PPC to Intel - F.A.Q.

[inziga]

Bellow is a summary of information I have looked up on the transition from PPC to Intel. Feel free to re-use this on other sites as long as you mention this thread. If there is anything I've left out, any errors in what I've written, questions you want answered, or suggestions for this, please post here or e-mail me (my neowin username)@gmail.com :)

I plan to update this as new information comes along.

Please use this thread for asking questions/making suggestions only. There are other threads for discussing specifics, and this will work best if there's fewer posts. Thank you :)

----------------------------------------------------------

Q: Why is Apple switching? I thought PPC was superior to x86.

A: According to Steve Jobs, ?When we look at future ... we see PowerPC gives us 15 units of performance per watt, but Intel?s roadmap gives us 70." However, there are many other factors for the decisi1) IBM has been unable to develop a G5 chip cool enough for Apple to put in a lapt2) They are also either having problems pushing the clockspeed, or they are chosing not to advance the clockspe3) They have been late on several G5 shipments, causing Apple to delay orders for customers and to delay the introduction of the G5 iMac.

They have been unable to do these things for Apple, and yet they've committed to producing three different chips for all three next-generation consoles coming out in the near future. Apple knows that they are the least of IBM's concerns(occupying only two percent of IBM's wafer manufacturing), so they are moving to Intel chips to stay up to date with the rest of the PC market.Q: When will the first Intel Macs appear?<A: Intel chips will be introduced in Apple's hardware line in the second half of next year. The full line will be updated before the end of 2007.Q: Which computers in Apple's line will get the Intel chips first?<A: Nobody knows for sure, but CNET speculated when they originally broke the Intel story that Apple will be updating from the consumer line up.Q: I was going to buy a Mac today. What do I do?<A: While it is good to think ahead to the future, it's important that you have the technology you need when you need it. In fact, for at least three years, a PPC Mac will probably be ahead in performance compared to an Intel Mac when using ported applications due to the fact that most applications will be native to the PPC architecture.

PPC will be supported a long time just as the 680x0 and G3 processors were/are so your computer will not be obsolete any quicker than it normally would. If you want to wait for an Intel Mac, then that's ok too. Jdon't be afraid that your computer will be outdated in a few years because noone will support it anymore...it won't. Apple is commited to making sure its PPC customers are supported likewise. What would they have to gain from abandoning their current userbase?Q: I own a PPC Mac. Why is Apple dropping support for my platform?<A: Apple has publicly stated thatwants to support the PPC platform for years to come and it will. Steve Jobs has even said that Apple even plans to introduce new PPC products before the introduction of the Intel products. The PPC platform is far from dropped in Apple's eyes, and Apple has provided resources for developers to support both platforms easilly for many years to come. Most developers will support this, some may not, but Apple will continue supporting PPC customers in its own software.Q: Will Apple be using x86 or x86-64 for their processor?<A: As far as we know, Apple will be using x86 for their chip. Steve Jobs used a 3.6Ghz Pentium 4 for his keynote, and all developer documentation Apple has released thus far points to a x86 platform.Q: Why not use AMD?<A: That is not known for sure. Some people have speculated that Apple's main concern is about the ability to get the CPUs they need. One reason might be that Intel is able to produce more chips than AMD and seem to be advancing in chip technology (more specifically in mobile processors...this is important since laptops are begining to outsell desktops) better than AMD is. Interestingly, Hector de Ruiz, COO of AMD was the head of Motorola's semiconductor unit back when Apple was using their G3/G4 processors.Q: Will AMD be supported in the future?<A: Nobody knows that for sure, but it probably won't require any extra changes if Apple decides to use AMD in the future. However, Apple may require that Macs utilize Intel's DRM technology in order to secure that OSX stays Mac-Only.Q: It's x86, so I can run Tiger on my windows computer by next year, right?A: Probably not legally. Apple's Vice President Phil Schiller has said that Apple "will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac." However, since Darwin (the BSD core of Apple's operating system) is cross platform, it is possible (and likely) that someone will hack a way to do it. Driver support for the many systems out there in such an instance will probably be too much of an undertaking, and doing so violates the terms of an OSX installation.Q: Ok, will I be able to run Windows on my Mac?<A: According to the current developer kits, Apple will be using a Phoenix BIOS(most likely with TrustedCore technology) to boot their machines. This means that You will probably be able to install Windows without and modifications to the system or software. However, this may be changed before the launch of the first Intel products, since this news is based on the Web Kits that will be sold. (Thanks PureEdit!) Q: Will the transition be difficult for end-users?<A: Probably not. People who keep their computers for a time longer than four years will find that application support for your PPC computer later on may be difficult. Finding software for the x86 platform may also be scarce at the begining. However, both of these things depend on how developers decide to compile and manage their software. If most software developers support their users through this, the transition should be fairly easy.Q: Will the transition be difficult for developers?<A: That depends on how the software was initially coded. Java and web-based(HTML, Javascript) code will "just work". Developers whome initially used Cocoa should only need to do "minor tweaks" and a recompile with Xcode 2.1 to be compatible for both platforms. Carbon and Xcode applications will need more changning, and software built on Metrowerks will need to be re-written in order to be portable. All of these things will be applicable unless your software utilizes byte ordering.Q: What is Apple's Developer Transition Kit?<A: Apple's Developer Transition Kit is a full PC designed to help developers transfer their programs to Universal Binaries with as little effort as possible.Q: What does the kit consist of?<A: From what is known so far: The kit is a Powermac with an Intel motherboard inside. The motherboard utilizes an Pentium 4 660 processor which runs at 3.6 ghz. In an interesting twist, this ccan support 64-bit extensions, but Apple isn't supporting them currently. Apple stressed that this is no reflection on what future Powermacs will be like and that it is only a Dev. Kit. for transition to the Intel platform.Q: Do you have any pictures of the Developer Transition Kit?<A: PowerPage.org has alleged pictures of the kit.Q: What is Universal Binary?<A: Universal Binary is a return to the concept of "fat binaries" introduced by Apple during the initial switch to PPC. They are essentially one file with code branches for two different processor architectures. They allow developers to create one file that will be compatible with both PPC and x86 systems running OSX.Q: What is Rosetta?<A: Basically, Rosetta is a transparent emulator based on Transitive Corperation's Quick Transit software that allows software written for G3 processor compatability to run without code changes. Wikipeia has a more in-depth description of what Rosetta is.Q: So Rosetta is like classic mode from the OS9 to OSX transition?<A: Not at all. Since they are changing architecture not operating systems, Rosetta will not have to load a whole new OS when an older application is needed to run. It should run "transparently" and with "a small footprint" (both quoting Steve Jobs), unnoticeable by end users.Q: So, I'll be able to run my applications flawlessly?<A: Well, since Rosetta needs to translate the binary, no matter how well they optimize it there will be a performance hit. We don't know how bad of a hit that will be, but we should be finding out more info about that in the future. Also, it only supports software that is compatible with the G3 processor so Rosetta won't be able to open all software that is out there now.. Q: Will classic mode (from the OS 9 to OSX switch) still be available?<A: Probably not. Phil Schiller, has been quoted saying classic mode is "... certainly not very high on the priority list." Also, Rosetta will not be supporting classic apps.

