[personal profile] standardtom
So it's true.

Seeing what this does to sales of existing and upcoming PowerPC-based products will be interesting, until each product line can make the transition.

Date: 2005-06-06 08:08 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ex-bearbong816.livejournal.com
Is this the "Dumming of America" or just their computing tools?

(sigh)

Date: 2005-06-07 10:21 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] timksweden.livejournal.com
As long as they're keeping Mac OS, I don't see that which processor they run on makes a big difference in terms of dumbness. But maybe that's just me ;-).

Best,
Tim

Date: 2005-06-06 09:19 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] jbear70.livejournal.com
On the drive home I listened to NPR and they were saying that this was a business decision driven by the increasing sales numbers of laptops over desktops. Apparently the Intel chips are designed to run cooler and use less power than the IBM/Motorola ones. Most of the software developers for Apple were happy at this announcement although there were some "boos" at the conference where Steve Jobs proclaimed the new decision today. The developers said they were happy because it didn't matter to them where Apple got it's chips as long as they were getting the best designed chips on the market. I agree with you though that it will be interesting to see how this plays out among consumers.

Date: 2005-06-06 10:09 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] danlmarmot.livejournal.com
It'll be interesting. I lived through the 68K/PPC transition, and it was fairly smooth, but not quite as painless as many think... there were a fair number of compiler issues to sort out at first.

One thing the announcement does not state is which architecture they're using. I would suspect Apple will be using Intel's EM64T processors, and compiling to x64... and bypass x86 stuff.

Date: 2005-06-06 10:40 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] standardtom.livejournal.com
Steve's demo today was done on a 3.6GHz Pentium 4, which is supposedly the system they're going to be shipping to developers as the testbed. I think that's still a 32-bit system, isn't it?

My cursory glance over the documentation for Xcode 2.1 hasn't shown anything one way or another yet.

I hadn't even thought about that aspect of it until you mentioned it!

Date: 2005-06-07 12:15 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] danlmarmot.livejournal.com
A 3.6 Pentium 4 could be either 32 or 64 bit. Pentium 4 is almost more of a brand name than a technical description at this point.

I know if I were planning a big transition like this one that I'd go with 64-bit chips. By the time these Intel-based Macs are shipping, 32-bit processors are going to seem like yesterday's news.

Date: 2005-06-07 02:10 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] standardtom.livejournal.com
True. And from a marketing standpoint, it'd be hard to go back and say something like "All that 64-bit stuff we were talking about with the G5? Well, ya know... just kinda don't think about that anymore, kthx!"

Date: 2005-06-07 12:36 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] airbearma.livejournal.com
Intel has 3.6 Ghz processors with or without EMT-64. I think the main reason for the shift is that the G5 is a power hog and IBM has no plan to come out with a low power version. Apple greatly needs more HP for it's notebooks.

Date: 2005-06-07 02:11 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] standardtom.livejournal.com
The notebook angle was my thought, too. I'm typing this on a Powerbook G4 1.67GHz, and it's snappy enough right now, but there are times when I wish for more.

Date: 2005-06-07 05:27 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kebinjoonzu.livejournal.com
*giggles* no more PearPC for me!

Date: 2005-06-07 04:21 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] standardtom.livejournal.com
oooo, no, CherryOS all the way!!111!!!

Date: 2005-06-07 08:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kebinjoonzu.livejournal.com
CherryOS was a blatant rip on PearPC :p duh..

Date: 2005-06-07 08:27 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] standardtom.livejournal.com
It was a joke, hon ;-)

Profile

standardtom

August 2014

S M T W T F S
     12
3456 789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 21st, 2017 04:38 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios