It's Official - Intel Inside

Just watching the "blogging style" on MacCentral and it is official. No more PowerPC Mac's. Well, maybe until next year when they ship with Intel Inside. Also shown is the "secret" PC version of Tiger 10.4.1 running on an Intel platform.

Velly Interesting!

Before we go nuts with this thread, lets catch our breath and take a couple days to hear the "analysts" spin.

We all have our own take on this I know, but lets be careful about knee jerk reactions until we get all the facts. A demo and announcement is not necessarily all there is to the story. Especially a story where no Altivec enhanced apps were demoed



Post Edited (06-06-05 12:06)

Michael Horton
-------------------

[news.com.com]

[www.bloomberg.com]

This article says that a strong motivation was Intel's coming protection scheme so that Apple can download "iFlicks" as well as iTunes.

[www.wired.com]

What does this mean for those of us who have just bought FCP 5 Studio and everything? Does anyone know if these apps will work on the new hardware or be completely rewritten. AHH I'm confused. I own stock in Apple and I'm curious to see if this could mean more sales in the long run due to cheaper hardware with the ease of Tiger. I hope not any old Intel could get a tiger disk and install it. that would be crap.

unless r&d is already well underway, id expect 2 years min before we see any real world intel/mac boxes in retail reality.

that gives us all plenty of time to see returns on our current machine / software investments. so IMO, no. nobody is going to be left out in the cold with their new fcp5 / studio purchases...

Ryan Thompson wrote:

I hope not any old Intel could get a
> tiger disk and install it. that would be crap.

Well Phil Shiller said in an interview "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac."



Michael Horton
-------------------

Relax, It's a long way off and you won't need to upgrade until YOU are ready. The machine and software that you have NOW will still work with what you have when the new stuff is ready about the end of 2006. You don't have to upgrade. Of course if this stuff is Insanely Great it might just be awesome for us all. We shall see.

I was planing on buying a new Dual G5 this week.

I think any Mac I buy today would have a much shorter productive life span than past Macs. Only other time like this was dumping nubus for pci slots. I don't thinking moving to Intel is inherintly bad at all. I trust Jobs made this decision for long term speed improvements.

The problem is I can't see developers wanting to support two different CPUs for very long. Hence the shorter lifespan. I can only hope that Apple cuts prices on the G5s knowing we'll have to replace/retire them sooner than otherwise. I can get two good years out of this purchase but I'd have been hoping for 3 and streetched to 4 as it moves to a secondary role running then current software in 2009 even if it's at then snail's pace.

My Dual 800 from 2001 can run FCP5 without a problem. A Dual G5 purchased today run the "new" FCP 8 in 2009? Not with Intel Macs out in June 2007.

Has Apple said whether their next operating system release, OS 10.5 "Leopard," will run on PowerPC Macs -- or only on Intel processors?

"Has Apple said whether their next operating system release, OS 10.5 "Leopard," will run on PowerPC Macs -- or only on Intel processors?"

I'm no expert, but I'm SURE it will run on both. Apple will have to make sure all it's software runs smooth on both Intel and PPC CPUs for years and years to come. Of course the story is different for third party developers. They can always choose to abandon Mac Intel, or Mac PPC, or just bail out altogether.

The worst hit of this whole announcement, sadly, is us Apple pro users. No developer is going to spend time hand-tweaking code for Altivec and the G5 at this point. All of a sudden it's a waste of their time.



- Justin Barham -

2 years is a long time away. Videos and films still need to be edited until the Intel Macs come out. You can still make money and do business until the intel macs are out.

If you buy a G5 tomorrow, you'll still be able to make money off of it for 2 whole years! Are you saying you can't recoup $3K in two years?

Why the doom and gloom? Faster processors, cooler processors, cheaper computers (hopefully).

-CHL

"LIFESPAN" MY ASS!!!!!! i wish we would all quit the damned whining. i have associates who are still (very profitably) editing video on power mac 8600's using videovision studio and os 9.x.

go buy your brand new g5 2.7 with fcp 5 etc TOMORROW and you will be QUITE able to make very good money with it for probably the next 10 years. nobody is going to force ANYONE into premature obsalescence.

its only a problem if you are one of those who insists on having the biggest and newest. and if you ARE one of those then you probably are bringing in enough money not to have to worry about it! or you are just too rich to care...

screw the kit and even more so, screw the cpu - as content producers, our only worry should be our product. and as long as your tools work for you and they are creating revenue, your primary worrys are covered...

Content is KING! Inspiration triumphs over technology every time.

My 2¢

Kevin

And here's the full dose of pure inspiration:

[stream.apple.akadns.net]

Yes, it's about LIFE-SPAN. Sure I can make money and then some on two years. I'd prefer to have the computer make money for five years though. The VideoVision examples doesn't cut it if your work requires latest feature set/plug ins, etc. (but not the fastest computer).

