Snow Leopard to drop PowerPC support?
By Joshua Topolsky 
posted Jun 11th 2008 1:55PM
posted Jun 11th 2008 1:55PM
[Via Mac Rumors; Thanks, Kiwi616]
Please note: If you're a current Engadget commenter, you do not need to re-register. Simply login and you will be prompted to select a username.
Old news.
Pie>PowerPC
When 2010 hits, that's when the platforms should sift, earliest, late 2009.
AKBlade13
I mean shift not sift.
Why do people put their name as a "signature" for comments when their name (hyperlinked, blue, and sexy) is mere pixels away?
Moreover.... why do people use signatures on comments period?
BOHSOCKS
BOHSOCKS
BOHSOCKS
(bohsocks)
Boh:
Many people on the internet prefer to 'sign' anything they write regardless of the user name specifications of whatever medium on which they are typing. Its a method of respect to the person(s) to which its addressed. Usually I find its more common for users outside the United States to hold up more formality in typing as well as users who are older but still new to the internet since they grew up writing formal "snail mail" letters.
Its not elitist, its a form of respect. While it may be uncommon to see on the internet, its certainly welcome!
@bohsocks.. lol good one.
ME
ME
and finally,
ME
oh, i forgot,
ME
Snow Leopard just has the existing Leopard feature set anyways..
Of all possible things they could add to the OS, optimization and new performance libraries are the most platform-dependent. Taking time to write and optimize this new parallel processing foundation is probably difficult enough by itself - it would surely be a waste of resources to make a POWER implementation.
Overall, I'm really glad that ANY operating system producer is doing a feature freeze and focusing solely on optimization and efficiency. I have been a windows user for a long time, but my next computer will be a Mac . The Mac Pro is already a screaming machine, i can only imagine a future model with 2 Nehalem quad-core processors and a whole new set of parallel processing libraries, not to mention a GPGPU/CUDA implementation for offloading threads to the GPU. Awesome!
If I remember it right, Stevo said this on WWDC, or at least he didn't mention PowerPC then.
Par for the course.
That's the way I see it. I knew I would have to upgrade eventually, but at least this gives me something of a timeline. Got a whole year and then some to save up for a new Mac (that MIGHT be enough time).
Forced obsolescence, mandatory upgrade, i haz it.
The last G5-based Mac was made almost 3 years ago. By the time 10.6 is released it'll be about 4 years. 4 years of full legacy support is fine. 10.5 and all its upgrades will continue to work fine on G5s for years and years to come, because Apple isn't going to stop supporting Leopard as soon as 10.6 comes out. It's more likely that Apple will continue to release periodic 10.5 updates for Intel and PPC, increasing legacy support past 5 years.
In fact, the OS support will very likely continue past the point where most G5 Macs begin to suffer component failures. I really don't see how this is a problem... at all.
still haz it
The whole point of releasing a new OS is to move the technology forward right?
Why would a new OS have to support 3+ year old hardware - makes no sense (unless you're Microsoft). Your PowerPC will continue to work just like it does today on OSX 10.5 - If you want all the advanced features of a new OS you will need hardware to match. (and no you don't NEED to buy a new computer, the one you have now works just fine right?)
This is the equivalent of getting pissed off that Sony PS3 software doesn't run on my old PS2.
Yeah I was a little irked about the requirements jump from Tiger to Leopard. I got a free G4 300 something Mhz tower that ran Tiger just fine. Leopard comes out and now you need a 700 to 800Mhz G4/G5 just to run it. On top of that it will NOT allow you to install it on a machine that does not met the requirements.
So even if Apple doesn't out right kill PPC support in 10.6, they could just make it so that only the very very last series of G5 machines could run it effectively killing of PPC support without actually taking the PR hit of out right doing so.
Granted single proc G5 1.6Ghz perform noticeably slower under Leopard it might not be so bad to just kill off PPC support.
@Zak
Obviously you dont see a problem with this, look at all your posts. You are a blind apple fanboy.
@Andrew
Then why does everyone complain that vista doesn't work well on old computers? They complain that it doesn't work well, but it works fine on new computers and the only time it has problems is with old ones!
Nice jab at Apple with the last line, but it really is a bit of a shock IMO. Apple does tend to be more aggressive with shifting users off legacy hardware than (say) Microsoft, but the timeframe typically is still quite generous, say 5 years. People still bitch, but 5 years is 5 years.
In this case, the Intel Mac Pro came out less than 2 years ago. If Snow Leopard is out next summer, it'll not run on computers bought a mere 3 years ago. Sure, Leopard will still be supported and run just fine, but this is quite aggressive even for Apple. If you think this is "typical Apple," you're kidding yourself.
PeterF: If they dropped it I wouldn't be bothered. Just as I wouldn't run Vista on a 3-4 year old PC I wouldn't run Leopard nor snow leopard on an 3-4 year old mac.
My laptop was top end about 3 years ago. Now it suffers just to run the software I use in the upgraded versions that have come since I bought it. That's life. And before you badmouth apple laptops, it is an Acer Travelmate 8006. with a 2ghz intel pentium-m processor. centrino certified.
peterf: Your post does nothing to contradict anything I said. If you want to call me a blind fanboy, don't you think you should present some evidence that proves me wrong to back it up? Or do you think calling me names is good enough?
@ PeterF
It's actually quite a different situation, because why does Vista not work well on old-ish computers? It needs at least a gig, but in practice more like 2 gigs of RAM to run smoothly, for one thing (no joke, I use Vista Home Premium on a desktop with 2 GB of memory). And you definitely want a decent CPU and GPU. Even a lot of newer computers in the mid-range don't come with 2 GB of RAM, BTW, so it's not just a problem for older computers.
I agree with @Zak. I am one of those people who purchased a Dual G5 Power Mac in the summer of 2005, knowing full well that Apple would be switching over to Intel soon. Frankly I'm surprised that I'll have gotten over three years of compatible system upgrades out of Apple!
My system still runs great and is very speedy (after adding more RAM and storage space). It should continue to work just fine for at least the next couple years. Then, if I really need to have the latest updates (let's face it, no one needs it but boy do we want it), I'll get a new computer and give this one to my parents.
And the cycle of computers continues. Go Apple!
At home I have a the original old beige g3 that *barely* was able to hand the original 10.0 install and it *still* runs....It feels like I'm using it underwater with some of the delays but that's only when I start opening up all my adobe apps at once.
IAt work I have a PPC g5 that i bought *after* the Intels came out because I wanted to make sure I could run all my old software.
And, just for shits and giggles, I have a Intel MBP so I can prove to everyone how big a fan boy I am (because my nano is too small for people to notice).
I also have a birthmark shaped like an apple on my butt which means I was destined for apple fanboyism...it wasn't a choice, I was born this way.
Sincerely,
Vince
Apple last made PowerPC computers when? And this release, as Steve Jobs said, isn't a features release. So, basically, PowerPC users can continue to use their computers until 10.7, which.....who knows when that hits.
That is why Apple is on the cutting edge, unlike Vista. Apple drops legacy code every couple of years......unlike Vista......
Dear God, are you serious?
So 3rd party companies do not have drivers available for Vista at release, but do make them available shortly after, and people (the Apple people) condemns Microsoft for not supporting legacy hardware.
Rumors circulate that Apple will cut off support for their own hardware, and it is good because it stays on the cutting edge?
Which is it, it is good to get rid of legacy support, or it is bad to get rid of legacy support, or it is because it involves Microsoft so they are damned if they do, damned if they don't?
And for the record, no I am not a Mac user but I will be within the next few hours - UPS is delivering my Mac Mini today.
