homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam

The Geek Culture Forums


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Geek Culture Forums   » News, Reviews, Views!   » Your News!   » Could this be a mistake?

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Could this be a mistake?
DoctorWho

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 392

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 06, 2005 12:01      Profile for DoctorWho     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I saw this today and I couldn't believe it. Personally, I am not one to really evaluate whether Apple is making a good move here because I don't buy Apple computers. What do you guys think, Is Apple making a mistake here, or do you think this will be good in the long run?

--------------------
Laughter is like changing a baby's diapers. It doesn't solve anything but it sure improves the situation. Leo F. Buscaglia

Posts: 1694 | From: The TARDIS | Registered: Apr 2000  |  IP: Logged
CommanderShroom
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2097

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 06, 2005 12:13      Profile for CommanderShroom     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
CG, I would give my left nut for the extra cash that is needed for a G5, just so I could run OSX. If it is true and the price drops on Apple systems, you will see me in line at the Ontario Mills Apple store with a nice and shiny Mac in hand.

Or, if it works I will own a copy of OSX (maybe OSXI, by then) for my current desktop.

--------------------
Does he know our big secret?
Has one of us confessed?
'Bout the wires circuits and motors
Buried in our chest

Posts: 2463 | From: Utarrrrggggghhh!!!!!!!! | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
drunkennewfiemidget
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2814

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 06, 2005 12:28      Profile for drunkennewfiemidget     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm sure they're all issues they've addressed; however, I'm still curious how they're going to handle heat, power draw, emulation, architecture changes, etc.

Although it's pretty blatant Mac's working on making things more affordable for people -- the Mac Mini being a mere $500.

I'm curious to see...

Posts: 4897 | From: Cambridge, ON, Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
SpikeSpiegel
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1452

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 06, 2005 15:06      Profile for SpikeSpiegel     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
does this mean youll be able to get dual 4ghz intel processors in your G5??

--------------------
its been a while

Posts: 3090 | From: Boston | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
HalfVast

Member # 3187

Icon 1 posted June 06, 2005 17:56      Profile for HalfVast     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ok, I've watched the entire keynote (note to self: get life) and I'm
feeling a little better. The main points seem to be.

1. OS X has been ported to 86x since the first version five years ago.
(Jobs called this the 'just in case' project.)

2. Developers using xCode 2.1 will be able to create 'dual binary'
versions of their applications for distribution which will automaticly
install the correct version based on the machine hardware. So new
versions of software should be supported on both platforms for
several years yet.

3. Wolfram Research was able to port Mathmatica to OS X 86x in
two hours from a cold start (come to Cupertino, and bring your source code.)

4. 'Rosetta', will be the emulator running in the background that
will allow OS X ppc apps to run on OS X x86 hardware seemlessly.
It will operate without the user knowing. Not like classic which has
to lauch and let you know it's there.

5. No mention of classic support. Somebody will still be running a
beige box with a G3 processor somewhere. (Ok, that will be me
because I still have not found something OSXish to replace OnLocation and
fer gosh sake will somebody (prairiesoft) port DiskTop to OS X)

I'll be interested to see the new hardware. Appologies for tech terms
I may have mangled. I'm only a graphic artist (who answers questions
for the in house IT guys...)

Posts: 795 | From: In the mitten around the abductor pollicis brevis. | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
MacManKrisK

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 955

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 06, 2005 18:18      Profile for MacManKrisK     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by HalfVast:
4. 'Rosetta', will be the emulator running in the background that
will allow OS X ppc apps to run on OS X x86 hardware seemlessly.
It will operate without the user knowing. Not like classic which has
to lauch and let you know it's there.

Right, right. Emulators are the answer to all of Apple's problems. Anyone remember the 68k emulator circa System 7.5 (before we called it the "MacOS" it was just called "System..."). Do the words "Error Type 11" mean anything to you?! You didn't have to launch that one separately either, but it still slowed your system to an absolute screeching halt, especially when you consider that, at that time, QuickTime (a system extension that CAME WITH THE OS) still wasn't 100% PPC native, nor was the farkin' Finder.

I've been through this emulator crap twice now. Emulators are shit, plain and simple. Apple always promises that they'll be good and solve a bunch of problems, but they always just cause more.

I think it may be time for me to change my nick, and my OS of choice. I can make KDE look, act, and feel pretty damn close to OS X, and I can do it for a hell of a lot cheaper, and without emulation.

--------------------
"Buy low, sell high
get rich and you still die"


Posts: 2331 | From: Southwest Michigan, USA | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
csk

Member # 1941

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 06, 2005 18:25      Profile for csk     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by MacManKrisK:
Emulators are the answer to all of Apple's problems. Anyone remember the 68k emulator circa System 7.5 (before we called it the "MacOS" it was just called "System..."). Do the words "Error Type 11" mean anything to you?! You didn't have to launch that one separately either, but it still slowed your system to an absolute screeching halt, especially when you consider that, at that time, QuickTime (a system extension that CAME WITH THE OS) still wasn't 100% PPC native, nor was the farkin' Finder.