I simply do not believe developers will want to be saddled with making and debugging dual coded apps regardless of how "easy" Jobs says it is.

My Dual 800 from 2001 can use FCP5. It has significant useful realtime functions using DVCAM. It's slow on MPEG2 encodes though but otherwise fine as an editing machine. I'm just not convinced a Dual 2.7 G5 will be that compatible with 2008's software, some of which will have been dual coded from 2006 and will be dropping PowerPC versions in 2007 or 2008, my hunch. This also means current older Macs will have a shorter productive life-span.

I think Apple's move to Intel is smart BUT the desktop sales are going to drop for the time being. It's harder to spend money on an EOL product that will begin to lose compatibility in 3 years instead of 5 (my estimation but they have to CONVINCE me otherwise . . . that's called sales).

Apple is a business and they probably understand the desktop sales hit they're about to take and hope to make it back and then some on the "backside" with coercive upgrades in 2007 as high end professional users face loosing some functionality.

For me, I have $4000 I was about to spend. I can put it on a new Mac or any other purchase that can help my business. Apple has to fight for my small business dollar. ROI on purchasing a new Mac just got smaller. It's not an "emotional" thing, it's something Apple just threw into the equation, like it or not. I can just as easily spend money on a Sony Z1, wait until the end of the year and with $6000-$10,000 buy Pansonic's low end DVCPro with a couple of P2 cards or FireStore (if supported). I've got choices and Apple is causing me to look at other options for my purchases. It's not whinning. It's practical business decisions.



Post Edited (06-07-05 05:25)

Craig Seeman
[thirdplanetvideo.com]

The major problem with one app over two platforms is the differences in APIs - ie, coding for both the Windows and Mac OS X APIs. In this case, your code is for the same API - cocoa / carbon, and there are only two places where things are going to be really different:

Altivec vectorisation & endian-ness

The vectorisation problem is an interesting one, because currently GCC, the compiler we use with Xcode doesn't produce very much vectorised code so you have to go in and code it yourself. Coding vector code isn't always that easy, so you could use Apple's libraries, and if you do, you don't have to change a thing as Apple have taken care of it for you. It sounds like Intel's compiler is coming to the Mac, and it's a very good compiler that will make good vectorised code, so we might find that it's easier just to strip the vector versions out, and let the compiler handle the Intel version itself, or just move to the libraries.

PPC is Big-Endian, and Intel are Little-Endian. This refers to the order bytes are stored in for mult-byte words. Converting over, or making so it will compile correctly for both is a task that it not hard, but could be time consuming if you use code which is endian dependent. This also effects the byte packaing order on textures for OpenGL and the such like, as well as binary files. If you're using the Apple APIs, then I think very much most of the work will be done for you, but if you're not, it's not hard, just painful.

So, once you've converted your App over, it should be very easy to keep it dual platform for the future. If you're writing a new app today, you'll write it with the above in mind, using Apple's vector APIs and making sure you don't rely on endian-ness. All the NEXT stuff that Apple bought from Jobs' old company has already gone through a 68000 to x86 conversion already, as NEXT straddled the two archictectures. I guess this is Jobs going back to his roots again.....

So, I guess we don't know how developers will keep both architectures going, but even with the above happening, I think we're still going to get longer lives on our macs that we would on a PC. It's certainly going to be interesting though....

Graeme



[www.nattress.com] - Plugins for FCP-X

help me here.. treat me like a computer dummy, (and you wont be far wrong)

is this a lot different from the move from OS9 to OSX?

surely there would be plans for some fairly gentle transition?

i read in one of those articles talk of Emulation, refering both to Mac/PC emulation, and also OSX/Classic emulation.

if so, im glad FCP has reached such a plateau
there wont be too much fancy tinkering with it during such a big transition.
or will there?
is this actualy a chance for them to re-write FCP from the ground - up, giving us a more robust media management system?

nick

"is this a lot different from the move from OS9 to OSX?"

I think it will be more like the move from 68000 to PowerPC. The actual OS needed to be rewriten and emulation was enabled to run non PowerPC apps on the PowerPC hardware.

The move from RISC (IBM) to CISC (Intel) is no minor feat. There was talk about some company who has technology for emulating MacOS X PowerPC apps on Windows or something of the like. Sounds like we will have an emulation (always means slower) package to run current apps on Mac OS (pc)

Who knows if or when FCP will be rewritten to use Cocoa technology. I would imagine they are already running a PC version of Final Cut Pro in the back roome just like they have Tiger 10.4.1 for PC running at the WWDC.

MY lack of understand the PC hardware extends a question to one area. The fact that Windows running on PC looks more "clunkly" as a desktop than does any MacOS; what causes that and how can we be sure it is the OS that makes the pretty pictures. We use essentially the same video cards as does the PC, so it must not be that.