Apple is not cutting off support. There's a difference between needing an Intel machine to run 10.6 and ending all support for PPC machines. Just like how Apple still supports 10.4 right now, Apple will continue to support 10.5 on Intel and PPC machines long after 10.6 is released, well past the point where the newest PPC-based Mac is over 5 years old.
This is a non-issue as far as that goes, and it's good that Apple is forcing the issue. It's not premature in any way.
so doesn't this essentially make snow leopard a $2000 service pack?
@ sinai
I don't know where you're buying OS X, but man you're getting ripped off…
Ending legacy support is definitely a good thing - If I am paying for a new Intel Mac and $139 for the new OS then I want it to run as stable and fast as possible on my new hardware. I don't want a bloated piece of crap (Vista) with half of the promised advancements stripped out (WinFS) just because it has to support 4+ year old hardware.
I still have a PowerPC Mac and I will be happy to run OSX 10.5 on it for years to come - its a great OS - at the same time I totally understand why a new modern OS wouldn't run on old hardware.
and no you dont NEED a new computer or spend money at all just becuase theres a new OS out - there's not shut off date for old OS, your current computer will continue to work just fine.
nophone - completely unrelated, but congrats on the mac
@Zak
Microsoft decided that they wanted their users to have the best experience possible, which means a video card that has been made within the past 6 years (my ATI 9800 works with glass, and there are older cards that work). They did not cut off support with the basic version of their OS, and still support the older OS (XP). So what is the difference between Microsoft and Apple?
In a different post you say 4 years of support is fine. When is the cut-off by your standards? Whenever Apple tells you? But if Microsoft doesn't "support" something that is > 4 years, then that is not acceptable and Apple makes a commercial about it?
@d
No offence intended towards you, but that is exactly why I have resisted getting a Mac for so long. A wedding, a child, etc. those are the things you congratulate people over. It is a computer, a tool to get things done and maybe some entertainment, not some extension of my being. When I got my iPhone (which is still broken, BTW) every Mac user used that same word – congratulations, like I was someone better now. I got it because it had a good web browser. I am still not sure if I am thrilled about having one (I needed to get it for software testing), but it will not be used to define who I am - an attitude that many Mac users seem to take on.
Ok, I'm a Mac user, but what you just said there makes no sense at all. Think about it, how can PPC users upgrade to 10.7, if 10.6 is getting a performance revision which will lead it into 10.7, which HAS that performance upgrades. According to what you said, Apple will have to sell what...an un-optimized version of 10.7 to PPC users, and an optimized version to Intel users...which beats the whole purpose of Universal Binary to begin with.
nohome: Let's be clear about something. When I say 4 years, that means "4 years after the last one was physically made". That means 10.6 won't support hardware that hasn't been sold in 4 years. However, and this is important, it does NOT mean that Apple is discontinuing support for PPC Macs. As I said before, Apple will continue to support 10.5 long into the future, both on Intel and PPC Macs. Apple still supports 10.4 right now, for example.
Additionally, 10.5 will continue to work on G5 Macs even after support for 10.5 is finally ended which will be years from now. We're looking at at least 8 years total from the time the last PPC Mac was made until support for 10.5 stops, and even then 10.5 will continue to work fine. There's no reason PPC Macs running 10.5 won't be running fine in 2013 aside from hardware failure. See? There's no problem here.
Also, I never mentioned Microsoft, and nothing I've said has anything to do with them.
@ Nohone
condolences on the Windows use...
@Zak
I understand what you are saying perfectly. When I say support, I do not mean the "if you have hardware or software problems [as long as you are under warranty], that you can't call up and get support", I am using the sense of new software being produced for it. Apple has a history of not supporting their old hardware through new software. As I said before on Engadget, I bought my GF a iPod Touch for Christmas. She plugged it into her PPC Mac Book using 10.2 (I think it is 10.2, I know it is OS X) and it does not work because iTunes will not install on it, and an update for iTunes is necessary for the Touch. Now imagine if Zune did not work on XP because Microsoft thought it was out of date. You don't think people, both XP users and haters, would say, oh, that is OK, XP was released 7 years ago, and they should not have to "support" that version?Yes, you need a SP, but a free SP, not a new version of the OS. And the same happens here, it is OK for Apple to stop supporting, through new software, their old hardware. When Microsoft (actually, 3rd parties) do not have new drivers for old (more than 4 years) hardware, and all hell breaks loose.
