Hi, Codebreaker.
it’s possible move away from the PowerPC
Nope, not ‘possible,’ Codebreaker. It’s definite. By 2008 all new Macs will be x86 based.
Kind of a shame really. I hope Apple doesn’t just become another ‘me to’ company. That said I have my feet in the PC camp but only because it’s what I started out with.
Well, it’s still going to be OS X–for the average customer not a bit different than the PowerPC version, and still only run on Apple hardware.
Apple was forced to it by IBM’s continued failures to produce enough chips when needed and their inability to come up with a power-efficient faster G5. They’ve had this scenario in mind for a long time–every version of OS X and all apple software have been developed for both chipsets for the past five years.
Apple will need to get price competitive with the PC vendors which is somewhat doubtful in my mind and there is growing interest on running Linux on a standard PC platform. The difference will become less and less.
In some ways this could be beneficial for me. I work for companies designing single board computers using PowerPC devices and we’ve always had supply problems due to Apple consumming most of the parts.
Not only that we’ve developed the technology to make thermally efficient G5 products. Note: not necessarily power efficient but capable of working in small enclosures without forced cooling.
I’ve already fed the marketing folks the news.
Apple will need to get price competitive with the PC vendors
Hmm, not sure about that, since the overall experience for the average user will be the same as always. It’s not like they’re going to make Apple run on a stock Dell machine. Actually, I’ve been hearing just as many people say that it’s likely bad news for desktop Linux, since it’s likely to make Macs a more competitive alternative. We’ll have to wait and see how it all plays out.
Intel or PowerPC ? Ok, see it from a different angle…
Do you actually know the size of the cylinders in your car? I suppose not. Does it make your ride to the supermarket any different? I don’t think so.
That’s Intel versus PowerPc. Under the hood is usually of little consequences, as long as it runs fine.
Do you have a mini-van to get to the supermarket? Would having a mini-van make the ride any different? Yes, definitively, because you’d get more space to put all those bags, and you could use the extra space to stock on those items on sale (bread, meat, etc.)
That’s Mac OS X versus Windows. What’s under the hood doesn’t really matter. But what’s on your screen, how you operate it, how well it functions, how easy (or not) it is to perform your tasks with it, that is what really matters in the end.
Ray
What’s under the hood doesn’t really matter.
Exactly, Ray.
A Jaguar is a Ford with a fancy user interface. A Saab is a GM with a fancy interface. An Audi is a Volkswagen with a fancy interface.
There are a lot less Jaguars, Saabs, and Audis sold than Fords, Chevys, and VWs, but they’re higher priced and more profitable. And clearly some people will pay extra for them.
Lou …
I like that … kind of made me smile.
PS … and I drive a Jaguar 🙂 … beautiful car.
Wendy
Very well explained, thanks to you all.
I will keep my big old GMC truck and keep my Ford 150s. Keep my Mac OS 9 and Xs. And hope that they will all work together happily forever after,,,,,,,,,, Jane
Thanks for the article Barbara.
Time marches on.
I think a G5 Powerbook that doesn’t get hot would be a nice backup.
Sorry to disagree but whats under the bonnet (hood :-)) does matter to some folk even though the user interface may get them from A to B just the same ( to mix metaphors).
I’m talking about cost of ownershop and performance. For instance there are a whole range of PC architectures and some just don’t perform so well. Take a look at some of the earlier Dell series machines that had integrated graphics, network and audio….despite featuring a 2GHz Celeron my old 800MHz PIII laptop was faster at doing what I wanted.
To continue with the analogies, if my criteria was to get from A to B as quickly as possible irrespective of cost then I’d get a Ferrari and not a Ford Escort and in either case driving them would be mostly the same thing…steering wheel and three pedals.
Sticking with the motor theme, if I’d invested in stockpiling loads of Diesel, I wouldn’t suddenly go and buy a petrol driven car.
Mac users probably have a whole legacy of programs and with the switch to a new engine are going to have to run these through an emulator and that most likely will not be as seamless as Apple promote. There will be a performance hit and some programs may not run. We’ve already been there with Intel/Windows.
In the end though to each his own and if whats under the bonnet isn’t important then why do we upgrade our machinces every so often.
Colin
Mac users probably have a whole legacy of programs and with the switch to a new engine are going to have to run these through an emulator
Well, when you consider that most software people use on a Mac is from Apple and comes with the operating system or free when you buy an Apple (Mac OS X, iCal, Mail, Preview, Safari, Address Book, iPhoto, iDVD, Garage Band, iMovie, iTunes, AppleWorks or Omni Outliner, XCode, QuickTIme, etc.), there’s over 50% of your software right there that won’t be running under emulation.
A lot of other software is free downloads (scanner drivers, Acrobat, Flash, Firefox, Eclipse, Real Player, Microsoft Media Player, etc.). Again, that much less software that needs emulation.
What’s left for most users is software from Adobe, Apple, and Microsoft. And Adobe’s Bruce Chizen and Microsoft’s head of the Mac BU were both at the announcement and said they were going to have new software when the Macintels ship. Again, no emulation here.
So how much of your software is going to run in emulation mode?
Not very much.
Lou….