I've been through this emulator crap twice now. Emulators are shit, plain and simple. Apple always promises that they'll be good and solve a bunch of problems, but they always just cause more.

Well, emulators are usually dog slow, no one is going to argue with that. However, there's no real reason that emulation can't be as reliable as running on the original hardware. There are plenty of emulators that work well, from Commodore 64 emulators to advanced stuff like VMWare and Wine (yeah, someone's going to argue that those last two aren't really emulators, but they are, from a certain point of view).

Interesting stuff. I bet IBM is spewing right now.

--------------------
6 weeks to go!

Posts: 4455 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
jordanv
Assimilated
Member # 3189

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 06, 2005 20:02      Profile for jordanv     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't think IBM will be - they have all three consoles for the next generation which, no offense to Apple, are going to do incredibly better in terms of sales.

Guaranteed income - it is too late for MS, Sony, and Nintendo to change and once it has started they are locked in because of compatibility issues and possible class actions from consumers (i bought this game for xbox360, why doesnt it work?) and the overhead required for providing two versions would be large.

Posts: 364 | From: a house (in Sydney) | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
macmcseboy

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1232

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 06, 2005 21:10      Profile for macmcseboy     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Although, most folks know that the machines in the just in case project are pentium class cpu's, The never specified that the instruction set or the CPU that will be used in the eventual release machines. The transistion kit includes prototype HW which is a P4, but it's in a G5 Case... It is my belief that the reloase machines will not necesarily be x86 cores... The Rosetta is similar to the DRE (the 68k-PPC emulator), it is less taxing as it will most likely employ X11 like technology. I am not sure but, hopefully all the this will be very effective and faster that the older DRE. I am sorry to say that Apple intel OS will not run on generic wintel boxes... You must take into account the 4MB OF ROM and the Main apple Chipset... not to mention the original MACOS ROM file that is specific to each iteration of machine. That file is the condensed essend of all things Mac since 1984...

--------------------
Live long and prosper.

Posts: 1139 | From: Victoria BC... | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Tech Angel
Alpha Geek
Member # 908

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 06, 2005 23:58      Profile for Tech Angel     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Some random thoughts on the subject:

- Evolution is frequently difficult, sometimes painful, but almost always necessary for survival.
- As Steve pointed out in his keynote, Macs have been through two significant transitions before and I well recall that the same kind of panic ensued then, too (especially with the 680xx to PowerPC transition).
- It was clear to me after watching the entire keynote that this decision has been well thought out, well planned, and even anticipated for some time.
- Lest we forget, the thing we Mac fanatics so dearly love is not the hardware (as cool as it sometimes is), it's not the processor -- it's the user interface, the user experience. Personally, I don't care what electronics are used to secure that experience for me as long as I continue to have it, and apparently I will. (I don't believe the new chips will impose too much difference on this, except for a handful of things during the transition period.)

To paraphrase Ralph Waldo Emerson, "All I have seen (of what Jobs and Apple have done in the past) helps me to trust (Apple) for all I have not seen." I look forward to the opportunities and products which will come from this decision.

- Pollyanna...uh, I mean Tech Angel [Wink]

--------------------
We must be the change we want to see in the world. -Mahatma Ghandi

Posts: 330 | From: the Great State of Confusion | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Serenak

Member # 2950

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 07, 2005 03:26      Profile for Serenak     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Half Vast

If that is the On Location I remember from about 7.0.1 then the best I can suggest is Disk Tracker Actually I liked Disk Wizard best but Disk Tracker isn't bad...

--------------------
"So if you want my address - it's No. 1 at the end of the bar, where I sit with the broken angels, clutching at straws and nursing my scars..."

Posts: 1936 | From: Suffolk England | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stereo

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 748

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 07, 2005 03:36      Profile for Stereo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I guess it's time for it again...

 -

--------------------
Eppur, si muove!

Galileo Galilei

Posts: 2289 | From: Gatineau, Quebec, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
drunkennewfiemidget
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2814

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 07, 2005 05:30      Profile for drunkennewfiemidget     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Emulators have come a LONG way in the last while. I would hazard to guess that by the time Apple starts shipping MACs with Intel chips in them, CPUs will be at least 3.5GHz minimum.

Any PPC program that hasn't been ported to run natively will probably still be able to run after the load created by emulation, at LEAST at the speed it did on the old PPC system it came off of.

I think Apple will do just fine.

I still want a G5. [Razz]

Posts: 4897 | From: Cambridge, ON, Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mac D
BlabberMouth, the Next Generation
Member # 2926

Icon 1 posted June 07, 2005 16:57      Profile for Mac D     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
For some reson I don't think it will be the P IV in the new Macs. I thought they where going to move every thing over to 64bit. I for one would love to see a 64bit notebook computer. And I think Apple is the company to start that trend. The only way right now to get a 64bit computer is from Apple, Buy a server (Not good for personal use) or build it yourself. And none of these opptions are available for a notbook. And there are only a couple stable OS's. SuSe 9.x pro is and OSX. Winblows 64 is still in development. And we already know thats going to suck.

