InorganicMatter Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 http://www.techradar.com/news/computing/ap...98033?artc_pg=3 Sorry folks, it's the end. First we have Finder in Cocoa, now huge reductions in disk space usage: Mail is down to 91MB in size, whereas before it was 287MB. QuickTime is now 8MB instead of 29MB, TextEdit has been reduced from 22MB to 2MB and the Mac OS X Utility folder has dropped from 468MB to 111.6MB. Similar size reductions are reported in other OS X applications too. This can only mean one thing: legacy PPC stuff is gone. given the massive reduction in size of OS X and its applications, what could possibly be coming out if it's not the PPC code? I know we have a lot of people here who pirate the developer builds, anyone here want to confirm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konami® Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 perhaps is the developer builds wrote only for intel processors, that does not mean that the final product will be only intel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Envying Posted January 5, 2009 Share Posted January 5, 2009 I am not sure if it is true of PPC code deletion until we see the final release of SL. I heard Apple is zipping all the language resources in a different place. I am not sure if Apple is doing the same thing for different code base. I am guessing the OS can make a judgment on what arch type it will be installed then extract the right code based program and install. The other thing is the basis of OS, ex. frameworks, libs, and so on. I am not sure if all these stuff have been slimmed to one arch type as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RepomanUK Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 It's always nice to see hope at work again but I don't think so. From minute one SL was about refinements and not new features. Refinement No1? No PPC. Moving language files around does not equal >50% reductions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
og-phantom Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 http://www.techradar.com/news/computing/ap...98033?artc_pg=3 Sorry folks, it's the end. First we have Finder in Cocoa, now huge reductions in disk space usage: This can only mean one thing: legacy PPC stuff is gone. I know we have a lot of people here who pirate the developer builds, anyone here want to confirm? I think the Apple page on SL states it is Intel only. If I am not mistaken... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RepomanUK Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 And a good thing too. PPC may be unsupported from now on, but current software should keep the old PPC boxes alive for another few years. Long enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InorganicMatter Posted January 6, 2009 Author Share Posted January 6, 2009 I think the Apple page on SL states it is Intel only. If I am not mistaken... There were still people decrying the obvious because many apps still had PPC code intact. With the apparent removal of this code, it seems more certain than ever that 10.6 will be Intel only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmdshft Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 It's only natural, there's no way that they could do the Grand Central technology on PPC, they were old processors which were made before Apple ever came up with the idea, plus there's all kinds of advantages to using Intel over PPC, and this is Apple's way of getting the most bang for your buck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synaesthesia Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 Solving the mystery of Snow Leopard's shrinking apps It's compression of the localization strings. Probably lack of PPC as well though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
netkas Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 10a222 $file loginwindow loginwindow: Mach-O universal binary with 3 architectures loginwindow (for architecture x86_64): Mach-O 64-bit executable x86_64 loginwindow (for architecture i386): Mach-O executable i386 loginwindow (for architecture ppc7400): Mach-O executable ppc $pwd /System/Library/CoreServices/loginwindow.app/Contents/MacOS so small apps size is due to localizations strings compression and filesystem compression used in snow leo (compression algo is as good as bzip2) so please, stop this rumors till we see release Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inimicus Posted January 6, 2009 Share Posted January 6, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lostgame Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 10a222 $file loginwindow loginwindow: Mach-O universal binary with 3 architectures loginwindow (for architecture x86_64): Mach-O 64-bit executable x86_64 loginwindow (for architecture i386): Mach-O executable i386 loginwindow (for architecture ppc7400): Mach-O executable ppc $pwd /System/Library/CoreServices/loginwindow.app/Contents/MacOS so small apps size is due to localizations strings compression and filesystem compression used in snow leo (compression algo is as good as bzip2) so please, stop this rumors till we see release Just because the executable is present doesn't mean it's functional. I would honestly be shocked if 10.6 supported PPC - it'd be an awful development move on Apple's part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
netkas Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Just because the executable is present doesn't mean it's functional. I would honestly be shocked if 10.6 supported PPC - it'd be an awful development move on Apple's part. Just because the executable is present doesn't mean it's not functional. I would honestly be shocked if 10.6 unsupported PPC - it'd be an awful development move on Apple's part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Nonny Moose Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Just because the executable is present doesn't mean it's functional. I would honestly be shocked if 10.6 supported PPC - it'd be an awful development move on Apple's part. Well, if previous history taught us anything, Apple is phasing out the G4 just like they did the G3 (slowly and painfully). So IF PPC is supported, it will only be on the G5 processor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lostgame Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Well, if previous history taught us anything, Apple is phasing out the G4 just like they did the G3 (slowly and painfully). So IF PPC is supported, it will only be on the G5 processor. The G5 processor was never even really supported in the first place - several major applications didn't even function with it. It would be a waste of development time to ensure that Snow Leopard would run on both architectures - I'd hate to have to run xslimmer on everything again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottishduck Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Keeping PPC support in 10.6 is pointless. Apple have a chance to force the market into going 64-bit, so keeping legacy support is a no-no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synaesthesia Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 G5 is 64bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InorganicMatter Posted January 12, 2009 Author Share Posted January 12, 2009 G5 is garbage. Fixed that for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottishduck Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 G5 is 64bit. PPC64 != x86_64 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synaesthesia Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 I know, but it's still 64-bit. You can program a 64-bit program in XCode that compiles to X86_64 and PPC64. Anyway, they jury's still out on this one, it might be intel only, it might not. Maybe it is better that they optimize performance more for Intel, maybe it's good to still include support for Powermac G5's - think of the folks who bought G5 quads in 2006! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InorganicMatter Posted January 13, 2009 Author Share Posted January 13, 2009 think of the folks who bought G5 quads in 2006! Yeah, I know, all half-dozen of them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Nonny Moose Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 PPC64 != x86_64 And for the longest time PPC > x86 c wut i did thar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackoverfull Posted January 20, 2009 Share Posted January 20, 2009 meanwhile, i can now confirm that the only ppc support that is left in snow leopard 10a222 is the one that rosetta needs. The bootloader is gone, the bootloader specs too, many apps don't have ppc code. That means that it's very,very,very,very unlikely that ppc support will be added again in a future build. And rosetta will be optional (but it isn't yet). And, just in case you're interested, the finder isn't going to be rewritten anytime soon, no matter what whe keep reading on the web about a "cocoa finder". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InorganicMatter Posted January 21, 2009 Author Share Posted January 21, 2009 And for the longest time PPC > x86 c wut i did thar? Sigh...here we go again. At the highest theoretical level, yes, in the same way Vista is TECHNICALLY superior to XP. For all practical purposes, PPC almost always performed slower than an equivalent Intel/AMD CPU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lostgame Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Just because the executable is present doesn't mean it's not functional. I would honestly be shocked if 10.6 unsupported PPC - it'd be an awful development move on Apple's part. I can't wait until Snow Leopard's release when you eat those words. For all practical purposes, PPC almost always performed slower than an equivalent Intel/AMD CPU. This. Also, when it comes down to it, what's the point in wasting the development time? They've gone through literally an entire generation of intel Macs - snow Leopard is not for the rare PPC holdout, snow leopard is about hardcore performance, the guys with the 8-core Mac Pros with 32 GB are Snow Leopard's concern. Snow Leopard is meant to take advantage of modern technology and improve stability and small issues - keeping PPC in literally doubles the workload, which would be an awful development move. It's incredibly naïve to say otherwise. Keeping PPC for Snow Leopard is like the antithesis of the idea behind the OS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts