of vue.
That's why I decided to buy a quad powermac G5, because a small speed bump apart, Apple will never make a more powerfull PPC based powermac. In three or 4 years the Intel stuff will have achieved it's full transition and the intel macs will be much faster than my quad.
My opinion is : you have a G5, keep it, enjoy it, and wait.
Originally posted by Big Mac
I've struggled to come to terms with it. When Jobs confirmed it, I was left befuddled. And as time has gone on, I have not exactly warmed up to the prospect. Try as I may I cannot stomach this transition. It makes me feel spiritually very unclean. I stopped visiting AI regularly after I bought my G5 last year, and upon catching up on that recent article that stated Apple dismantled its PPC hardware team, I felt physically ill.
There was no way that Apple / IBM could keep up with Intel. With PPC, IBM made the processor and it was up to Apple to come up with the MB and support chips. This was like Apple having half of a partner to help them keep pace with an entire industry. Intel is looking at taking CPU activities and utting them off on special support chips, they are looking at using flash memory for instant on, they are evolving the wireless communications. The switch to Intel was not about the CPU, it was the development cost of the CPU ++ the cost of the CPU, and the cost of the support chips and the evelopment of the MB. Look at it like this, you will get equal or better performance, and maybe slightly lower prices.
I suspect Uncle Steve merely said complete transition in order to force developers to write to Universal Binaries; after all, if he only said "in some cases, we'll be going Intel, and in others we won't", it would confuse the market, make it appear that Apple is waffling, and convince developers that it's not worth their time to write Universal Binaries as who knows what's going to happen: and in not doing so, they could essentially halt any degree of transition because not enough apps would get on board.
I don't think Uncle Steve likes other people grabbing hold of the reins like that ...
So, we have complete "transition" ... and who knows, maybe they will go all the way with it? But frankly, I doubt it (unless Intel has some serious serious snazz up their sleeves) - I mean, the die size alone of the two chips tells you at least something, plus, there's plenty of institutions who've put a lot of effort into PPC, and are loathe to drop it all ...
What I think is going to happen is simply this - Apple wants all developers to just get into the habbit of writing Universal Binaries no matter what; then, they'll be the only mainstream computer company in the world that can take their pick between PPC and Intel, and simply use whichever is best for the task at hand ... for portables, Intel, for racks in scientific computer, PPC ... I mean, who knows where PPC and Cell might wind up? Could you imagine what a killer media machine production machine built upon a kick ass Cell architecture might be like? Obviously nobody knows at this point really exactly what's going to happen - so why would Apple want to cut themselves off from a potentially huge advantage?
Nah, to my mind, it's "tell the developers we're going to move entirely to Intel, get them to write Universal Binaries, and then be the only computer company in the world that can cherry pick between Intel or IBM": that's potentially one hell of an advantage!
Originally posted by Big Mac
I've struggled to come to terms with it. When Jobs confirmed it, I was left befuddled. And as time has gone on, I have not exactly warmed up to the prospect. Try as I may I cannot stomach this transition. It makes me feel spiritually very unclean.
I do however find the whole waiting process HARD to take. I was waiting for almost 2 years for the infamous G5 powerbook. So when Apple dropped the intel bomb...I was excited...until I realized HEY!! Thats gonna mean even MORE waiting!
DOH!
And on top of that when the intel books finally arrive(rumor now has it early 2006)....we'll have to WAIT almost another year for a OS upgrade that will fully utilize its chip!
DOUBLE DOH!
Apple is a cruel mistress. But ya gotta love em.
My main delema will be trying to decide between the upcoming ibook and powerbook. If rumors are correct, pbs will get an intel, a built in isight and drop the 12" model....while the ibooks get a widescreen 13". I hope the ibook gets an intel too. Otherwise that would make the decision even more confusing. I still find it hard to believe apple will both drop the 12" pb AND not offer a 13" pb don't you? I want a small laptop...so probably won't go with a 15" pb anyway...and will be forced to get a 13" ibook with or without an intel chip.
Argh...so many decisions.
1. remember how the Mac was still a Mac when we went from Motorola to IBM
2. Climb on top of my girlfriend.
Originally posted by philbot
2. Climb on top of my girlfriend.
I guess that explains your sig?!?
Quote from the girlfriend...?!?
;^p
(sorry, could not pass that one by...!)
Originally posted by regan
PAnd on top of that when the intel books finally arrive(rumor now has it early 2006)....we'll have to WAIT almost another year for a OS upgrade that will fully utilize its chip!
I don't think that's really true. OS X has apparently been able to run intel since the beginning. What exactly won't tiger be utilizing once the intel machines come out?
Originally posted by Flounder
I don't think that's really true. OS X has apparently been able to run intel since the beginning. What exactly won't tiger be utilizing once the intel machines come out?
Nothing, all of the tools / frameworks are in place. This is not a boutique shop, this the industry leader. They have the whole package, and make utilization easy, because they want to remain the industry leader. Rosetta, acceleration framework, and currently OSX x86 was updated to 10.4.3 and few days earlier than PPC. Nothing will not be utilized, so everything will be utilized.