I made a comparison between how people treat Windows and how Mac is given a free pass. You challenged that, and so while you did not mention Windows, I continued with it - the main point of my argument. If you wish to challenge a point I make, you cannot decide to change the argument mid-stream.
@Skeezle:
Grow up.
@nohone:
the only reason he made a big deal about you becoming a Mac user, is because you set yourself up in the previous comment. If you don't want to be congratulated, why are you announcing to the users on engadget that you will shortly be a first time Mac owner? lame.
Everyone says that this isn't an upgrade to add new features, just to improve performance and stability. So do you think we will have to pay for it? If it isn't going to add any new features, Apple is going to be hard pressed to charge $129 for it like they do for leopard.
Well since it's got 'service pack' written all over it then, yes, it should be.
It will still probably be a paid upgrade, but presumably more people will get it next time they buy a new Mac, and current 10.5 users might feel less compelled to buy it at retail, except for those who might benefit from some of the performance capabilities, etc.
yes you will...... unlike vista.......
This is for the "developers preview" and not an actual OS release so obviously they want all their developers on intel since they will be designing applications that take advantage of the Intel processors. As for when the actual OS comes out I am 110% positive it will support PowerPC as well as Intel processors. There is no way in hell Apple would leave out that many of its customers since so many people still own PowerPC machines (myself included).
You do know this is Apple we're talking about, right? ;)
You sir are living in a windows world. The transition began in Mid '05. This release isn't supposed to drop until Late '09 I think Steve/Apple thinks 4 years of cutting edge OS support for an end user computer is fine enough.
Really it's the primary advantage that Mac has over Windows (It's not VISTA people) After 3-5 years they expect you to update and don't get too nostalgic about your cheap ass. Mac's are expensive relative to the market, if you wanted to save money buy a PC. I already have seen problems where iPod classics wouldn't run without OS X 10.4.x+ Which while silly when considered is just fine in the Mac world.
As a windows developer I am jealous of the Mac Segment, you get to demand that everyone is above a certain level which is relatively high, and there isn't that stigma of abandoning users and forcing them to upgrade if they fall below the line. It's really nice when you think about it. Now if we could just get their total market share above 5%...
@KJ
Good points and something I was just talking about here at work. As a web designer/ developer dealing with IE6 headaches is absolutely ridiculous in this day and age when CSS is so much more advanced than what IE6 ever could handle. Yet it's still at the top of the list in popularity, and it shows just how backwards it is for technology companies to hold back simply because their user base can't handle change.
But such is the life of a company that wanted to hold such a large market share, they got stuck with all the burdens to keep the public happy. I hope Apple keeps their market share low for that one reason alone: politics start to get in the way.
You are NEVER gonna get people to completely upgrade every 4 years. Most people are slow on technology and when they learn a system wanto keep for a long time. My mother in law for example had Windows 95 Compaq and almost 10 years later upgraded to Windows XP on a Toshiba Laptop. Spending $1000 is a big chunk of change and if the web works fine for them in IE6 (though I have her upgraded to IE7) they don't see a reason to change.
Get over it, it is life and unless you would rather not have the large userbase and ignore the dollars (because yes she does buy things online) then feel free to ignore them.
And Microsoft is damned if they do and damned if they don't. Vista was one of those moments, they did it for security and stability. The UAC isn't exactly needed, but as a long time Vista user now its amazing to see application be rewritten to conform to proper security standards and no longer need UAC permissions to run. So I think Vista is the best that could have happened for Windows and Windows 7 will build on that and be probably well praised.
But seriously, at some point moving forward at least allows for much better file sizes and performance than trying to make those people holding onto a G3 iBook happy. At that same point I'm sure Apple keeps its resources "efficient" aka minimal so having a team appointed to legacy hardware isn't worth the time/money.
With that, Leopard's not a bad place to stop and if Snow Leopard is only a performance boost, then by time the next 'feature-rich' OS comes out most people will be in upgrade mode anyhow. Of course, I'm in the camp of upgrading every 3-4 years, so sorry to those G5 tower owners. :-/
This transition is less about file size and more about code optimizations.
Dropping PPC sounds totally logical for Snow Leopard considering that optimizing multithreaded execution and taking full advantage of the CPU and GPU features are extremely hardware dependent tasks thus it has to be done separately for each platform.
If Apple kept PPC support, it would take twice as long to make all the necessary optimizations in the code (compared to an x86-only version). Since the share of PPC in the installed base will be almost ZERO by 2009 (and rapidly dropping afterwards), it's simply doesn't make sense to delay the whole OS for the sake of PPC support.
Guess this is as good an excuse as any to give my wife as to why I need to drop the PowerBook...
10.5 dropped support for G3, I can only imagine that 10.6 would drop support for G4 and G5 as well ... It makes sense to me.
they are trying to "optimize" the OS, and apple isnt like microsoft in that sense and we know it, if you wanna be better, you have to cut the past or whatever like that, if apple thinks that keeping support for powerpc will hold them back, go ahead, whatever to make osx better and better.
It will have been 3 1/2 years since the transition to intel by the time Snow Leopard ships. Of all macs capable and in the market for running Leopard/Snow Leopard, I'm betting PPC macs will be the vast minority.
Honestly, by that time, the only macs that people will be complaining about will likely be PowerMac G5s. But if you think about it, the G5's are on par or slightly behind even macbooks and Mac Minis when it comes to performance at everything but 3d. And that's now, never mind next year, when Nephilim or whatever Intel's next architecture is called is out.
Ryan Trevisol:
My Power Mac G5 Dual 2.0 Ghz with 1.5 Gb of RAM and 500GB HDD runs really nice on Leopard. These things are beasts, don't compare them to the Mac Mini.
Sorry but I have a Dual 2Ghz G5 and a Core2Duo Macbook.
He's right the Macbook outstrips the G5 in everywhere but 3D performance. FCP although not officially supported on the Macbook flys compared to the G5, I expect in a years time the G5 will look far more outdated, when compared to the new macs shipping with snow leopard.
How in sam hell is this a low rated comment?
I have to applaud Apple for making it clear what Snow Leopard will run on though. This is kind of in contrast to Microsoft who were content to allow some manufacturers to put 'Vista capable' on their machines when they quite clearly weren't.
Hmm. The truth hurts apparently.
oh they didnt just drop support for it. PowerPC users will just have to pay $9.95 the update.
Hardley surprising after news of poor hardware sales and huge dip in stock prices during the el jobso's key note. They release new hardware specs to get the mac faithful to sit and rollover and buy new mac hardware.
So I take it that this is an ok thing?
I mean a certain other company couldn't even drop support for old file formats in Office without people going ape skype over it, never mind the whole mess of people hating that their new OS wont run on their older machines.
Seriously these companies have to move things along, people. Nothing lasts forever.
Dropping old file format support and dropping support for old machines are two completely different things. You could very well need to access some .doc file from an archive. I suppose you could always use a virtual machine with an older version of Office, but why shouldn't the latest version of a software product be able to use data from an older version?
An older version of an OS on older hardware will run fine. Stick to comparing OSX to Vista.
"but Apple shutting out legacy users doesn't come as a real shock, does it?"
You took the words right out of my mouse. My first reaction was exactly that. It would be no big surprise if Apple dropped support for PPC.
