Quake3World

lol

I'm wondering the same thing. Though I expect there is a future for the G5, I think the slow phasing out of hardware support will be a problem for PPC owners. I expect, like 68k chips, that FAT binaries will be around to deal with the transition.

That's the plan.

I'll be getting my grubby hands on one of the boxes ASAP and porting my crap onto it.

i had my eye on this rumor for weeks, and laughed it off... to have it confirmed today... jesus... what a farce...

but apple aren't stupid, they know what they're doing... shame though, it's the end of an era, ppc and mac os x made a good combination, a very poweful one... if they do develop and release a g5 powerbook, i'll still buy one.

It's going to hurt their sales of Macs until the OSX86(tm) is released, for sure.

damn, I don't know what to say or think. Especially since I bought my powerbook end of april.

*reads some more*

You'll be able to run the OS and the apps for the next five years or so after Leopard comes out.

I think I'm returning my iMac (which was less than two weeks ago), as it's performance in anything I've done is not signifigantly faster than my 5 year old 1.3Ghz AMD box, and basically has no future. I had hoped that, you know, the OS, the OpenGL libraries, and Applications in general would be optimized for the G5 in the future.

Might be a stupid restocking fee, though. Grr.

"I'm returning my Mac as it's white and not black, like you illustrated at the keynote."

Really, I'm not worried about it at all. I got a dual 2Ghz G5 when they came out, a 1.33Ghz 15" PB and a 1.33Ghz 12" PB for the girlfriend.

We'll be able to run the apps until the machines are too slow to use, as always. I'll get a OSX86(tm) system when they come out because, as a developer, I need as much CPU power as I can get to compile with GCC.

I'll compiled a fat binary and, believe you me, will support it as long as Apple do.

Awaiting the video: http://homepage.mac.com/only_mortal/scr ... pation.jpg

i've never seen a video with Steve Jobs actually. After seeing that monkey Steve Ballmer jumping up and down at a MS conference I was traumatized for life.

They had to go and announce another OS, right after releasing Tiger. Now there's nothing special about owning Tiger, and Leopard is the new thing to "have"....bah!!! Marketing, I hate (love) it!

anantech has a coverstory with photos:

http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2438

lol, AT points out that AMD performs much better per watt on the 2nd page. Too bad, Jobs.

I'm sure they'll start with Intel, but will have some AMD option in the future. AMD has some pretty good 64-bit solutions, and Apple wont be able to ignore them for too long...

I'm not too sure about that. They probably signed a contract last year that they're exclusively tight together for the coming....10 years or something.

Does this mean Macs will be marred by that god aweful "Intel-Inside" sticker?

saturn wrote:lol, AT points out that AMD performs much better per watt on the 2nd page. Too bad, Jobs.

That's true if you're looking at the Pentium 4...which we're pretty sure they wont use. The Pentium M offers incredible power per watt, and with future multi-core processors using that core, it should be a great chip.

I'm just glad I haven't bought a Mac in the last year, and don't intend to for a long time.

Canis wrote:I'm sure they'll start with Intel, but will have some AMD option in the future. AMD has some pretty good 64-bit solutions, and Apple wont be able to ignore them for too long...

I disagree.
In addition to my point above, I have to question if the processor(s) will be an identical part to any "PC" processor. If it's not, then there's no reason that AMD could even produce a usable chip. And if they did, you'd need another line of motherboards and who knows what else.

Also, AMD could have the same trouble as IBM with producing large amounts of chips. Apple doesn't want to get shafted again by manufacturing problems. With Intel, they'll never have to worry about that. Intel could produce a hundred times more processors than Apple could ever sell.. (maybe an exageration, but you get my point)

One last thing:
OS X already runs on x86 hardware, and has since 10.0. Now that's interesting. I guess the rumors of an x86 build all these years were true. How about that...

It explains why they kept Darwin up to date for x86 the entire time.

a little solvent will take care of the Intel inside sticker.

These new Mactel boxes will allow you to install and run Windows too, if you're so inclined.

I am, since that means a Triple boot of Longhorn, Linux, and OS X. Although, with OS X in its current state, and another update coming before longhorn, it may end up being a dual boot.