PowerPC Support when Intel arrives?

[peteag]

I heard that Apple will take Intel-CPUs instead of IBMs in 2006. And until 2007 is over, the hole product-line will fit to the intel-architecture. My problem ist, I wanted to switch to Apple. But is this reasonably now? Will the support for PowerPC end in 2006 or 2007 or will it be continued? Please help.

[shevegen]

Ultimately I dont really think the support for PowerPC will disappear all of a sudden. People can still continue to develop stuff, and I think even Apple will not want to make their current small (hehe) user base drop. (Its not so small, yes, but I compare Apple with MS now, and I think with the Intel move apple wants to be able to compete with MS which probably means that the MS users can see much better applications)


I could be wrong of course....
But to be honest, its probably cheaper to get an intel or amd pc and use a good linux distribution on it. In 2006 you can decide again if you want ultra shiny apple things (which are in my eyes way too much overpriced and too much of cult and less of effectiveness, but hey this is just my one cc ) ... ;>

The best guy who can answer you is most definitely a long time mac user !

[Doom9]

Apple did significant platform moves in the past.. they've already moved the processor architecture once (to PowerPC), and then there's the move from OS9 to OSX. Both were not done in overnight, but the user base eventually followed. It won't be any different this time. Developers have a year to prepare and move their code to a compiler platform that can create code for both CPU types. Such compilers are available today, and many programs written for OSX can be ported with very little effort. So, if programs are moved to a flexible development platform, we're likely to see binaries for both CPU types for a while. Naturally, if you buy Mac now as opposed to in a year, the hardware will lose more value in a year because it will become obsolete. But MACs use IDE HDs, USB and Firewire peripherals, AGP graphics cards, so there's a lot of hardware you can use in an Intel based MAC as well.

[peteag]

will a new intel-processor be enough when i buy a new mac-system now? i mean: if i have a complete g5-based system and then the move from ibm to intel comes, so i want to buy a new intel-cpu (for mac) and put it into my system. is this possible?

and when would you think the whole systems get cheaper?

[Episode]

I don't think you can upgrade your processor on macintel by yourself, since that hardware is still mac, even if it uses Intel processor. They are still hardware company and allowing users to upgrade cpu's wouldn't be wise thing to do.

But what I found most disturbing is that those new Intel processors aren't even 64bit! (yes, I know that Intel has 64bit Pentium 4's, but those that Apple is going to use are Pentium M's and they have clearly said that for now they just stick to the 32-bit mode, which is really sad) I really think that Apple is switching to inferior technology :(

But I see no reason not to buy new G5 system since there will be lots of new PPC-products before switch is complete, maybe even after that and your system won't become obsolete in one year. This is because developers can make binaries that support both platforms at the same time, so support for PPC users won't stop after Apple has switched to Intel. Making such binaries is really easy too. You just select both x86 and PPC from Xcode's compiler options and you are good to go. And there will be emulators from Apple to emulate both systems, so it really doesn't matter what platform you are using. So yeah, buy one now if you need a Mac, it won't be obsolete for a long time.

And those new Intel-based systems won't become any cheaper since from what I heard, PPC chips are actually cheaper now than Pentiums. The reasons for switch were need for higher performance and better availability since IBM couldn't break 3Ghz barrier in one year and they still cannot deliver enough chips for Apple.

[peteag]

But they said that the roadmap of intel will be the best at this time. Are you sure they will move back to 32bit os x? this would be a very very big step backward. Or is there a new os in development?

[Episode]

OSX isn't fully 64bit yet. It has many optimizations that of course will speed things up, but it's still same os that runs on both 32bit G3/4 and 64bit G5 processors. There are no separate versions. Intel may say that their roadmap will be the best in 2007, but we cannot be sure about that now. What they are planning to do is drop support for Pentium 4 completly and add 64bit support, higher bus-speeds and dualcore support for Pentium M and use only that. But since there is no such processor currently, I'm little sceptic about this solution being the best at the time. And those features might not be even used on Macintel when first models are released.

And IBM has released today new line of G5 processors with dual core support (maybe we will see 4-way Macs soon?) and low-power models for laptops, so technically there is no need for change. Maybe Apple will support both architectures by using PPC on Powerbooks and Powermacs and x85 on iMac, iBook, Mac mini and so on. :D

[peteag]

Dual core G5s? I've read the news. But that means the models got more expensive, isn't it? But what about 64bit? So, the time is there to go 64bit because everyone does it. OS X is real 64 bit, isn't it, sure 32bit programs will run on it but some Linux distributions contain also both 32 and 64.