"Snow Leopard, because javascript doesn't run fast enough."
Here comes Ajax on meth.
Proud Pismo user here, perhaps it's finally time for an upgrade...
"Why upgrade when you can buy a whole NEW computer for more money?"
But seriously, I actually understand this. They had to drop support some time, and those relatively few people clinging to a PowerPC platform will either buy a new Mac or stick with a pre-Snow Leopard OS. If it works, is it really THAT important to upgrade, especially considering the relatively few new features coming to Snow Leopard? I'm all for clinging to old hardware (before last August I was still using a 333 MHz PC), but support has to end some time, and 3 1/2 to 4 years until the hardware becomes unreasonable is understandable. If you still want to breathe new life into it, throw Linux on that sucker. Otherwise, either stick with 10.5 or buy a new Mac.
Apple: Oohh I have to go number 2 .. open wide please!
Fanboy: Okidoki
Me: drop dead, go to hell!
*devil appears*
Devil:you called?
Me:book the bitch!
Devil:okidoki
*Devil & MMaster disappear*
Isn't it ironic that both of our bitchy "speech-texts" end with okidoki?
Honestly, if you're one of those people who would actually want to stay on the cutting edge of OSes, you probably wouldn't be using a PowerPC Mac anymore anyways.
At this point, if you'd care about Snow Leopard then you likely already have an Intel mac. If you don't, you should. Let Apple focus their attention on the current and future, instead of dragging their feet in the past. Aka: Move on.
I have a 12" G4 PowerBook. Why haven't I upgraded.. because all the new laptops are too big. I bought a 12" simply because it was small. I could buy an Air, but it lacks ethernet, modem, cdrom, firewire, 250gig of disk space (ok, so I upgraded my G4 from 80, but atleast I could upgrade) FFS Apple, will you release a 12" MBP. I don't care if a laptop is 2mm or 2" thick so long as its foot print is small (enough to fit in my bag - Eee anyone) but we all know the air is a fashion accessory not a real laptop.. Where's the "pro" version of it? With ram that can be upgraded let alone hard disk! Its no good if I have to carry around more than a charger.. Anyway, this isn't a MPA rant, its a wheres the tech refresh for my lovely small laptop rant. I don't fear the intel, I fear the crappy selection.
As I've said in other posts, 10.5. is fully supported on the 12" PB (I have one too), and will continue to be supported long after 10.6 is released. Apple will do what it always does, support older OSes with incremental updates.
i agree with you 100% on this. although i have a 15" PB, i always admired the 12" for it's perfect straddling of the gap between portability and performance.
you also hit on something i've thought ever since the intel switch: where is the ultra portable? (12" or so). the 13.3" of the macbook makes a big difference, and i just don't understand why apple is so obsessed with thickness, as opposed to footprint. the MBA is exceedingly thing, but the (relatively) wide area that it takes up negates a lot of the portability of it, at least to me. no matter how thin something is, something that is slightly thicker but with a smaller footprint will be far more portable.
i am holding out on intel until a 12" MBP. (an interesting note: my 15" PB has a noticeably smaller footprint than 15" MBPs. however, if they make a more PB-like 15" MBP i would probably get that.) until then, i will keep on rockin my ppc (with its somewhat faster performance per mhz).
Isn't the support for G3 already suppose to be dropped in Leopard?
I understand if Apple drops support for lower clocked G4 in Snow Leopard, but dropping those dual core G5 would be ironic; afterall 10.6 is more refined 10.5 with higher stability.
Take that Palm OS!!!!!!!!!!
There goes Palm OS with Leopard dropping support for the ancient PowerPC processor palm is left in the dust once again.
After this news I will be selling my palm stock!!!!
Way to go palm, first you drop support for the motorola dragon ball and now this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why does Engadget visitors hate Palm so much.
This news has absolutely nothing to do With Palm or palm OS.
You guys are nuts.
