On Sun, 5 Jun 2005 18:36:52 +0100 Ten runlevelten@gmail.com wrote:
If this is really true, it'll be interesting to see how this is going to affect existing Mac users (who will have probably invested lots of money in software already)
Interesting.. will Apple support their back-catalogue if there is an architecture change?
I bet the 'classic' fiasco still smarts for Apple users who thought Apple had finally learned from their own history not to alienate their userbase with complete changes.
why not an Apple port to Xen, Apples contributed to konqueror why not hardware support via Xen and Linux, you could then sell cool stuff on a daughter card with a PowerPC CPU for backwards compatibility.
I like to imagine the speedy rise of people saying "Apple does, Linux Does, Why you cant you run windows on Xen?".
It's tempting to see x86 migration in the pipeline, but x86 isn't the only technology Intel have.
I am sure also sorts of things are possible.
If they address the issues with the underlying platform, which might be less difficult now than with classic Mac OS, then hey - a lot of apps can be ported or recompiled - and if they're commissioning the design of the chip to their own spec even the altivec/etc stuff can be supported, or at least recompilable on their new hardware platform.
I think recompiling software in disorganised release management teams, this could on occasion be hard.
To be honest, though, what killer task is happening in a PPC-specific way that {can't be done/isn't being done/hasn't got source available} on other architectures?
If they want to support instruction set x or have a richer register setup than my plebeian x86 products, or have something better in the pipeline, we'll find out - but if Apple Computer has a req/spec they need, then Intel will probably meet it to win a contract.
Definitely might make an Intel's diversify strategy seem apparent.
There's always the fact that Intel can probably bring the most incredible manufacturing might to the table and produce cheap horsepower, in millions, manufactured, quality guaranteed and delivered on time.
I don't know, AMD are winning market share. Suddenly Intel must plan with Unix in the form of Linux head on, a hardware neutral platform opening up the market for innovation.
That could be the decisive factor - the Germans had lots of superior military hardware during ww2, but they didn't bank on trying to out-manufacture Detroit :)
Lets not be down hearted Alugs full of engineers, but Germans are lucky and have two words for engineer and the later is held with such respect that everyone on this list probably would like to be known as such.
Maybe they just need someone who can make enough chips for 'em.
Well who knows why has UNIX lasted? because its central goal was portability. After all it was written in C. An operating system first!
and existing PC users assuming that Apple opens up and allows anybody to run Mac OX for x86 processors.
I'd buy "a" commercial desktop environment for x86 UNIX designed by Apple Computer (by which I mean an OS X type affair - and crazily, I know plenty who would). Wouldn't want to pay for the underlying OS though.
Would you, I'd run Linux :) Going to play with 2.6.12 soon.
Apple are pretty old-school as a computer company aren't they - from an era when even the best of computer companies had fairly closed hardware policies.
I don't know, Apples a Company with a work force it wants to keep, and a brand that has a high marketing value.
They were pretty happy to stick with that, even before the law of the jungle galvanised it for them (let's face it, the Microsoft bogeyman's under the PPC bed, just waiting for them to *dare* getting out of it).
Interesting point.
<ramble>
</ramble>
Ten
-- There are 10 types of people in this world -those who understand binary, and those who don't.
Will the world change with Internet Go?
Owen Synge
Beginners could start at yahoo games, but some other alternatives are forming, he he.