« More Apple, Cops with Guns, Torture, and more... | Main | Studying for the Bar? »
It's True: Say Hello to *cough* Mactel
Apple did it. It announced it is ditching the PowerPC in favor of Intel chips. MacRumors has a good summary of the keynote highlights with lots of discussion in the comments, while Engadget did a blow-by-blow, and MacInTouch offers more detail. The most interesting part of all of this as far as I'm concerned is that Apple claims (at the end of the article) it can and will prevent people from running OS X on non-Apple hardware:
Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. “That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will,” he said. “We won't do anything to preclude that.”
However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. “We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac,” he said.
So how can they do that? If A dell uses the same processor as a Powerbook, why won't they run the same OS? Another problem: OS X on Intel looks pretty damned slow.
Technicalities aside, if Apple can do this, it could be kind of cool. I know I would love to be able to partition my drive on my iBook and have it dual boot into Windows. Not that I love running Windows, but there are occasions when it's just sort of the only option (e.g. law school finals and the bar exam if you're using the damnable Extegrity). If a Powerbook or iBook could dual-boot OS X and Windows (and Linux, of course), but a Dell laptop could not, which would you rather buy?
Apple talked a lot about how long it would take Mac developers to port their software to run on Intel chips (not long for some, forever for others), but I haven't heard anything about how long it will take Windows developers to port their software to OS X on Intel. Will this move make it such a transition easier, and if so, will Mac users soon see an explosion of new software options? I mean, it doesn't matter that much if you could just boot your Mac into Windows for the $100 or whatever it costs to buy a copy of that OS, but still, I'd rather work in OS X so it would be nice if rebooting wasn't necessary.
On the darkest side of all this is the argument that this whole shift from PowerPC to Intel is for Hollywood and so Apple can lock down digital media with the DRM built into Intel's new chips. I have little doubt this was a big factor in the decision, but I have a lot more doubt about the value of such a motivation on Apple's part. In a sense, Apple sold part of its soul to the RIAA with the DRM build into iTunes and the iTunes Music Store. Now it appears at least possible that Apple has sold the rest of its soul to Hollywood.
Listen to me talking about Apple's “soul.” It's a corporation. What I should probably say is that Apple may be selling out its users or betraying their best interests with these moves. I guess only time will tell whether the value of being able to download DRMed movies and music will outweigh the hassles and restrictions that come with all of that.
Posted June 7, 2005 06:45 AM | mac geek
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://mowabb.com/mt32/mt-tb.cgi/3850
It won't be too hard to keep OS X off of non-Apple machines. Apple has always maintained control over its hardware and that's what it'll do here. Apple-specific motherboards, device drivers, etc.
I'm sure this is a natural progression from Apple's switch to BSD. Darwin was based on FreeBSD and has been ported back to x86 platforms. The official Darwin 8.0/OS X 10.4.1 for x86 is available on Apple's website. Apple did what smart companies do, take advantage of the open source geeks who just want to hack code. Plus, they keep the UI proprietary and zealously defend it from copycats and they maintain the Apple identity.
Posted by: Steve at June 7, 2005 07:33 AM
I've double checked, and they're not moving to a PC platform, just one made by Intel. You're not going to buying dual boot machines, and you're certainly not going to be able to install OS X on a PC you already have.
Posted by: gr at June 7, 2005 09:30 AM
Yeah, keeping it off non-Apple machines won't be that hard at all. But given /. reporting that some dude cracked a new Sony DRM scheme only 72 hours after it was posted, you just know some geek out there is going to come up with some kludgy hack that'll make it happen nonetheless. I have to agree to that this is an outgrowth of the BSD move. I mean, jeez, they've been running builds of OS X on intel machines for the last five years...that's some serious advance planning. What amazes me is that they were able to keep it under wraps for so long. It seems clear now, given the lack of response to cNet breaking the story on Apple's part, that this was a planned leak. That kind of ticks me off as it is more manipulative than I'm used to from Apple. Still, I have to admit that while the transition will be a pain, it will be a temporary one. In the long run, I can't see the downside to this move. This is going to lead to a lot more innovation, something that Apple has always been strong at. It's already happening with the Rosetta technology. Reading the Universal Binary development doc, it's clear there won't be much of a hit for the ordinary everyday stuff that most of us run (WP, websurfing, iTunes, etc.) The switch will really only affect stuff that is really math intensive so Photoshop and Final Cut and probably some music editing stuff won't run too nice if its PPC code. But then again that's the stuff that is going to get rewritten first anyway. As long as they don't screw too much with the form factor (and no 'Intel Inside' logo to mess up my box please) now that a wealth of cheaper components will be available, keep high quality, and most importantly keep the OS experience the same, I'm good.
Posted by: Famous P. at June 7, 2005 09:38 AM
Apple has been planning this as a worst-case scenario for years because they've seen their business slip to the bottom of IBM's priorities. As far as business goes, this is a great move: there won't be proc shortages as there have been in the past, and innovation will continue because Apple will get to reap the benefits of the entire industry's innovation in procs.
I am sure Windows, too, will RUN on a Mac; the question is, of course, how well?
Finally, while I am sure the DRM stuff was certainly a PART of this move, I think the bigger part was much more straightforward—IBM doesn't care about Apple anymore and isn't interested in working too hard to develop more new stuff for them with MS and Sony pumping money into them for game consoles; meanwhile, Intel is HUGE and has competition (AMD, and Apple can leverage that). Now, Intel's "road map" that Jobs kept talking about? I am sure part of that is the DRM. But part of it is the development of faster, cooler, dual-core laptop procs. And that's what a lot of Mac users right now want—a faster, cooler laptop.
Posted by: kristine at June 7, 2005 09:54 AM
gr: what does it mean when you say "they're not moving to a PC platform"? What do you make of Shiller's comments (quoted above) that people will be able to run Windows on their Mac? No, Apple won't *sell* dual-boot machines, but it sounds like it won't take much effort to make your machine boot either OS as an after-market thing. Going the other way (running OS X on, say, a Dell) sounds like it will be harder.
FamousP: Yeah, if they put that "intel inside" sticker on iBooks and Powerbooks and whatever they're going to call their desktops -- fugghedaboutit. They're done.
Kristine: Why wouldn't Windows run on your Intel-based Mac just like it would run on an Intel-based Dell or IBM or ....? If they're using the same chips (and ok, maybe they won't be), what would the difference be?
Posted by: ambimb at June 7, 2005 10:07 AM
NB: I'm not an expert.
We know there will be some hardware changes required by OS X to keep the Apple's proprietary hardware. So I have a feeling that, to get Windows to run WELL, one might have to do some hacking, particularly if there's a BIOS involved.
But we just don't know. My guess is that, at least at the beginning, most people won't be able to just install Windows on a partition and have it work. They'll need to know something about the hardware architecture.
Which is not to say that there won't be a lot of people who will be happy to help less advanced users figure it out. I'm just not jumping up and down with exitement over being able to dual-boot out of the box.
Posted by: kristine at June 7, 2005 11:24 AM
No BIOS, cheeseburger!
Posted by: Famous P. at June 7, 2005 11:40 AM
I wondered about Apple keeping the hardware proprietary... that's a key (in my mind) to protecting the Apple brand, and it looks like they are going that way. Which does make me a little sad. I wanted to switch all my boxes... :) That said, it will be tough for them to retain a premium for the hardware when you can do a direct (I know, not quite direct--but it will be in most consumer's mind) comparison to other Intel based notebooks and desktops on the market. That could be a negative.
Then there is the "Osborne Effect" which concerns me as well. What will the impact on Apple sales for the next year be? I was *set* to buy a new Powerbook--now I'm not. Granted, there are people that won't wait, but I'm not going to pay a premium price for a PB now, knowing that in a year, Adobe will be concentrating more on making their software run faster on the Intel based Macs. Of course, Apple is not going to abandon PPC users. But having been through the transition from the 680x0 to the PPC, I know from experience that once the Intel Macs start shipping in volume, the PPC will be the also-ran platform.
Ambimb: Windows might not run well (or at all) on Apple hardware for several reasons. 1. Apple can/will develop a proprietary BIOS; 2. Apple includes a lot of custom hardware in their machines (such as the AltiVec) and Windows developers don't really have any incentive to write drivers for that hardware. Or even the ability, in some instances. Not that it can't be done... just no guarantee that it will be.
Posted by: Dave! at June 7, 2005 12:04 PM
Ok, I'm understanding now. So what's a BIOS? I mean, I've heard of it, and I know it's bad when you have a bad one or old one or inappropriate one, but what is it, actually? And are Mac users now going to have to learn stupid arcana like this to keep their machines happy and healthy?
Y'all didn't know I was so pc-stoopid, did you?
Posted by: ambimb at June 7, 2005 12:13 PM
You won't need to worry about your BIOS. Most people never need to. It's the code that runs off a chip right when you turn on your computer but before it boots. The BIOS runs a series of tests like checking RAM, looking for bootable devices, enabling the keyboard and testing ports.
It wasn't until some geeks clean-room reverse engineered the IBM PC BIOS that the wave of cheap IBM clones were able to be made.
Posted by: Steve at June 7, 2005 04:39 PM
Hey, Dave!, I just bought a PB. And I think there are a lot of people out there who need new machines NOW (Lordy knows I did) and need them to WORK. High-end users can go ahead and buy their G5 towers, too, because those will be fine for at least 2.5 years (till end of 2007) and software will still be developed and supported for them until that time and probably for a while after.
