17032 Views 14 Replies Latest reply: Mar 11, 2011 3:47 PM by Matthew Knice
Yeah but how hard can it be to simply put in PPC codes? Is Apple beginning to half-@$$ their work like everyone else nowadays? I really hate this world. People need to grow up and learn that now everyone makes a boatload of money and can afford to drop $2500 on a new Mac, simply for a software upgrade that runs on lower specs than the computer they already have, simply because it is a different type of processor, that would be like Microsoft ditching all support for AMD processors. That is a very very low blow in my book.
Hello again BDAqua,
Yeah I guess you are right, but if they get rid of the G4 support, Im really going to feel bad for japamac, hes put hours and hours of his time into his machine, but my G4 (eMac originally 700MHz Over clocked to 900MHz) is far too old, it barely scrapes by with Leopard. LOL but yeah I dont use it anymore, it has been set for life, now its just a mouthpiece. People see in on my desk in the living room, and ask questions about it, thats about it. I use my G5 more than anything, and if Apple gave us G5 owners one last update, that would make me the happiest Apple customer they know. =) I really love Apple's engineering, and ideas, Steve Jobs is an amazing man, but you know, he does live the good life, and sometimes I feel like the customers that try to make ends meet and cant purchase a new computer right away, escapes his intelligent mind. Maybe he has some plans for us in the back of his head?
Regards again. =)
Apple officially announced discontinuance of PPC support some time ago.
Heck, even all developer resources for PPC Macs of any kind are gone from the archives library.
As BD noted, Leopard began the change, and Snow Leopard finalized the transition from PPC.
Unless processors change dramatically and require the use of Open Firmware again (fat chance), we will never see any new software or Operating Systems for a PPC machine.
The clock is ticking for early Intel machines. Lion will probably push more towards the "cloud computing" and further integrate mobile machine functions.
Some even say that Lion will be a hybrid "iOS".
Whatever happens, Leopard is it for PPC Macs.
"Maybe he has some plans for us in the back of his head?"
Buy a new Mac already......
"...simply because it is a different type of processor, that would be like Microsoft ditching all support for AMD processors. That is a very very low blow in my book."
No it would not be the same because AMD makes x86 processors like Intel so there is no need to do completedly different version of Windows operating systems, some tuning maybe. The reason why Apple ditched PowerPC was because IBM and Motorola did not/could not put enough effort to the processors to be competitive against AMD and Intel. Motorola was probably more interested in embedded market and for IBM Apple was not big customer if you compare it to the gaming console giants (Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft) so probably IBM did not put as much resources as it could to design and manufacture processors it shipped to Apple.
Message was edited by: thewk
One should keep in mind that it doesn't make any sense to compare clock speeds with a RISC architecture and a CISC one. Those Digital engineers who developed the Alpha eventually were hired by Intel and the new chips contain Alpha features, which was a RISC design. I'm not sure of the present architecture used in Intel's newest chips. But the PPC and RISC is not really dead, as far as IBM is concerned, because their enterprise level servers still use the Power architecture, if I'm not mistaken. IIRC, the issue Apple had with PPC was with energy and heat issues for laptop applications. The issue was not clock-speed, which everyone without an understanding of the RISC vs. CISC architecture, tended to focus upon.
we will never see any new software or Operating Systems for a PPC machine.
Au contraire, maybe not from Apple, but definitely many other developers have PowerPC software. http://www.lemkesoft.com/ offers Mac OS 9 software still, not just PowerPC.
Lion's features have not yet been fully announced, and its hardware requirements are as of yet unknown. Snow Leopard is only for Intel Macs. And Snow Leopard also adds stacks.
Keep an eye on http://www.apple.com/macosx/ for new features to be announced whenever Apple chooses to announce the release date.
What do you suppose we do then? Mind you, I have an Intel Mac Pro which pretty much so far I use like my PowerBook G4 - everyday stuff.. I rarely if ever use the MP for video editing because I know nothing about it, nor does it interest me not one bit..
Like you, I use my PowerBook G4 and even my PB G4 Pismo for certain things.. and while major developers(think Microsoft, adobe, etc..) have stopped making universal binaries to run on both platforms, there are thousands of minor developers still writing support code for powerpc and intel combined... Unlike 68k motorola chips which are long long dead.. PowerPC has the capabilities for even today's demanding apps even though they are a couple of years old.
I am for keeping PPC alive for future generations.. I have faith that the PPC will never die out so long as there are many of us still using it alongside our intel macs..
Both Intel and PPC deserve brotherly love, and not hate towards one another..
with 10.6, it was going to be too slow, even on the fastest G5s. there's a breaking point to being able to support with universal binary code, it simply chews up too much space. I don't totally agree with them killing rosetta in 10.7, but all my apps are intel native now anyway, so oh well I guess.
well, considering when Lion comes out the newest PPC Mac will be over 5 years old, with the majority being 6+ so this should not be a surprise to anyone that support is going to be dried up by then. keep the old hardware alive for future generations? for the most part I don't see why. no support, no software, etc. kinda saw this with the nintendo / SNES, but a lot of those games are available today on the wii. sure not exactly the same but at least they are still getting played... difference of opinion on this one I know. Mom's G5 will be 7 years old when 10.7 comes out. it's time for an upgrade!
CS2 and PowerPC plug-ins were
holding back performance on Mac Pro 2006 and G5 owners waited for CS3
Rosetta was never and has not been a perfect solution and trouble, can add a good 2GB RAM cost in overhead as well.
Quad G5 came out Late 2005 and sold into summer '06 so yes, the "5 yr cut off."
I'd love to see a container or the fact that Server is now rolled into Lion have virtual hard drives, and "Classic OS X" and install whatever you want or let others build VMs if you have 10.4 have support for legacy OS (like XP Mode virtualized now in Windows 7 Pro).
Putting the Apple App Store into 10.6.6 though with no "opt out" mechanism is not what I want in my OS.
Well my PowerBook G4 17 inch DDR2 model came out in 2006.. so its 4 years for me.. but still this does not phase me one bit, as minor companies are still putting out some impressive powerpc based apps.. While the main developers(adobe, microsoft, apple.. etc) are putting out INTEL only, there are 1000's of others still making UNIVERSAL BINARIES..
What is also known is some of the apps on the mac app store are UNIVERSAL BINARY.. Go figure!
Hello Peoples. =)
Ok, I see theres been some controversy.....now my Mac (Power Mac G5—See specs below) Runs Mac OS X 10.5.8 Leopard very very well. Even with Universal Binary. HOWEVER.....Ive gotten 10.5.8 Leopard to run WELL on my eMac (2002 model that has been Modded, again see specs below) using the wonderful Application "XSlimmer" It completely rids the system of Intel Code (I hate people saying Leopard ***** because it takes up 16GB of Disk Space. Look, when you use this App, just like Snow Leopard, you get anywhere from 8GB to 10GB of Disk Space back.) I use it after ALL updates. It also knows which Applications are safe to "slim" up and which will crumble if and fail if they are modified. And therefore it wont "slim" up those Apps. Plain and simple. Now with that being said....not ONLY does it give back space, it also drastically improves system performance and application performance, because the system doesnt have to fly through the milky way belt in an unguided rocket taking hits and slowing down from loading all the Intel code, because it simply isnt "there" Its a wonderful application and it has been well worth my money. =) Just thought Id share my good finds with ya guys.