And finally , I hope we can stay with HFS+ disk formatting and not have to put up with FAT 32 and FAT 64 issues, like the PC crowd does.

I think I will buy the very next itteration of the PowerPC that comes out and ride out the transition through 2007.

Graeme,

Thank you so much for your technical explanation.

Us small video businesses really need to think where things are headed as far as developer support. Now we may not be able to predict the future but it's the nature of business and purchasing decision to take that into account with a guess (educated or not) whether it's Apple's move to Intel (which I think is a good move) or my buying a G5 this weeks (which may not be a good move).

As my business grows I'd like to keep older machines in use with "future" current apps so they all have same functions/compatibility even if the speed differs greatly. The changeover may mean, as I've said before, shorter lifespan, higher software upgrade costs, etc. I HAVE TO factor that in for my purchase decisions. Simply put I have to deal with a potential increase in operating costs and decide how to handle purchase decisions. Job's WWDC Keynote is, at least in part, a sales pitch. His pitch was to developers. He has NOT pitched to me, the computer/software buyer/small business though, about to make a significant capital investment.

Graeme, your input as to what a developer faces is a great help. Does it clear things up? Nope, the longevity of my next purchase and my ROI are still in question BUT at least you presented me (us) with the issues that the developer faces. The developer's decision on supporting legacy PowerPC based code will directly affect the longevity of the computer I purchase.

Hers's another interesting look at what might have happened between Jobs and IBM.

[arstechnica.com]

craig, i think youre drastically overthinking your situation. if you buy a single G5 today, it will still be a viable professional production tool for at VERY LEAST 5 (and id guess 8 to 10) years.

the fears you mention are valid fears for anyone who buys ANY computer at any given time. there is always a possibility that the day after you buy any computer system there will be a better, faster and cheaper option available.

but just becasue something is available doesnt mean that you HAVE TO go get it.

lets think about it, were not going to see full blown functional commercialization of mac/intel boxes until at least 2007. thats the better part of two years from now. even if you decided on day 1 of the rollout that you had to get a new box and ALL new apps, youre looking at + or - $10k for one SD DV seat. and in the professional video business over a 2 year period that isnt really a significantly large amount of cash. in two years of pro video work if you cant cover $10k worth of new gear, you probably dont really NEED the newest technology in the first place.

id suggest that anyone considering the purchase of a SINGLE G5 - just go get it and get to work! the only folks who would need to be wary are places like schools where they have a fixed annual budgets and dont have the fiscal latitude to replace full rooms of gear at a time.

wayne granzin wrote:


> . . .
> the fears you mention are valid fears for anyone who buys ANY
> computer at any given time. there is always a possibility that
> the day after you buy any computer system there will be a
> better, faster and cheaper option available.
>

It's not "better faster cheaper" at issue. There's already better faster cheaper than my Dual 800. It's compatibility. I can run current versions FCP, SoundtrackPro, DVDSP, Photoshop, After Effects. Rendering is slow but that's why the new DualG5 would help. Otherwise everything is compatible. Heck I'd only need a new graphics card to run Motion on my Dual 800. Even earlier G4s can run most current apps. The issue is that PowerPC support will be dropped and I speculate, given developer costs/hassles, it'll be on the sooner side.

Even if one is buying a SINGLE G5, the replacements costs are normally gradual so that over time one may have a few seats ranging from newer to older computers but all capable of running the same software as people and projects move from room to room. At some point (my guess is 2008) pro apps comming out at that point will not run on PowerPC Macs. That will mean replacing ALL the seats or living with different versions and issues when an FCP 8 project from one room can't move into the older FCP 7 in another room.

None of this would be a big deal if the Intel Macs were available today. It would be a next purchase and over the next 2-3 years I'd retire the PowerPC Mac. We're looking at 1-2 years for the Intel Mac and by then hardware sales of PowerPC Macs will have dropped precipitously. The developers will have good reason to drop PowerPC support and Apple will bank on a big bump up in hardware sales (which will mean a big bump in our short term expenses).

I think the move is forward looking but now I'm worried about two performance issues:

1) Virii which addresses Intel hardware

2) 64-bit? Where is 64-bit?

- Loren
Today's FCP 4.5 keytip:
Set your custom layouts by pressing
Option>Windows>Arrange>Set Custom Layout.
Access your custom layouts 1 & 2 with Shift & Option-U!

The FCP HD KeyGuide?: your power placemat.
Now available at KeyGuide Central
www.neotrondesign.com

Here's my two cents:

It's all about return on investment or more bluntly: it's about making sure you make money and/or enjoy more freedom with every single business decision you make.


Would the speed increase of the G5/software purchase make more money for you or give you more time to do other things? I've found if I can expect a 25% increase in productivity/quality, I'll make the purchase. With FCP 1.0 you could expect to render every single dissolve. Some took three minutes to render. I did purchase one of the Matrox cards and breakout boxes to make things faster. It did. It's long gone now. But it did make me more money at the time.


Best,
Chet

If the intel inside machines are subject to the silliness that current windows machines owners have to deal with....viruses, trojans, worms or whatever...count me out. That is a money sucking/productivity hole I do not even want to go down...and probably should have been counted into any speed touting figures of any machine. Even 8.5 GHz on six processors will do you absolutely no good if the machine doesn't work.

Loren Miller wrote:

> 1) Virii which addresses Intel hardware

Chet wrote:

> If the intel inside machines are subject to the silliness that current windows machines owners have to deal with....viruses, trojans, worms or whatever...count me out.

Thank god viruses and such are written for Windows OS, not for Intel Hardware. Changing the chip does not bring the Win-virii over to OSX.



Post Edited (06-07-05 19:21)

wayne granzin wrote:

> if you buy a single G5 today, it will still be a viable
> professional production tool for at VERY LEAST 5 (and id guess
> 8 to 10) years.

I agree. My thoughts for the transition;
as a primary FCP4.5 editing machine I'm running dual 1.8ghz w/ 1.5gb ram at the moment and my work is 99% DV. So it works fine. But I'm getting more and more involved with HDV-stuff so I will want a faster machine soon, in 6 to 10 months.

Currently I also have an audio studio, which is running old G3 233mhz grandpa w/ ProToolsIII & OS8.6. The OS and PT3 was "locked" almost 4 years ago, "why upgrade when it works?" and it does it's job fine too (last time it crashed was mmmmh.. 3 years ago). And I'm probably going to use it at least 1-2 years from now, if the hardware wont fry in heavy use (it's mainly used for recording metal bands ;-)).

In early 2006 I'll get the new G5 anyway and hope it will be a great workhorse for years to come, like the G3 and the dual1.8 box. Then I may replace the grand old G3 ProTools machine with the dual1.8 and stick with it hopefully for many great years until it fries. The upcoming HDV/HD-G5box will be probably "locked" down at some point too, when it just works and makes money for me. But as Jobs said, there will be support and upgrades for many years for G5-based stuff so I'm not worried.
When Intel-based systems finally ship in 2007, I won't be the first one to shop, like before; I'll sit & work and wait for "the second gen" of the lineup. In 2008 it might be anyway a good time to upgrade the primary video-machine again.

All the older machines will still work with older OS and software, like the old G3 today still works for me and still makes money. In audio work, you won't need as much power as in video stuff, so there will be many many years until the G5 is really obsolete, like wayne said, maybe 10 years.

But Windows is written for the Intel line. Now MacOSX will be written for the Intel line.

I think moving vermin over will be an easy port. :-(

- Loren
Today's FCP 4.5 keytip:
Set your custom layouts by pressing
Option>Windows>Arrange>Set Custom Layout.
Access your custom layouts 1 & 2 with Shift & Option-U!

The FCP HD KeyGuide?: your power placemat.
Now available at KeyGuide Central
www.neotrondesign.com

<<But Windows is written for the Intel line. Now MacOSX will be written for the Intel line.

I think moving vermin over will be an easy port. :-(>>

You don't have anything to worry about. These vermin are written for the security lapses and sloppy coding in Windows, not x86 (aka Intel/AMD.) Maybe the ancient, convoluted architecture of the chip makes it a LITTLE bit easier, but the main problem is the operating system.

As far as concerns buying G5s, that's backwards. We already have all the software, and it will remain that way for sometime to come (at least five years for current apps and OS IMHO.) The real problem will be when to buy an Intel machine? Still, I think it will obvious when that time happens.

Remember, we'll be the last to transition with our pro hardware. This is a bottom-up transition. I actually think the smart money is to buy G5s if the prices drop due the news (fingers crossed.) These are great machines; 64-bit, PPC, with Altivec. They're going to be "the business" for quite some time.

This whole thing is just a slight inconvenience for the majority of Mac users. It's sad for the nerds like me who actually care about what makes the the computer tick, and who tend to get religious about silly tech design. It'll be a real pain for many developers. But for most users who just want things to work, everything is pretty much A-OK.

Apple is fighting for a better computer experience on many fronts. This is one area where they decided that their investment in effort just wasn't worth the return. Especially when they could spend their time more effectively elsewhere (e.g. when Sony works on Vegas, they don't have to simultaneously worry about things like future chip designs and potential yields, they just get to do it.) While the PowerPC may be better, the effort just isn't that worth it to Apple, and they're probably right, as much that may disappoint geeks like me.

Basically, I'm sure it will all be just fine. Especially for those who just want things to "just work."



- Justin Barham -