OK I can't remember does AMD have a AMD64 chip for notebooks? I can't remember. I'll go look.

--------------------
There's nothing wrong with me, This is how I'm supposed to be.

Posts: 1449 | From: Where I am is very relative to my location at that time. | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
magefile
Highlie
Member # 2918

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 07, 2005 17:17      Profile for magefile     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't understand why they're using x86 rather than x86_64 (unless the media got it wrong). Anyway, I think the people getting screwed over by this will be those of us who just bought new Macs. My Powerbook is gonna deprecate much faster now ... at least I compile most of my own software anyway.

--------------------
Let them be stupid - the market will sort it out.

Posts: 743 | From: Massachusetts | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
spungo
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1089

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 07, 2005 18:11      Profile for spungo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
No prospect of getting a G5 laptop - I expect that was a big factor. Ye oldie laptops are replacing desktops rapidly - no long-term strategy will float without considering laptops first.

As for the whole Linux debate - I don't see how this news will alter things very much - OSX will still run on Apple-only hardware - at a premium. Only the PPC port will suffer.

--------------------
Shameless plug. (Please forgive me.)

Posts: 6529 | From: Noba Scoba | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
csk

Member # 1941

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 07, 2005 18:15      Profile for csk     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by magefile:
I don't understand why they're using x86 rather than x86_64 (unless the media got it wrong).

Because Itanium has been a load of crap, and they want to go Intel (as opposed to AMD) in order to switch to the (faster) Intel C compiler (as opposed to GCC).

--------------------
6 weeks to go!

Posts: 4455 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
dragonman97

SuperFan!
Member # 780

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 07, 2005 18:50      Profile for dragonman97   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by csk:
quote:
Originally posted by magefile:
I don't understand why they're using x86 rather than x86_64 (unless the media got it wrong).

Because Itanium has been a load of crap, and they want to go Intel (as opposed to AMD) in order to switch to the (faster) Intel C compiler (as opposed to GCC).
That's not what x86_64 is. x86_64 is the good stuff that AMD came up with, and Intel copied, calling it EMT64, or something to that effect. It's a 64-bit extension of the x86 architecture, allowing existing 32-bit code to function rather well, while letting 64 bit code run quite well. Intel's Itanium was a major flub.

--------------------
There are three things you can be sure of in life: Death, taxes, and reading about fake illnesses online...

Posts: 9331 | From: Westchester County, New York | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
csk

Member # 1941

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 07, 2005 19:09      Profile for csk     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by dragonman97:
That's not what x86_64 is. x86_64 is the good stuff that AMD came up with, and Intel copied, calling it EMT64, or something to that effect. It's a 64-bit extension of the x86 architecture, allowing existing 32-bit code to function rather well, while letting 64 bit code run quite well. Intel's Itanium was a major flub.

Interesting...

If apple were to do x86_64, then, but rely on Intel hardware, would there be any benefit, though?

--------------------
6 weeks to go!

Posts: 4455 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
supaboy
SuperFan!
Member # 183

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 08, 2005 07:52      Profile for supaboy     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by csk:
If apple were to do x86_64, then, but rely on Intel hardware, would there be any benefit, though?

They wouldn't have to hide their technology page touting the benefits of 64-bit processors. [Wink]
Posts: 1767 | From: Columbia, SC USA | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Stereo

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 748

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted June 08, 2005 10:19      Profile for Stereo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
In a related news, I was curious about what was Metrowerks' reaction to the switch and the requirement to use Xcode. I found a very interesting info (IMHP):

"Metrowerks recently sold its Intel x86 compiler and debugger technology to a third party. As a result, Metrowerks will no longer create and sell products that include this technology. Metrowerks will offer support for these products by hosting on-line discussions on newsgroups and on our web site." (See source here)

Who is that third party MW has sold its compiler to? Apple, maybe? If so, with or without being aware of the switch? To me, it seems that CodeWarrior for Mac is "dead product walking," soon to be dead. Will MW choose to focus on embedded, game consoles and other specialized applications?

(And while searching, I realised I first knew about MetroWerks when they were still a Montreal-based company, building Pascal and Modula compilers... Now, they belong to Freescale Semiconductor - formerly Motorola - offering IDE for almost a dozen plateforms!)

--------------------
Eppur, si muove!

Galileo Galilei

Posts: 2289 | From: Gatineau, Quebec, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
GMx

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1523

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 08, 2005 12:23      Profile for GMx     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Where's the line for the Kool-Aid? [weep]

It may not be so easy going as far as transition according to this Macfixit article (fifth one down), and it seems they've given up on 64 bit for now (third article down).

Posts: 5844 | From: S-4, Area 51 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted June 08, 2005 15:49      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GMx:
It may not be so easy going as far as transition according to this Macfixit article

As someone who's ported an application from Motorola to Intel, I can say that I found the 2-hour port claim 'surprising'.

2 hours to get the first clean compile, maybe.
2 months to find and fix all the big-endian/little-endian bugs.

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10669 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged


All times are Eastern Time  
Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | Geek Culture Home Page

2015 Geek Culture

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.4.0



homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam