Ilgaz Ocal wrote:
On 2005-06-12 19:27:06 +0300, Tim Cutts <timc@chiark.greenend.org.uk> said:In article <3gvoodFeggvnU5@individual.net>, Ilgaz Ocal <Ilgaz@spamcop.net> wrote:On 2005-06-11 01:04:34 +0300, Tim Cutts <timc@chiark.greenend.org.uk> said:In article <3gr18rFcobl4U1@individual.net>, Ilgaz Ocal <Ilgaz@spamcop.net> wrote:We all miss something, this type of transition from one CPU family to other has NEVER happened in IT history.[ snipped my counterexamples ]HiI don't snip anything. The computers you mention are either pro workstations or servers.And that means they don't count? You said (see above) "NEVER happened in IT history" which just is not true. Even if you'd said "Never happened in Apple history" you'd have been wrong too. The IBM PC is just about the only line of computers which *hasn't* changed CPU architecture much, and even then it has to a certain extent; the 386 and later are very different from what went before.Its different. Servers does not upgrade every year, they have generally custom, in house written software which are traditionally written portable. . Professional workstation runs some very pricey software with support contracts too, nobody would dare to say "oh that cpu sucked anyway, lets move on" in professional software market. I am telling about ordinary home machines which are used for amateur video editing, gaming. Sadly some will lack Altivec etc since simply resources won'T be available to support 2 entirely different kind of CPUs.
That would be surprising, since major players are already supporting both the Mac and the PC markets. They already have algorithms adapted to both Altivec and the Pentium (and sometimes the AMD) vector extensions. Apple's move to Intel will actually simplify their world.
Apple home computer is changing CPU family.For the second time. The point of all my counter examples is that it shouldn't matter. If code is well written, and the OS programmin interface stays the same (as it will) all you need to do, for the majority of code, is recompile it on the new machine and it will all just work. Fear not! TimI understand what you mean and I am a bit pessimistic I guess.
No doubt Apple has convince themselves that their hardware sales will not be at risk in this move. And no doubt that will be achieved by doing something very arbitrary and proprietary... think of it as "hardware copy protection". ;-) Maybe Intel has finally found a taker for its "unique processor ID" feature, and each copy of OSX will be licensed to a specific processor. Time will tell if they can get away with this artificial incompatibility, or if people will figure out how to make Apple have to compete on a level hardware playing field... -michael 8-voice music synthesizer using NadaNet networking! Home page: http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/