[Episode]

Not really. Actually dual core is cheaper than two single core G5's (almost all models are dual processor models anyway). I don't think this will have any affect on Powermac prices. G5's are all 64bit processors, but they can execute 32bit code too. (G3 and G4 are 32bit and they cannot execute 64bit code) And as I said, OSX isn't real 64bit, it just has lots of 64bit optimizations and there are no separate 32bit and 64bit versions as both G3/4 and G5 use same OS. OSX and some programs just run little faster on G5, that's all. (You can also have both 64bit and 32bit versions on same binary, so you don't need to have separate version for different processors)

[peteag]

dual core is cheaper than single core? Hä? dual core is a much more complex technology and the way of producing it is some more spending! how could this be that a more complex technology is cheaper than a less complex one?


Oh oh oh, understand. Did you mean, the new apples will contain just one cpu (dual core) instead of two cpus (single core) or did you mean the new line will contain tow dual core cpus for 2 times more performance?

[Episode]

Exactly, currently Powermacs have two single core processors. With dualcores you can use only one and have a cheaper motherboard too. There might be model with two dual core processors, but this is highly unlikely.

I would also like to remind that IBM has had dual core processors for a long time. I think they were actually the first with their POWER4 processors few years ago, which G5 is based on. So this is not a new technology for them. And of course IBM would like to keep Apple as their customer for as long as possible, so they cannot ask too high prices for these things.

[peteag]

will apple coorperate with intel very very sure? i mean, now when ibm produce dual core processors with some 3 ghz, apple should got back to them, isn't it? but i don't think so that the new cpus are that cheaper because the coorperation ends in one year and then it doesn't matter if the last product of their relationship is cheaper or more expensive, hm?

[Episode]

AFAIK, the main reason for the switch was that IBM couldn't deliver enough processors for Apple, there weren't promised 3Ghz G5 within one year of launch and lack of low power G5 for laptops. I don't know if they were also too expensive or not, but now that IBM does offer all those features and more that Apple needed, switching to Intel might not happen. But only time will tell.

[Joe Fenton]

First, Apple isn't going to be using Pentium Ms - they plan on using a future processor Intel has on it's roadmap which is supposed to be DERIVED from the Pentium M. As such, it may be 64bit.

Second PowerPCs are not the same as x86s when it comes to 64bit. There are a couple 64bit specific operation codes which are trapped when running as 32bit - mainly load and store 64bit. Beyond that, the code is always the same. All that changes is that registers hold 64bits instead of 32bits. On the PPC, addresses are always formed from the contents of a register with an optional offset that may be a 16bit constant, or another register. Since the registers are 64bit in 64bit mode, so are the addresses.

The reason is simple - the PowerPC is derived from the POWER RISC processor, which has always been 64bit, so PPC has been 64bit since the very beginning. A lot of folks don't remember the PPC620 from Motorola - it was a 64bit PPC released at the same time as the PPC601. You could think of the early PPCs as always stuck in 32bit mode. With the release of the G5, the PPC is back to its 64bit roots. That's why many feel that Apple will use 64bit chips on x86. It'll be next June before they're released, so there's plenty of time to see what comes about.

Back to the original thread topic - try to remember the 68K to PPC transition. Most major packages supported the 68K for maybe two updates before dropping 68K support. A considerable amount of software was released as PPC only. Look for the same on this transition.

[peteag]

let's think logicaly! when apple turns to intel, the next pcs have to be more stable, much more faster and mor powerfull, because it would be a heavy setback to their customers. they (we) want more power and more speed with every cent we pay. so less power and less speed for more money is just unlogicaly and a bad chess move!

[Joe Fenton]

Overall, Apple has always managed to make newer systems and OSes faster and better. It's probably the only reason they're still around. Despite how quickly most software dropped 68K support, the PPC machines WERE better. The PC machines might not be the "absolute best," but you can be reasonably sure they'll be better than the current and upcoming PPC machines.

[peteag]

Will the PowerPC architecture be supported after 2007 when Intel-Macs are finally finished. Because I want to buy such an PowerMac G5 Model but what if it's useless and no longer be supported by Apple? And: what about buying a PowerMac G5 now and rig it up to an Intel-Mac later??? Is this possible?