The original rumours concerning Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard stated that it would be available only for 64bit Intel processors, leaving PowerPC G4, G5, and early Intel Macs out in the blue. While Steve Jobs' keynote and the preview pages at Apple.com did not speak of any hardware cut-offs, Gizmodo got their hands on a hardware requirements document for the Developer Preview release of Snow Leopard, and it contains bad news for PowerPC users.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-07-07
Member since:
2005-04-01
Hardly proof of anything. The support may even be there, but it's missing either the ability to boot, or maybe there are bugs, or maybe Quicktime X doesn't work on PPC yet. Everyone seems to be suggesting that PPC support has been "removed" rather than just present but buggy.
I'm not saying it will definitely support PPC, I'm just saying the requirements for the dev preview is hardly proof that the final won't work on PPC.
Member since:2005-11-10
"It will not be compatible with PowerPC, although Orchard Spy has learned that Apple is at this point continuing to churn out builds for PowerPC—but only internally." - orchardspy.com
They may be targeting just Intel at the Alpha stages, and then add PPC back in, or may be batting around the idea of dropping PPC internally. Maybe they even want to gauge user reaction first, before making their decision.
Member since:
2006-01-09
It seems reasonable to have quick compiles on a single architecture for alpha testing; however universal binaries and wider use would provide better beta testing.
So taking this at face value means no PPC support in Snow Leopard.
There are going to be some folk who invested in some heavy weight G5 systems with, say, 8GB of RAM .... and they will NOT be happy at all.
It's early days for this debate.
Member since:
2005-07-08
They said that they were focusing into polishing 10.6 so that it can become the foundation of the future OS X releases. Excluding PPC of that wouldn't be that strange.
(And notice that "not releasing new versions for PPC" isn't the same than "not supporting the existing OS X PPC versions")
Member since:
2006-01-23
Member since:2005-07-06
Hey, I've got a Mac Mini G4, a Powermac G5, a first generation MacBook and the latest Mac Mini and I for one can see the positive effects of dropping PPC altogether. Snow Leopard won't be relased until mid-2009. I don't upgrade my computers until at few point releases have been made (actually, only my Intel Macs run Leopard ATM) so the effects of Apple dropping PPc won't be felt by me until late 2009, early 2010.
By then I don't think I'll have much use for the Mini G4 and the G5 will probably be replaced by a Mac Pro or high-end iMac. At that time, I'd welcome whatever benfits dropping PPC will entail.
Member since:2005-08-18
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:
2007-04-29
i have a dual g5, and i'll be really pissed if they drop ppc.
first of all the last ppc was sold less than 2 years ago. i understand apple can not support hardware forever, but it should at least support expensive hardware like this for 5 years or so.
there is no real technical reason to drop it. it might shrink the installation dvd a little, but that's about it. ppc is not holding back any innovations.
if you are a software/hardware developer, please make a support plan like sun has. the versions of solaris have a clear roadmap and lifespan. there is no sudden eol with solaris. freebsd and ubuntu do this too btw. if apple is serious about conquering the business market, the must have a proper support plan and roadmap.
well, let's wait and see, it's not like apple have never surprised us.
Member since:2007-07-27
they will. one more year till snow leopard and two more until the next version of osx, at which time support for leopard will stop. that's five years since the last ppc-mac was sold..
Member since:2005-12-12
Member since:
2005-11-10
It might be just G4 this time, and leave G5 in to be obsoleted in 10.7.
I'm on both sides of the fence; I've got a Mac Mini G4, and a MacBookPro(64-bit). Would I be worried about the Mini not running the latest and greatest? No, the CPU really isn't up to much and the disk is the biggest bottleneck. It'll be every bit as good as it already is just running regular-Leopard.
G4s are unlikely to benefit from all the CPU/GPU work in Snow Leopard, ergo - nothing to miss.
Dropping PPC only really affects G5 owners in a way that matters: their investment and performance.
Member since:
2008-06-03
Well.... they are a hardware company after all, so they definitely need to find excuses to sell more computers.
I can imagine many PPC owners, especially the late PowerMac G5 users, being a bit pissed.
I own a pretty new 8core Mac Pro, which cost me a bomb to get, and I'd be equally distressed if OSX 10.9 aka PussyFoot released in 2011 didn't support my hardware.
By then I'm hoping most creative pros like myself would have credible open source alternatives becoz the main Mac demographic would almost certainly be made up of poser fashion-victim types.
Member since:
2005-08-12
Member since:
2006-11-24
Mac reality distortion. Seriously, what are you thinking..?
The PPC is history. In no time, you will have so much power on any Intel Apple that you will not look back at the G5. Do you want to burden the developer community for years to come to serve those still sitting on PPC?
It doesn't happen every day, but you got you acknowledge that there has been a mayor platform change and that is that for the PPC.
It does not have to do with my hate for Mac when I say this, it really only is a logical, natural decision. You can keep using the current systems the way they are and eventually they will fade out.
Member since:2007-11-29
Member since:2005-09-13
Member since:2007-11-29
Member since:2005-09-13
Member since:2007-11-29
My point is that IF they WOULD HAVE DONE that, everyone would moan. I didn't say they have actually done it, I only said what would happen IF they had done it.
(Hypothetical!) Scenario: Microsoft drops XP-compatibility and doesn't release Vista 32. Everyone says "Nooo! Microsoft is bullshit! How can they abandon older technology, those f***heads!"
Compare this to:
(Very Likely) Scenario: Apple drops PPC-compatibility by releasing their newest OS for Intel 64 only. Everyone says "Yeah! Apple is cool! It's a good step and nobody should be unhappy about that! Who uses PPC anyway! Go Apple! A giant leap for mankind! Never look back! Stop living in the past! Forget those PPC whiners! Yeah yeah yeah Apple Apple Apple!"
Member since:2007-11-29
Just one thing more, as an example. I know an Apple user, and he's sooo proud to have Apple and climb up their butts.
Now, back then when Macs were still PPC, he always praised the PPC and explained that it's soooo much better than Intel and so on, and then, half a year later, he told me they'll switch to Intel and this is such a good decision and that they always were prepared for this step, their OS code was designed so that it could be very easily built on an Intel CPU, etc... and yeah, now Intel rocks of course, because when Apple says something...
In my eyes, this is the typical scenario. Whatever Apple does, it's good. Yeah yeah yeah Apple Apple Apple! If Microsoft would now switch to another architecture than Intel, it would be the biggest bullshit in the world, but if Apple does that, it's great.
And now, of course, everyone loves their decision not to support PPC anymore... because it's Apple's will, and "Apple's will" is equal to "truth".
Member since:2008-06-13
I'd actually really really welcome Microsoft dropping the backwards compatibility for the sake of a decent security model. Vista could have been a much nicer system to use were it not for the kludges put in place to ensure older binaries to work IMO.
re. 10.6: seeing as my first and only Mac is a first gen macbook, I kind of hope that they drop PPC support, as it means I will get some hard drive space back that is currently taken up with wasted code that I can't run (ie, 1 half of every UB).
would also like to see Java 6 and JavaDB for 32bit architectures, but I guess that's hoping for a bit too much.
Member since:
2005-11-10
I've been wondering since the announcement if Apple will add any virtualization support in Snow Leopard. If they do drop support for PPC hardware do you think they would keep around Rosetta such as in a virtualization or emulation layer?
I mean surely Apple is doing something about virtualization in this release right?
Member since:
2005-11-13
I have a dual G4 that is running Tiger with no issues. Most of the reason for upgrading is to add some incredible new feature or remove bugs. I haven't seen any major bug in Tiger yet. Is there some incredible feature of {Snow} Leopard that is needed on this machine?
The issue will not matter until there is new and required software that ONLY works on the new versions of the operating system, ie no more universal binaries.
I'm sure that Apple will eventually be phasing out universal binaries. At that point my dual-boot OSX/Gentoo G4 will remain a dual-boot G4 with all the new software now being installed on Gentoo.
Member since:
2006-06-01
Member since:
2008-06-11
First off, it's kind of funny how many people come here with the explicit (and not-very-well-hidden) intention of insulting Mac users. It's not like Mac users are forcing their decisions upon you, so chill!
Second, DavidGurvich is exactly correct. Unless there's some killer app you absolutely need, upgrading a Mac is generally not necessary. I used Panther on my Powerbook for the last four years before I finally upgraded to Leopard because a big student discount was offered.
It's not like you're suddenly not going to be able to use your G5 productively anymore, so why fret? Your computer still does more than it did when you first bought it. You're not suddenly going to be unable to do your work simply because Apple releases a new OS.
By the way, I'm typing this on my main desktop computer: 333mhz iMac G3 with 192mb RAM and OS 9.2.2. I still get a lot of work done on this machine!
Member since:
2005-07-11
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:
2006-03-27
The name "Snow Leopard" suggests that it is just an update to Leopard, not something really new. Everything that works on Snow Leopard will work on Leopard, except things that will require the newer hardware.
A couple notes:
- you don't need a 64 bit OS to use more than 4 GB of RAM. G5s used to be sold with more than that, and they run Panther or Tiger, which were 32 bit.
- Leopard is 64 bit.
Member since:2005-11-10
Regular-Leopard is 32-bit, with 64-bit API stacks. The kernal in Leopard is 32-bit as with the drivers. The ability to address more than 4GB RAM is because of the 64-bit memory management APIs;
In Snow-Leopard, the kernal will be Universal, as well as drivers - meaning full 64-bit code top to bottom on 64-bit machines.
Member since:2006-03-27
If you want to run 64 bit apps - as Leopard does - you need a 64 bit kernel. There's no other way.
OSX's kernel is a micro-kernel, so in fact it can have 32 bit parts, like the drivers, if they don't need to be 64 bit.
[q]In Snow-Leopard, the kernal will be Universal, as well as drivers - meaning full 64-bit code top to bottom on 64-bit machines.
They can port the remaining parts, but there's hardly any advantage.
The "optimization" part is more interesting.
Member since:2007-11-01
OSX's kernel is a micro-kernel, so in fact it can have 32 bit parts, like the drivers, if they don't need to be 64 bit.
Except on the PowerMac G5. It can switch between 32-bit and 64-bit mode on the fly, even though the machine boots in 32-bit mode, with a 32-bit kernel. This is one of the advantages of the Power architecture. So you're right about Intel architecture.. in that the system must boot in long mode (64-bit mode) to be able to then support both 32 & 64-bit code. With the arrival of the Core 2 models, Apple had to make a hybrid kernel to be able to do what they were doing trivially on the PowerMac G5 platform and the Xnu 32-bit kernel, from 10.3 and on.
BTW, it's spelled "kernel." As of OS X 10.4.5/intel and 10.5.0/ppc, OS X has been shipping completely universal. So, 64-bit drivers would just add one or 2 additional segments to the existing universal drivers.
So, what will change in 10.6? Assuming the G4 will be unsupported and the G5 still is, the whole system, including drivers, would have 3 segments in each universal Mach-O object: IA32, AMD64 and PPC64.
Member since:2005-11-10
Member since:
2005-07-06
For the past few weeks, I've been skimming through the April 1994 issue of BYTE magazine - an issue largely devoted to the PPC's debut and the "CPU Wars" (one of the front cover headlines is "Should You Switch from RISC to CISC?").
It seems like the entire history of PPC has been characterized by huge potential that was never quite capitalized-on. That's been the case with IBM even more so than Apple (on the consumer side of things, at least). The most interesting stuff in that old BYTE issue, aside from the number of ads for anti-piracy "hardware dongles," are the ambitious plans that IBM once had for PREP, the "PowerPersonal" platform, WorkplaceOS (very similar idea to Xen, but circa 1991), etc.
Ah well, maybe my old Power Computing "Fighting Back for the Mac - Kicking Intel's Ass" t-shirt will be worth something as an ironic collector's item 