Edited June 9, 2005 by inziga

[jackwanders]

Thanks be to you, good sir (or sir-ette). This thread's going in my sig.

[inziga]

Thanks be to you, good sir (or sir-ette).  This thread's going in my sig.

586034515[/snapback]

Haha...It's sir :p ....and it's no problem, it's just something that needed to be done. The only problem now is I'm fresh out of questions to put on here. :)

[Bling3k12]

This needs a sticky...

[Chad]

Nice job. One question though

Q: Which computers in Apple's line will get the Intel chips first?

A: Apple's lower line will be getting the chips first followed by the upper lines.

I haven't heard where Apple has said what will be updated first.

I do know Rosetta will not support Classic apps, so my guess would be that Classic will officially be unsupported (unless it has already) with this transition

[Bling3k12]

Nice job.  One question though

I haven't heard where Apple has said what will be updated first. 

586035761[/snapback]

That was reported in the CNET article, and seeing how it was pretty much correct, I'd assume that's the plan.

[fukachu]

true it was mentioned that the consumer line would probably be the first to be updated. although in personal opinion if the pro line can get a really nice processor and pic express etc i think it would want to get changed first since many people are unhappy with the G5's progress in processor speed etc.

i also ready that they still ahd some PPC products comming out..? does that mean software or hardware?

[inziga]

Nice job.  One question though

I haven't heard where Apple has said what will be updated first. 

586035761[/snapback]

Yeah, like Bling3k12 said,I read it in the artical. I guess this isn't enough to assume though as Apple may change its mind even if this is the current plan ("surprise!, all computers are Intel now!"), so I'm going to change that.

i also ready that they still ahd some PPC products comming out..? does that mean software or hardware?

586037261[/snapback]

Hmm....to be real honest, I don't know. He didn't specify on the CNBC interview.

[DirtyLarry Veteran]

Fantastic Read. (Y)

[thechitowncubs]

Great job, answered my questions (Y)

[toastyghost]

Nice job.  One question though

I haven't heard where Apple has said what will be updated first. 

I do know Rosetta will not support Classic apps, so my guess would be that Classic will officially be unsupported (unless it has already) with this transition

586035761[/snapback]

http://daringfireball.net/2005/06/classic_not_supported

With the first Intel Mac, Classic is dead, officially.

http://daringfireball.net/2005/06/bombs_away

That has some deeper info as well, that you may want to add to your otherwise brilliant FAQ. Particularly this section:

This transition period is going to be hard on Apple, not hard on Mac users. If you?ve just purchased a machine recently, or need to buy one soon, you?re no worse off than you would have been if Apple had remained committed to producing new PowerPC hardware ? today?s machines would have been obsoleted by even-better machines next year no matter what processors they contained. And no one is abandoning PowerPC software development. I see no reason to expect Intel-only Mac software in the near future. Universal Binaries take full advantage of both Intel and PowerPC Macs. That?s worth rUniversal Binaries take full advantage of both Intel and PowerPC Macs. Macs.

Sticky this? It'll stop us having to answer the same questions in thread after thread.

[Help]

http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/o...e=DRPPCDUALCORE

hmm.. I think the statement about IBM not giving enough performance for their chips tomorrow is crap...

[PureEdit]

Some more info: http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/

It has FireWire 400, but not 800. USB 2 as well. USB 2 booting is supported, FireWire booting is not. NetBoot works.

The machines do not have Open Firmware. They use a Phoenix BIOS. That's right, a Mac with a BIOS.

(I asked if the Bios had any tweaks like Memory Timing which is common for many PC motherboards, although Intel OEM motherboards don't usually have any end user tweaks like that.-Mike)

They won't tell us how to get in the BIOS. I'm sure we can figure it out when out dev kits arrive.

They run Windows fine. All the chipset is standard Intel stuff, so you can download drivers and run XP on the box.

[inziga]

http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/o...e=DRPPCDUALCORE

hmm.. I think the statement about IBM not giving enough performance for their chips tomorrow is crap...

586037519[/snapback]

You're right, except that IBM is only advancing by adding multiple cores or DSPs, they arn't advancing in speed on the singular processors. I also think this may be due to the fact that IBM knew that Apple was eyeing Intel. With their servers, and their consoles, IBM doesn't need Apple. I think this is what Steve Jobs meant when he cited the difference in IBM and Intel's roadmap.

[inziga]

Some more info: http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/

586037642[/snapback]

THANK YOU! :D

[MonkeyClaw Veteran]

this is awesome, thanks for making this a sticky. with this and the keynote address, i am no longer worried about my recent pb purchase, so thanks guys for getting rid of the stress, heh

[Help]

You're right, except that IBM is only advancing by adding multiple cores or DSPs, they arn't advancing in speed on the singular processors. I also think this may be due to the fact that IBM knew that Apple was eyeing Intel. With their servers, and their consoles, IBM doesn't need Apple. I think this is what Steve Jobs meant when he cited the difference in IBM and Intel's roadmap.

586037668[/snapback]

Isn't Intel doing the same?? They are delaying the 4.0 ghz processor by introducing dual-core processors because of power issues. I don't think Intel is going to bump up the ghz at the rate that they were doing it last year, unless they make significant changes to the design of their processor or start making them in a smaller process.

[inziga]

Isn't Intel doing the same?? They are delaying the 4.0 ghz processor by introducing dual-core processors because of power issues. I don't think Intel is going to bump up the ghz at the rate that they were doing it last year, unless they make significant changes to the design of their processor or start making them in a smaller process.

586037760[/snapback]

Hmm.....You're right. I don't know, I think a main reason for the switch was Apple wasn't able to deliver products and (probably more annoying to Steve Jobs) had to delay new product announcements (iMac)....Either way, I think it's best if we leave this kind of conversation to the other threads. I want to try and keep this strictly about the FAQ if possible :)

[Chad]

A note on Macrumors...Apple isn't letting anyone who gets a developer machine post benchmarks.

[inziga]

A note on Macrumors...Apple isn't letting anyone who gets a developer machine to post benchmarks.

586038356[/snapback]

I'm sure they still will though. :) There's already been one such incident earlier today. As soon as another gets posted, I'm duplicating here.

[Chad]

The post is gone. Any guesses as to why? (rhetorical question)

A few did use xbench on a couple of the machines at WWDC. xbench is such crap for benchmarks though, so it's hard to tell what to expect.

[inziga]

The post is gone.  Any guesses as to why?  (rhetorical question)

A few did use xbench on a couple of the machines at WWDC.  xbench is such crap for benchmarks though, so it's hard to tell what to expect.

586038471[/snapback]

Yeah, Apple told him to take them down. ThinkSecret has those xbench benchmarks on their site. Should I link to that? (They were done with Rosetta, so they are skewed.)

[qinwarrior]

Thanks. I just bought iMac G5 last month. I hope it would run for the next two years or so.

:cry:

[joseph-]

Thanks. I just bought iMac G5 last month. I hope it would run for the next two years or so.

:cry:

586045038[/snapback]

Too bad for you, because...you know...the G5's will *explode* as soon as the Intel processor models are released. :rolleyes:

[Bennifer]

I think the key thing to remember, that is obvious, but everyone forgets - if your Apple is giving beasty performance now, it will always work as well as it does now. My Mac Mini can last me for years and years as it is now and perform perfectly as a media centre for my music, video, DVD, it does H264 fine as well. It always will. It works on Photoshop just fine. The software it has now is awesome, and wont be any worse in 5 years time.

The time has gone where obselete technology is really applicable - any machine made in the last 3 years is useful for a very long time :)