Comments on: WWDC 2008: Is Mac OS X 10.6 the Death of PowerPC? http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/06/07/wwdc-2008-is-mac-os-x-106-the-death-of-powerpc/ Daniel Eran Dilger in San Francisco Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:32:15 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: W-2 : Apple Rumour Mill – The Hamsters are hard at work « The Nanchatte Technojunkie http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/06/07/wwdc-2008-is-mac-os-x-106-the-death-of-powerpc/comment-page-1/#comment-18830 W-2 : Apple Rumour Mill – The Hamsters are hard at work « The Nanchatte Technojunkie Wed, 27 May 2009 15:28:51 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/?p=1904#comment-18830 [...] The best guess so far for it being Intel only is IMHO provided by the enthusiastic Mr. Dilger from RoughlyDrafted: Death of PowerPC who’s solidly thought out piece, while having no more evidence than any other, appears to me [...] [...] The best guess so far for it being Intel only is IMHO provided by the enthusiastic Mr. Dilger from RoughlyDrafted: Death of PowerPC who’s solidly thought out piece, while having no more evidence than any other, appears to me [...]

]]> By: Myths of Snow Leopard 2: 32-bit Support — RoughlyDrafted Magazine http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/06/07/wwdc-2008-is-mac-os-x-106-the-death-of-powerpc/comment-page-1/#comment-9479 Myths of Snow Leopard 2: 32-bit Support — RoughlyDrafted Magazine Tue, 17 Jun 2008 08:41:28 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/?p=1904#comment-9479 [...] - Mac OS X Leopard - Snow Leopard WWDC 2008: Is Mac OS X 10.6 the Death of PowerPC? Myths of Snow Leopard 1: PowerPC Support Omni Software Update [...] [...] – Mac OS X Leopard – Snow Leopard WWDC 2008: Is Mac OS X 10.6 the Death of PowerPC? Myths of Snow Leopard 1: PowerPC Support Omni Software Update [...]

]]> By: Myths of Snow Leopard 1: PowerPC Support — RoughlyDrafted Magazine http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/06/07/wwdc-2008-is-mac-os-x-106-the-death-of-powerpc/comment-page-1/#comment-9395 Myths of Snow Leopard 1: PowerPC Support — RoughlyDrafted Magazine Mon, 16 Jun 2008 07:21:38 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/?p=1904#comment-9395 [...] WWDC 2008: Is Mac OS X 10.6 the Death of PowerPC? WWDC 2008: New in Mac OS X Snow Leopard [...] [...] WWDC 2008: Is Mac OS X 10.6 the Death of PowerPC? WWDC 2008: New in Mac OS X Snow Leopard [...]

]]> By: Mac OS X 10.6 "Snow Leopard" to arrive Jan '09 - Page 6 - MacNN Forums http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/06/07/wwdc-2008-is-mac-os-x-106-the-death-of-powerpc/comment-page-1/#comment-9336 Mac OS X 10.6 "Snow Leopard" to arrive Jan '09 - Page 6 - MacNN Forums Fri, 13 Jun 2008 23:54:53 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/?p=1904#comment-9336 [...] Even using the 5 year support standard that some have suggested (I've already shown that the 3 year standard means 99% of Macs can run Snow Leopard), the portion of Macs left out is about 10% thanks to Apple's sales growth since the switch. Graphic from RoughlyDrafted [...] [...] Even using the 5 year support standard that some have suggested (I’ve already shown that the 3 year standard means 99% of Macs can run Snow Leopard), the portion of Macs left out is about 10% thanks to Apple’s sales growth since the switch. Graphic from RoughlyDrafted [...]

]]> By: tehawesome http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/06/07/wwdc-2008-is-mac-os-x-106-the-death-of-powerpc/comment-page-1/#comment-9259 tehawesome Wed, 11 Jun 2008 22:10:11 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/?p=1904#comment-9259 Is there any huge difference from a developer's point of view in terms of writing an app on an Intel-only version of Snow Leopard, then compiling and distributing a PPC version? My guess is that Grand Central and OpenCL are going to be Intel-only, but, as with the current Core APIs, will degrade cleanly so that without the appropriate hardware, you just don't get the new features. As it stands, it's important to qualify that the current 10.6 build is Intel-only (and we've seen Apple being sneaky before about maintaining parallel builds for different architectures: can you say Marklar?) and not rule out a PPC version, though it does rather seem that this drives another nail into the coffin. Still, I'm writing this on a G4 Cube running 10.4, and it's increasingly looking like I'm not going to ever run 10.5: a Nehalem Mac Pro running 10.6, however... Is there any huge difference from a developer’s point of view in terms of writing an app on an Intel-only version of Snow Leopard, then compiling and distributing a PPC version? My guess is that Grand Central and OpenCL are going to be Intel-only, but, as with the current Core APIs, will degrade cleanly so that without the appropriate hardware, you just don’t get the new features. As it stands, it’s important to qualify that the current 10.6 build is Intel-only (and we’ve seen Apple being sneaky before about maintaining parallel builds for different architectures: can you say Marklar?) and not rule out a PPC version, though it does rather seem that this drives another nail into the coffin. Still, I’m writing this on a G4 Cube running 10.4, and it’s increasingly looking like I’m not going to ever run 10.5: a Nehalem Mac Pro running 10.6, however…

]]> By: gus2000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/06/07/wwdc-2008-is-mac-os-x-106-the-death-of-powerpc/comment-page-1/#comment-9250 gus2000 Wed, 11 Jun 2008 18:05:18 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/?p=1904#comment-9250 Hmmmph! http://gizmodo.com/5015495/snow-leopard-will-be-intel-exclusive-after-all It looks like the current builds of 10.6 are Intel-only. Hmmmph!

http://gizmodo.com/5015495/snow-leopard-will-be-intel-exclusive-after-all

It looks like the current builds of 10.6 are Intel-only.

]]> By: John Muir http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/06/07/wwdc-2008-is-mac-os-x-106-the-death-of-powerpc/comment-page-1/#comment-9197 John Muir Tue, 10 Jun 2008 19:36:28 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/?p=1904#comment-9197 Have a look at these reported screenshots of the Snow Leopard WWDC seed: http://orchardspy.com/ This one in particular: http://orchardspy.com/4.jpg That Application Type column looks reassuring! Have a look at these reported screenshots of the Snow Leopard WWDC seed:
http://orchardspy.com/

This one in particular:
http://orchardspy.com/4.jpg

That Application Type column looks reassuring!

]]> By: gus2000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/06/07/wwdc-2008-is-mac-os-x-106-the-death-of-powerpc/comment-page-1/#comment-9137 gus2000 Mon, 09 Jun 2008 15:58:00 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/?p=1904#comment-9137 I envision a compromise between lugging around the anchor of PowerPC and dropping it completely: instead of making one OS build using all Universal Binaries, make two separate builds (Intel and PPC) instead. There's great benefit in the current one-DVD-fits-all scheme, but PPC will be dropped eventually and the split seems like a logical intermediate step. It would allow the Intel code base to move forward unencumbered by legacy, and signal to the PPC owners that the End Is Near. Obviously some features would be omitted for PPC, but at least the G4/G5 owners would be able to have a current, supported release through their end of useful life. I'm still using a G4, which is quite usable but showing it's "Moore's Law" age. If I really want to continue to have it useful for another year or two, OS X should trade future features for a PPC-optimized release that can maximize performance with limited system resources. I envision a compromise between lugging around the anchor of PowerPC and dropping it completely: instead of making one OS build using all Universal Binaries, make two separate builds (Intel and PPC) instead.

There’s great benefit in the current one-DVD-fits-all scheme, but PPC will be dropped eventually and the split seems like a logical intermediate step. It would allow the Intel code base to move forward unencumbered by legacy, and signal to the PPC owners that the End Is Near. Obviously some features would be omitted for PPC, but at least the G4/G5 owners would be able to have a current, supported release through their end of useful life.

I’m still using a G4, which is quite usable but showing it’s “Moore’s Law” age. If I really want to continue to have it useful for another year or two, OS X should trade future features for a PPC-optimized release that can maximize performance with limited system resources.

]]> By: Nanchatte Technojunkie » Blog Archive » W-3 : Apple Rumour Mill - The Hamsters are hard at work http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/06/07/wwdc-2008-is-mac-os-x-106-the-death-of-powerpc/comment-page-1/#comment-9124 Nanchatte Technojunkie » Blog Archive » W-3 : Apple Rumour Mill - The Hamsters are hard at work Mon, 09 Jun 2008 04:13:21 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/?p=1904#comment-9124 [...] so far for it being Intel only is provided by the enthusiastic and well written Mr. Dilger from RoughlyDrafted: Death of PowerPC who’s solidly thought out piece, while having no more evidence than any other, appears to me [...] [...] so far for it being Intel only is provided by the enthusiastic and well written Mr. Dilger from RoughlyDrafted: Death of PowerPC who’s solidly thought out piece, while having no more evidence than any other, appears to me [...]

]]> By: PerGrenerfors http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2008/06/07/wwdc-2008-is-mac-os-x-106-the-death-of-powerpc/comment-page-1/#comment-9106 PerGrenerfors Sun, 08 Jun 2008 14:08:59 +0000 http://www.roughlydrafted.com/?p=1904#comment-9106 I expect that 10.6 will drop the G4 completely but keep the G5. Lots of Power Mac G5 and later iMac G5 are still okay machines. In addition, the hardware requirements will be really straightforward: G5 or Intel processor, minimum 512 MB RAM. I expect that 10.6 will drop the G4 completely but keep the G5. Lots of Power Mac G5 and later iMac G5 are still okay machines. In addition, the hardware requirements will be really straightforward: G5 or Intel processor, minimum 512 MB RAM.

]]>