What they are doing is making *Macs* with Intel processors - not the
> same thing as making OS X work on exisiting Intel boxes. I think the
> emulator that they refer to will only be used on these boxes. Now, it
> is possible that the code will get leaked or hacked or something like
> that - but from what I understand, legally, Mac OS X will still only
> work on Macs, regardless of what processor they use.
The emulator is only for applications that won't have been ported at
release time. To ensure some kind of compatibility.
Right now there are announcements for MSOffice for MacIntel etc. See
below the few things I got from OSX developer lists to get an idea of
what all this is really about.
> I'm acually not sure how I feel about this move. I always thought
> that Apple used the G series processors from IBM due to their
> performance advantage over Intel/AMD....
I think they do, except that the G series was supposed to deliver more
that what actually was and IBM does not seem to pay much attention to
power consumption issues that affect laptop a lot (the reason why G5
are not in powerbook yet: you don't want to have 100W of heat on your
lap...)
> With the Microsoft Xbox 360 running on a G5, and the next-gen of
> Apples running on Intel, the world is on its head.
You don't need to put the Xbox on your lap :) Besides, latest Macs use
G5 (mini, iMac, PowerMac etc).
It will be a good 2-3 years before the complete shift to x86 will be
over, which is approximately a machine's life time anyway. Apple
already sells $999 a MacIntel machine with OSX running, only for
developers...
Here is the info I got (with comments):
> and the whole thing is summarized here :
>
> http://news.com.com/Apple+shakes+hands+with+Intel/2009-1006_3
> -5733937.html?tag=nefd.lede
Begin forwarded message:
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: 2005
> 年6月7日 11:47:34:JST
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [honyaku_osx] Mactel, anyone
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> From a few dev lists:
>
>> I'm looking at an IRC feed from the Keynote.
>> Steve Jobs is delivering the whole thing on a Pentium 4 box running OS
>> X!
>> Apparently they've had X running on Intel since day one.
>> Software ports are stated to be little more than a simple recompile
>> away.
>> Mathematica 5 was ported to OS X on Intel last week. Supposedly only
>> took
>> two hours to complete.
>> Select and Premier developers will be given special rental terms on
>> 3.6GHz
>> Pentiums in PowerMac enclosures.
>> Microsoft Office for Intel OS X is being readied for release.
>> Bloody Hell...
>
>> Intel's press release:
>> <http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20050606corp.htm>
>
>> And apple's press release:
>> http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html
>
>>> Is this mean that someone (or even Apple) will port Mac Os X to
>>> ordinary home built Pcs?
>> No.
>> <http://news.com.com/Apple+throws+the+switch,+aligns+with+Intel/2100
>> -7341_3-5733756.html>
>> "After Jobs' presentation, 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."
>
> About developping for the MacIntel:
>
>>>> Discussion of rumours such as this is not appropriate for this list.
>>> How about discussion of the implications of having to build apps with
>>> fat binaries?
>>>
>> For most Cocoa development, I suspect that there will be very little
>> to say. Cocoa and its ancestors have run on several platforms in the
>> past, and there has typically -- as suggested in the keynote -- been
>> little more to do than simply check the appropriate box.
>>
>> For those concerned about endian issues, there are already functions
>> both to discover the endian-ness of the host, and to do appropriate
>> byte-swapping -- see, for example, NSHostByteOrder,
>> NSSwapBigDoubleToHost. etc.:
>>
>>
>> <http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Cocoa/Reference/Foundation/
>> ObjC_classic/Functions/FoundationFunctions.html>
>>
>> Beyond that, there should be little for developers working at the
>> level of abstraction of the Cocoa APIs to be concerned about...
>
> Also, and it is something I had totally forgotten when I sent my
> earlier posts, the OSX base, NeXT was originally based on x86 and all
> the libraries necessary for development in OSX also have GNU equivalent
> that run on x86.
>
> As was hinted a link I sent yesterday I think, Apple had OSX running on
> x86 machines from the beginning...
>
> I suppose it is good news in a way: cheaper CPUs, less heat (that's the
> reason why G5 is not yet on laptops), hopefully bring cheaper Apple
> machines :)
JC Helary
