Apple ’s startling promulgation that it will begin a conversion forth from PowerPC chip to Intel - made processors has left Mac fan ’ heads spinning , and not just because a former “ foe ” of the Mac is now counted among its allies . Many details about the conversion are indecipherable or flat - out missing . After all , Apple said it wo n’t be shipping any Intel - based Macs until next yr . And let ’s be good , calculator chip are not exactly the uncomplicated theme under the Dominicus .
To help you sort out this office , here ’s what you take to do it about the Apple - Intel announcement , in the form of oftentimes - ask questions .
What, specifically, did Apple announce?
On June 6 in an address to Mac developers , Steve Jobs announced that Apple would begin a modulation from the PowerPC Saratoga chip that currently power Mac system to chip ramp up by Intel . Jobs said that by June of next twelvemonth , at least some Intel - based Macs would be on the market , that by June 2007 most fresh Macs would be Intel - based , and that by the end of 2007 the last - ever PowerPC - ground Mac will have rolled off the assembly argument .
2006? So why did Apple announce this now?
Developers of Mac software — the very people Jobs was addressing — will require metre to ensure that their computer program will make on Intel - based Macs . Now that developers have those tools the chances are good that legion Intel - quick programs will be quick before Intel - base Macs actually arrive .
Why did Apple do this?
Jobs said the company made this decision because they “ want to be make the salutary computing gadget for our customers , looking forward . ” He cited his 2003 announcement to transport a 3GHz G5 by mid-2004 , a hope that is still unfulfilled . He mentioned that Apple has also failed to deliver a G5 - based PowerBook .
understandably , Apple has not been instill with the pace of processor ontogenesis by IBM , which build the G5 chip . And as Jobs said , Apple believes that when it looks to future processor development for chips destined for Apple systems , Intel would progress much faster than IBM would .
Does this mean Apple has to do a new version of Mac OS X for Intel?
Yes , but it ’s not as big a peck as you might think . OS X originated as NextStep / OpenStep , an operating system that originated on Motorola - based french-fried potatoes and later also ran on Intel chip . So OS X has , from the very beginning , been an operating system equal to of running on different chips .
And as Steve Jobs accommodate , Apple ’s created an Intel version of every interpretation of Mac OS X , just in case it needed to make the electrical switch someday . That day is here , but the bulk of the work has already been done .
Is this like the OS 9 to OS X transition again?
It ’s somewhat different . For most developers , alter their software to run on Intel processors will be quite a bit easier than making that software run natively in OS X. ( Although for some developers , who are using CodeWarrior as their growing environs , it might be just as voiceless or even hard . ) From a drug user position , though , an Intel - based Mac system will look just like a PowerPC - free-base system . Mac OS X is remaining the same ; it ’s just the underlying processor that will be different .
But itisa transition , and there will be quirks and protrusion , new poppycock to learn , and a lot of doubt . So in that way it will remind you of the OS 9 to OS ecstasy modulation or the move from 680×0 processors to PowerPC chip back in the mid-’90s .
Does this affect the software I already own? What will happen to my software if I buy an Intel-based system?
Apple has announced a new technology , Rosetta , that will run PowerPC Mac programme on Intel - establish Macs . However , according to Apple ’s owntechnical documentation , Rosetta does not corroborate classical apps , nor does it substantiate apps that require the G4 and G5 processors .
Rosetta work by translating code mean to go on a PowerPC chip into computer code that is compatible with Intel processors . If you recall running 680×0 codification ( say , Microsoft Word 5.1 ) on a Power Mac back in the mid-90s , you live what this think : curriculum black market slower when they ’re not running on their native CPU . Most common programs will probably be quite usable ; some mainframe - intensive applications such as games and 3 - D renderers will credibly not be . Over the next twelvemonth , I would imagine that many software program developer will update their applications specifically so that they run properly using Rosetta .
( Rosetta doesnotwork the same way Classic does , however . Classic actually runs software program within an entirely freestanding and additional operating system ( Mac OS 9 ) design for the same PowerPC crisp notice on your PowerPC - based Mac . Rosetta runs programs that are native to Mac OS X — but translates the PowerPC cow dung instructions into Intel - compatible single . )
By the time the first Intel - based Macs appear , many of the program you utilize may have already been updated to newfangled variation which also support the Intel architecture . You ’ll be able to tell which processor type a political platform supports by selecting it in the Finder and choosing Get Info . In the More Info selection of the Get Info window , you ’ll see an “ Architecture ” line that will list Intel , PowerPC , or both . ( There ’s also an “ Open using Rosetta ” checkbox that might be utile in sure oddball state of affairs , much as “ Open using Classic ” is today . )
Will I have to buy new versions of my software specifically to run on an Intel-based Mac?
As with the PowerPC and OS X transition , there ’s no single answer . dissimilar developers will deal things other than . One fellowship might provide an Intel - compatible adaptation as a free upgrade ; another might make it into their next major outlet and charge you for the perquisite .
Because of Apple ’s new “ Universal Binary ” approach , developer can deliver a single program that contains within it both Intel and PowerPC versions of their software . You wo n’t have Intel apps PowerPC apps floating around , stool it easy to chatter on the ill-timed one ( and pretend it out of the question to sweep - and - drop software from an Intel Mac to a PowerPC one ) . And succeeding Mac computer software will likely be sold plainly as Mac software , not specifying whether it ’s Mac for Intel or Mac for PowerPC . You ’ll set up it , double - detent on the political platform , and your computing machine will utilize the right computer code for its C.P.U. .
How much work will need to go into modifying Mac software?
It will depend a set on the program . program written solely using Apple ’s Cocoa fabric will generally come over cursorily . Programs primitively on OS 9 , which largely apply the Carbon development scheme , will expect more oeuvre . Programs that directly address the central processor , or that take advantage of Velocity Engine , will need lots of tweaks .
Still , most developers we ’ve spoken with to are fairly positive that moving to Intel wo n’t be a huge impediment for them , have in mind they ’ll be able to make Intel - quick version of their programme pretty chop-chop . Owing to its NextStep / OpenStep heritage , Mac OS X has been designed from day one as a grouchy - platform operating system . That means that programmers have been boost to write programs that babble to various frameworks that are built by Apple and are abstracted from specific ironware . That ’s a good thing , because when there ’s a big change ( like , say , moving from PowerPC to Intel ) , the burden of compatibility falls on the Apple engineers creditworthy for maintaining those frameworks .
Will Intel-based Macs get nasty viruses and spyware like Intel-based PCs?
Essentially , no . The viruses and spyware you listen about on Windows are just that — plan of attack on the Windows operating system , which happens to run on Intel ( and AMD ) CPU . If a Mac were to be overrun by viruses and spyware , those infestations would happen irrespective of what processor was guide that especial Mac .
This is not to say that a Mac could n’t get virus and spyware . But that ’s true today , too . The Mac is free from viruses and spyware because it ’s more secure than Windows and because it ’s a much less common system than Windows .
The Mac is presently an appealing choice for personal computer users because it ’s secure , easy to practice , and Mac software package put up an easy fashion to interact with digital photos , movies , the Web , and electronic mail . go to Intel CPU does n’t change any of that .
So does this mean my Mac is obsolete?
Did n’t bring for you ? Okay , permit me be more direct . When you buy a Mac , it starts to become disused almost straightaway , in a way . Technology advance . Computers get quicker . Eventually , there will be a version of Mac OS X that wo n’t run on your Mac . That was rightful three years ago and it ’s true today . Your Mac today , and any Mac you purchase in the next year , will still elapse through all the stages of life-time . The Intel transition will be a very specific milestone along that itinerary . Depending on how the passage shakes out and , more importantly , what you employ your Mac for , the Intel passage might make your Mac obsolete more quickly , or might keep it relevant for a little while longer than would be usual . But all computers are born to be disused .
Should I not buy any new Macs until the Intel-based Macs arrive?
It depends on what your need are and what your current Macs are . Over the next year , Apple ’s go to be come out with numerous forward motion on existing PowerPC - based Mac model . And keep in mind , harmonise to Apple the PowerPC wo n’t be completely eradicate from the caller ’s product line until former 2007 . If you ’ve pay back an aging Mac system , do you want to wait until 2007 to get a newfangled one ? If you bought a fresh Mac today , you could be pretty convinced that it would serve you well for several years and probably would n’t become obsolete any quicker than it would normally , give the marching music of time .
Then again , if you ’re well-fixed with the Mac systems you ’ve catch now , and do n’t sense the want to purchase a Mac for a while , expect until Apple cross the next barriermightbe a good melodic theme . Or it might not , because …
When the new Intel Macs come out, should I be first in line to buy one?
Do you care live on on the sharpness ? When those first Intel - free-base Macs come out , they may not be without their quirk . But more sure enough , if at that stop most of the program you run do n’t currently exist in Intel version , a quicker Mac might actually seem wearisome to you . This is the effect many Mac users find when moving from a Quadra to a Power Mac in the early days of that transition : because most of the programs they used were emulate , the “ faster ” Macs were in reality slower in quotidian use . Once they upgrade the programs they used most to PowerPC - native varieties , things get respectable . ( It ’s significant to note , though , that these days many people rely almost exclusively on Apple - produced curriculum such as Mail , Safari , and iLife . We ’d numerate on Apple being there with all of its software , quick to go for Intel , on day one of this young era . )
How will the Intel machines measure up to the PowerPC Macs in performance?
We simply do n’t hump yet . As soon as we know , we ’ll let you know ! Also , keep in intellect that since Apple ’s not blend in to ship any Intel - base Macs until 2006 , the Intel scrap that are available today on microcomputer arenotnecessarily the fleck manikin , speeds , or even families that will make their agency into Apple ’s Intel - free-base systems . We ’ll just have to await and see .
Does this mean Apple’s abandoning its commitment to a 64-bit architecture?
We do n’t have any particular yet , but it seems highly unlikely to us that Apple would sprain its back on 64 - bit microprocessor chip . Intel offers 64 - bite chip and it ’s almost unsufferable to conceive that Apple would move backward in this area .
Could this lead to cheaper Macs?
It ’s possible , count on what organization part Apple grease one’s palms from Intel and what they be . But keep in mind , Apple ’s not making a inexpensive ringer PC . Apple ’s going to continue to make Macs , and sales of Mac hardware help fund Apple ’s development of Mac OS X. Do n’t expect Apple to bulge out selling computers at rock and roll - bottom prices like cheap PC cloners .
Will any PC be able to run Mac OS X for Intel?
Apple says no . Our guess is that some enterprising cyberpunk may be able to get it to work , but we ’d expect that if anyone can get OS X to run on PC computer hardware , it will be a laborious unconscious process , and the end solvent may not be a especially stable system . You sure as shooting wo n’t be able to go out , grease one’s palms OS X , stick the install DVD in a Dell PC , and have it just turn . Apple intends Mac OS X to only run on Apple hardware .
Will my Intel-based Mac be able to run Windows?
It seems likely , although Apple wo n’t support it . Someone will probably count on a way to put in Windows on a Mac system so that you’re able to opt to boot into either OS X or Windows . In addition , consider a future adaptation of Virtual PC that get you move microcomputer applications at full amphetamine , on a windowpane within your Mac ( or on a second monitor ) . There are some challenging opening here for Mac users who must use Windows applications some of the clock time .
But if all Macs one day will be able to run Windows, won’t application developers stop creating Mac versions of their programs?
It ’s potential , but not very potential . mackintosh users are Mac users because they want to campaign softwarein the Mac port . The large software companies that publish program on the Mac translate that , and so do the small Mac developers who are making the cool operating system X apps around . I ’d tell you that the middle - chain developers with a drooping commitment to the Mac would be the ace most worth worrying about , but candidly , the Mac OS decade transition already shook most of them out of the Mac market place .
The future of the Mac games marketplace is somewhat more of an clear question , as Peter Cohen attain when he talked to Mac game developers .
Whatever happened to the megahertz myth?
It ’s still true — you ca n’t compare different cow dung type solely base on megahertz ( or gigacycle ) . Even Intel has had to lot with this , as some of its chips do n’t equate to the amphetamine - per - megahertz ratings of its other splintering . Apple clearly feel that Intel ’s chips have the proficient growth way , and so that ’s why it ’s made this major shift in engineering science .
On the positive side , have Apple use Intel poker chip will eliminate the power for PC users to employ the Gc of a Mac ’s mainframe against them . And with the processors being equal , we will be capable to make a much more direct comparing between the speed of Mac OS X and Windows XP .
Apple used to bash Intel’s chips. What changed?
Intel ’s chips have evolved . Intel is a immense troupe that has devote massive resources to improving its chip engineering . It ’s also been spurred on by heavy contender from another PC chipmaker , Advanced Micro Devices ( AMD ) . Clearly Apple now feels that the future of Intel ’s chip architecture is quite bright ; otherwise we would n’t be where we are today .