I think Apple will see a hit in sales, but I don't think it's going to be all that bad. The big hit will be in Powerbooks. Mac Minis are inexpensive enough that sme folks will still buy them, even though they're going to be the first to get upgraded. Students and teachers who need iBooks will still get those. Ditto on iMacs and eMacs. People who need towers will still get those (as discussed above). Powerbooks are the only machines that are really lagging in the marketplace already and that are expensive enough to warrant putting a purchase off till next summer.
Do I wish I could wait? Sure. But as Dave! said on my own blog, Rev A Apple hardware is usually awful. I'd rather wait until the kinks are worked out both with the hardware and the software. Hell, one reason I've kept my Pismo this long is because it can still boot into Classic! I'm always hesitant to give up the old stuff, "just in case."
Posted by: kristine at June 7, 2005 05:12 PM
Yeah, you don't need to worry about BIOS... until something goes wrong that is. BIOS, by the way, is an acronym for Basic Input-Output System. As Steve observes, it gets your system up and running and then boots the OS. It's an issue in the Mactel era as BIOS generally tend to be hardware dependent, as in Intel hardware dependent. Its one of the keys to Intel's 82% market share. Macs use Open Firmware, which is hardware independent and thus allows for greater flexibility in motherboard design/form factor/use of non-intel vendors/engineers/etc. as you don't have to design around a given chip set. Which is not to say that there isn't proprietary stuff on an Apple motherboard. There is, not a huge amount, but some very key bits are Apple designed. This is one of the ways they would probably try and stop somebody from running OS X on any old x86 box. It also is unclear at this point whether or not Apple will be ditching Open Firmware as a consequence of this switch, something that could stifle that innovative design we've come to know and love. But the fact that Apple has so adamantly stated that OS X will only run on a MAC Intel box gives one reason to hope.
Posted by: Famous P. at June 7, 2005 09:21 PM
Famous P: let's be clear, it's not Intel market share, it's X86 architecture market share. I haven't used an Intel processor in 6 years. I've been on AMD chips since I got rid of my Pentium 166 back in 2000. I currently have an AMD 64-bit chip and it's screamng fast. I wish I would have waited for the dual-core chip, though.
I wonder how much of this was Intel panicking at getting passed in marketshare by AMD. I'll bet Apple got a sweet deal.
Oh, and I've never had a BIOS problem. People just need to be careful of what they download and run. BIOS viruses are bitch I hear.
Geek out.
Posted by: Steve at June 7, 2005 10:34 PM
I think Kristine is right... there are good, solid reasons not to wait. In my particular case, I have more computers than I can use right now (work laptop, home PC, home Mac) so a PowerBook is a luxury item--in other words, I can wait. (Although I am picking up a used PB soon.)
But if you are a typical computer user, you will easily get 2-3 years out of any new PB you were to purchase now, which is just about right to upgrade to a new Intel based Mac when they are both available and stable! :)
Posted by: Dave! at June 8, 2005 10:34 AM
Spot on man; Though if Intel hadn't initially had the strangle hold on the x86, that architecture wouldn't be where it is. AMD, after all, was an Intel licensee before the revocation of that license forced them into the clean room. And K5 and K6 were meant as Intel, not an x86, killers. Still, I'm kinda surprised that AMD was passed over so. Seems like there could have been a lot of synergy in that relationship. The only thing I can think is that Intel means to use Apple to solidify its break from x86 in some dramatic fashion. But if that's the case, why then does the Apple Universal Binary PDF only reference IA-32 and not IA-64? Maybe because Apple's transition timeline only clearly extends to to prosumer stuff right now? I'm betting that there's going to be some a-bomb dropped with high end Macs in 2007. I don't know. Certainly is getting interesting again. And ditto the BIOS. As a life long Apple user, I've never had any problems, though I did have some nastiness with the firmware of my Superdrive when I bought my sunflower iMac. And with firewire during one of the 10.3 upgrades. But that only hit the external drive so I never had boot problems.
Dave! is right too. I wouldn't hold off though I would wait maybe a month or two for this news to soak in a bit. I think initially at least, as Kristine observes, it is going to have a negative impact on sales. With talk of a surplus of product going into the WWDC, there's going to be a lot more in a few months as high-end users vacillate about whether to buy. In a couple of months, I think there will be some really good deals floating around. You can check out prices at macprices.com.
P.S. Think Secret (thinksecret.com) has some Xbench scores up for PPC apps running under Rosetta. Doesn't look good.
Posted by: Famous P. at June 8, 2005 12:07 PM
P.P.S. Xlr8yourmac (xlr8yourmac.com/index.html) has some excellent bits on the Mactel developers platform (apparently it is using a Phoenix BIOS among other things), the limitations of Rosetta, and comments from Firmtek on the switch.
Posted by: Famous P. at June 8, 2005 01:05 PM