The fact that most of the software comes from Apple may not be relevant. I admit I’m not a MAC person but unless Apple have written all the software they’ve ever made to run on both Intel and PowerPC then some will have to run through an emulator. Even Apple are saying that.
An Intel processor will not run PowerPC code.
Codebreaker (Oh, no! Another Colin! 🙂 ),
Sorry to disagree but whats under the bonnet (hood ) does matter to some folk even though the user interface may get them from A to B just the same ( to mix metaphors).
Actually I was agreeing with you. Ford and Jaguar share the same motor. So it’s not the motor that distinguishes them–it’s the other stuff.
So now Apple and Windows will both use Intel processors–so it’s not the motor (Intel chip) that distinguishes them–it’s the other stuff.
And compare a Mac Mini to a Dell and you’ll see that while the Mac Mini is more expensive, it has much nicer "other stuff"–like a real video card (something you complained about Dell yourself), DVI output, Firewire, etc.
but unless Apple have written all the software they’ve ever made to run on both Intel and PowerPC
In fact that’s exactly what Apple has done. All the Apple apps I listed (except the iLife suite) comes with Mac OS X and Apple has said that for the last 5 years OS X has run on both PowerPC and Intel. Also, reports from the WWDC show floor have said that Apple was showing the iLife suite running natively on Intel. So all the software I described above does, in fact, run on Intel today.
As a developer myself, I know that few apps write directly to the processor (assembly language)–that was more common years ago. Nowadays apps are written in high level languages like C, C++, and Java. While there are undeniably some issues moving to a new processor, it’s probably less than 10% of code that has to change. Any processor-specific optimizations are relegated to a few areas of the code.
And remember that Macs use a lot of the same technologies as PCs (same video cards, networking, etc.) so it’s not like it’s going to a completely different platform or anything. And in fact if a company like Adobe already has Intel optimizations for its Windows apps, it can use those now in its Mac apps. It would be a different story if Macs were moving in the other direction (from Intel to PowerPC) but they’re not.
Hi Barbara, Excellent article, thank you.
My favourite software is Adobe and what Apple has built in, plus goodies like Terragen. So from what I gather here and what Ive read, I am not going to worry!
It will all sort out in the end to our advantage, so we hope. Be interesting to see what we all say a year or so from now. Jane
Lou….
Not really another Colin…I’ve been here a while but just recently changed my handle, when things went a bit astray with logging on.
So maybe it’s some good news for you Mac folk that most of your apps are safe….I hope….:-)
The Dell example was a case of looking under the hood because not all Dells are built the same way. I’ve just received my new one but made sure that the internal architecture did not include shared busses. It goes like a rocket.
I would question your statement about apps not writing directly to the processor. There are many, many systems in the world but in my experience I don’t know any that directly run programs written in high level languages at least not those who’s main requirement is performance. As you know Applications are written at a High Level e,g C, but then usually compiled for the target processor. Apart from which no ones going to give away the source code. So yes the source code doesn’t change much but what you run on your machine isn’t the same executable….unless you go through an emulator.
Just think….if I want to change from my PC to a Mac I have to buy a Mac version of Photoshop.
Colin
Mac OS X is already running an emulator : Classic (Mac OS 9). And asside from having to launch OS 9 each time you want something (to preserve memory), it runs quite well and fast.
I read last evening (I can’t find the link now, I’m at work), that already iLife ’05 is shipped in Universal Binaries (both PowerPC and Intel versions).
Just think….if I want to change from my PC to a Mac I have to buy a Mac version of Photoshop.
No. You have to call Adobe which, for the fee of the disk itself + shpping, will exchange your copy for the other platform. I know this, I did it myself.
Ray
You know, I think the pundits all have it bass ackwards: they’re all saying it will hurt Apple’s hardware sales.
But as a consumer, it won’t affect my hardware purchases, it’ll affect my software purchses.
Why? Because any hardware I buy now will work with current apps and new apps (because they’ll be dual binaries–as Ray said, both PowerPC and Intel). So my hardware purchase is safe. It’ll work for 2 or 3 or 5 years, and new software will work with it, too. What’s the downside? There isn’t any.
BUT . . . software is the exact opposite problem. 3rd party (non-Apple) software that I buy now will only work under emulation the next time I buy a Mac. If history repeats itself, only paid upgrades will work on the new architecture. I was thinking about buying PS CS or PS CS2 (given my many, er, comments about lack of scripting in PSE 🙂 ) but now that I know that PS CS(2) will only work under emulation on Intel, there’s no way I’m going to buy it now. I’ll buy the next version–the one that works on PowerPC and Intel.
So short term, this will hurt the software manufacturers (Adobe, Microsoft), although in the long term they’ll probably get more upgrade revenue.
(Caveat–of course, if I depended on PS CS for my job, I’d buy it now because I needed it. But for me, an amateur, it’s not a must-have.)
Hi Beth, I love Walter Mossberg’s articles, and indeed a huge thank you for posting that link. (I didnt get today’s paper.)
He has an uncanny way of explaining stuff so that dummies like me can understand. MAC rules, and OS X is the best, so I will get the new G5 for my husband. Thanks,
Jane