I don't see how people can be complaining about Apple dropping PPC support when 10.6 ships. Many wish that Apple will support PPC "just a little longer" but how long is that? With computers, you don't necessarily buy for the extended future, you buy for what you need today because even the next day, your computer you just bought is already "old".
I'm not saying that because it's old, it's garbage, its still fully useable but you can't keep holding old hardware hoping that it will run newer software will into the future. If you decided to buy a G5 Mac prior to the Intel move, you must have read that Apple was making a move to Intel in the future but even then, it would be maybe a few years before they actually do it. To me, if I can get at least 2 or 3 years of solid performance from my computer, I'm happy and that's not to say after those years I'll throw it away, I would keep it knowing full well that if something were to come out, I would have to go out and buy a new computer.
Even if 10.6 stops PPC support, what's wrong with Leopard IF Snow Leopard is only tweaks and not really adding features? I'm still using Tiger; I'm missing out on Leopard's features but Tiger still allows me to perform tasks I need it to do.
I just think people always want the latest and greatest of everything while trying to save, which in the computer world, it's almost impossible when technology is changing every day
as the owner of a Dual 2 GHz G5 that still has great performance under 10.5.3... this blows dead bears!!!
Apple has traditionally supported older hardware for really long periods of time. This kind of architecture change is a once a decade kind of event, so I'd say cut them a break.
Besides, G3 and G4 users aren't really the kind of cutting edge users to immediately upgrade their OS's and the kinds of apps Powermac G5 users are running are the kind that are difficult to keep dual-architecture (note Adobe dropping PowerPC support in their audio app for instance).
You think? That thing just about qualifies as a Mac ancient artifact.
Look at all these double standards here.
Microsoft's new OS won't run on old computers = MICROSOFT SUCKS!
Apple's new OS won't run on old computers = THANKS APPLE! We don't need old legacy support! Those computers will run just fine, there's no need to upgrade them!
Why is it so bad that people can't use Vista on their new computers? XP still works fine on them!
Further more, you can run Vista on 5 year old computers with very decent performance (3.06 GHz Northwood, Radeon 9600/9800 or Geforce FX 5600/5700 - maybe even a FX 5200, 2 GB ram). Even the Betas ran fairly well on that computer.
Vista had lots of new features over XP.
Snow Leopard is simply a go at proper optimization of OSX for intel,
no other new features other then optimization, that is all.
Windows users need to need to tell Microsoft drop legacy support as well. Microsoft can start with dropping "Windows check up your hardware, and user clock in to Microsoft to avoid nag ware advantage".
@d
No offence intended towards you, but that is exactly why I have resisted getting a Mac for so long. A wedding, a child, etc. those are the things you congratulate people over. It is a computer, a tool to get things done and maybe some entertainment, not some extension of my being. When I got my iPhone (which is still broken, BTW) every Mac user used that same word – congratulations, like I was someone better now. I got it because it had a good web browser. I am still not sure if I am thrilled about having one (I needed to get it for software testing), but it will not be used to define who I am - an attitude that many Mac users seem to take on.
There is a lot wrong with that post. For one thing, strawman arguments for the lose. Who are these "many Mac users" you refer to? Can you point them out to me? Can you point even one of them out to me?
Second, you resisted getting a Mac because of the strawman you created that generalizes all Mac users' behavior - and you wanted to disassociate yourself with this imaginary entity? That's how you go about choosing which kind of computer to buy? You know there are better ways to pick out a computer... things like the merits of the hardware and software.
Avoiding a computer because of the imagined collective attitudes of that platform's users is weaksauce at its weakest. If you honestly let other people's (imagined) attitudes about a computer steer you away from it, that's pathetic. Grow a spine and determine for yourself whether you like it or not. :D
This is a good thing. My 1.5GHz 12" PB is slow on leopard. It needs more Ram and it needs more CPU power for it to run properly. And dropping PPC support allows Apple to optimze the OS further.
Tack up reason number 120498714507 that Macs will never gain widespread marketshare in the business world.
Yeah, reasonable. IT staff prefers Microsoft OSs that do not even run properly on *current* hardware. It keeps them in bread and butter, who would blame them for that.
@Bad Beaver
Congratulations on proving that you're a muppet who goes by blogs and not by fact.
Go you.
Honestly: who cares? If you keep running vintage equipment, you will have a reason for that. Likely, it will do whatever you do with it well/well enough. For regular consumer needs, a G4/G5 system is still plenty powerful. I use ten (10!) years "obsolete" Newtons as they are good at what I need them for. If you are the person who suffers from technolust for the always latest and greatest, you will already have acquired an Intel Mac. If you are a Pro in a field that demands maximum performance, dito.
Apple ditched legacy hardware support before, and usually does so *after* if becomes painful (try running 10.4 on a G3 and tell me with a straight face that you like it). They did it with the G3, and also when they switched from 680x0 to PowerPC (right kiddo, back in the early 90's when you were still a naughty gleam in daddy's eye). Yet guess what, people still employ those systems, even those very old ones. It is not like they instantly break just because they are no longer supported.
So let me get this straight:
Businesses say "XP works just fine for us. We don't need to upgrade all of our legacy systems just to run the latest and greatest OS. Thanks anyway." And the zealots responded with "SEE!? Vista is a failure!"
Now Apple MANDATES upgrades for its latest release, and you say corporations will say exactly the same thing... Only this time it's perfectly acceptable and a good thing?
So which is it? Is legacy support good or not?
(Yes, I do agree with your sentiment. THIS is the way the Apple-circle-jerking blogosphere should have reacted to Vista.)
Please how 3 days ago is this "news"?
To Engadget, damn I'm an Apple Fan but come on now. Next thing you know you'll post something like "Apple's logo is for fact a profile of an Apple with a bite on the right side". Come on now you making us look bad, the ones that like Apple will always like em, others won't so please slow your roll, on the Apple posts.
Agreed. Both Engadget and Gizmodo have gone overboard on the Apple news. Most of their articles are blatantly redundant.
OH MY GOD! BAD APPLE FOR DISCONTINUING SUPPORT OF OBSOLETE HardWARE!
Uhmmm...
I had a problem with vista, not because it didn't support older hardware, but because of how new the hardware had to be in order to run it smoothly. A computer that is a year old with decent specs for its time should be able to run a new OS smoothly. Yes, it would be nice if Apple kept some legacy support. 4 years is probably long enough, I wouldn't have expected vista to run on a 4 year old machine.
This is one reason that I love Linux. I've found uses for old machines where support was long ago dropped.
I have Vista running on a 7 year old machine with absolutely no problems.
And on a three year old machine with no problems.
the first is a dell XPS which was top of the line in its day.
the second is a $400 Dell dimension 510.
if you had problems with vista, its because of you, not the hardware.
I have to agree with PeterF. There is obviously a double standard thats in favor of Apple. Which is good for me since I own stock but still rather interesting, especially the people that make excuses for the shortcomings. Hopefully we will hit 200/shr in no time.
This definately isn't a bad thing (coming from a guy who is on a Powerbook G4 and works with a company full of PowerPC G5's). It wouldn't make sense to continue PowerPC support with the goals they have set. They are focusing on making the OS more efficient for x86 processors. So it looks like I'll have $30K of PowerPC hardware that I will no longer be able to upgrade to the latest OS, thats fine.
What will be a problem though, is 3rd party software. When a new Apple OS comes out developers adopt new enhancements in the OS extremely fast. Hopefully the software will still remain 10.5 compatible at large and everyone will continue releasing things in Universal Binary. If they don't then my business can't compete and we have to totally reinvest. 4 years is a short time to totally lose application support. Even on Windows most software will easily install on a machine running Windows 2000 (10+ years old now).