Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I think it is still safe to invest in the current powermac line.

Its a tried construction and the lifespan of these machines is more up to how much ram you can squeeze in to it than raw processor speed. With 8 GB of possible RAM you wont run out in a long time.

It will also be a lot longer than two years before any of the double G5 processor configurations becomes too slow.

My 2 cents

Link to comment

From what can be read in the press release for Apple so far.

(i.e. all my comments are made as a curious and concerned onlooker, not as a rep of any of these companies)

Apple have said they will support PPC based Macs for "along time to come", that developers will be armed with the tools, via Xcode, to support both processor types in a way that is seamless to the end user.

Considering Tiger runs on original G3 iMacs or any Mac with Built-in USB, "along time to come" would seem like a far while.

So it seems there is no cut off date as yet when Apple will stop supporting both the current PPC chips and the Intel chiped Mac's in the future will use. One of the hidden features of Mac OS X is that it relatively processor neutral, especially relative to the Old Mac OS. This was stated as being the reason a transition to Intel processors is possible. If the move is being billed as trivial, then by the same logic it's just as trivial to always keep the PPC support in future versions of the OS.

Although as design professional we all know the difference between "trivial" in marketing speak and reality.

I know I'm also curious to hear if this news changes NNA's plans for Vectorworks, but given that the WWDC lasts until Friday, and developer test hardware is months off as well, add time to digest, I wouldn't expect any announcement for a few months yet.

Link to comment

NNA is not going to comment on this. Their policy is not to. However, Steve Jobs has characterized this as a minor transition. According to his keynote, OSX has been compiled to run on the Intel chip for the last 5 years. The rumor of Marklar was true.

He also made it clear that this is less of a transition than what was required to go from OS9 to OSX.

I would not worry about it. Jobs has spent more time thinking about this than you or I ever will. It is in the best interest of Apple to make this work.

We are always faced with the reality of our machines being made obsolete by newer and faster hardware. This change will be no different. Remember that Apple has told us for years that Intel was the enemy. So it is natural for you and I to feel uneasy about this change.

Link to comment

Thats what I like to read. A company (NNA) that responds with the concerns of its users. We're better knowing that all of the improvements will still be worked on with PPC machines. I can make my next purchase with a seigh of relief. Thanks

PS Try to find a better software company than this. (not many around) you guys keep up the good work. We look forward to a long relationship with NNA

Link to comment

Personally I think its great (and I've just bought a new G5!). What excites me is that I should be able to buy a Mac and run OSX and Windows on the same box. Right now I have to run 2 platforms and duplicate software (as few developers offer dual platform software on the same license - well done Auto-des-sys and Ashlar - who do). Some 3D software we use only runs on Windows yet we have a big investment in Mac systems as well - hence 2 platforms! Like I said, I'll be first in line for the G6 with 2 hard drives, one with OSX.5 the other with Longhorn.

Link to comment

NNA is committed to the Mac platform and to supporting the new Intel machines that Apple will be introducing.

Right now, however, we can't offer any real details since Apple is still in the very early stages of providing information to developers. We have staff out at WWDC investigating what this will entail and Apple has already offered their support to us as they have on a number of recent projects that we've undertaken. I don't think users buying G5 machines now have much to fear since Apple and its developers have a large installed base of those machines that they'll need to support during some period of overlap. I know NNA (then Diehl Graphsoft) continued to support 68K machines for many years after the release of the PowerPC-based machines.

We'll continue to keep you updated with our plans and progress in this area, but I wouldn't expect a lot of news until the beginning of next year. Right now we're still focusing on adding the improvements you've been requesting and will be integrating the new processor into our plans in the coming months.

Link to comment

quote:

Originally posted by Kevin:

Sean;

Thank you for the quick and thorough response. Very refreshing in light of the normal policy of "no comment".

Also, congratulations on your promotion.

Here, Here.

It does make everything seem very positive.

So business as usual sounds like the order of the day.

Link to comment

I really don't think Apples announcement is a big issue for the day to day user as we upgrade our software and hardware over time anyway.

You know you'll change in time anyway but the news that in the future, all be it a long way off, the lovely shiny new kit you brought today won't work with the latest in umpteen years time still gets people unduely worried.

By the time the changes come into real effect you'll be lusting after the latest off the production line anyway, with software equally taking advantage of the new power and features each hardware innovation manufacturers produce.

It's the software folks who I think will feel they need to be clear and happy about how they progress and it appears Nemetschek from Sean Flaherty 's posting at least are on top of the game here already. No worries.

In the past Apple wanting to go its own way, in many respects, cost it sales as well as made them. For example, remember how the graphic card connection to the motherboard worked in older Macs, expensive scsi only hard drives, ADB keyboards and mice, printer connections etc.

Look what options an Apple user has now in comparison.

They'll always do things their way, but hopefully it will be to put their little twist of innovation, expertise and style to existing and new emerging technology, some of it even created by them.

After all they didn't invent the GUI but did a great job of improving it and bringing it to the marketplace for us all to use.

I'm sure they won't close the door to IBM or Motorola and I bet there's even one held wide open to AMD.

By the time you need to change equipment you'll reach the stage where you'll want to anyway.

I suppose it's timing both hardware and software versions changes together to ensure maximum gain with minimum financial penalty.

Alan

[ 06-09-2005, 09:55 AM: Message edited by: alanmac ]

Link to comment

And when did Apple do that!! You mean those multi-colored stickers on my filing cabinet are outdated?

From one who purchased his first Mac in February, 1984, and has never looked back. The serial number was a whole bunch of zeros and three digits. The interesting thing is that nearly every Mac I've purchased (about two dozen, or so, over the years) has been priced within $500 of the first one. . . which came with a single 128kb floppy drive, a 9" monochrome screen, and a whole three applications. Does anyone remember Multiplan? Now those were the days . . . but these are better days.

I have little worry that Apple will continue to wage the business war and be a significant competitor. If not, we'll each make fiscal and creative judgments about who else might better deliver our needs.

[ 06-10-2005, 12:23 AM: Message edited by: Travis ]

Link to comment

I don't see what the big deal is. As Travis points out, those early Macs had Motorola processors and IBM was its archenemy.

Then Macs had IBM processors and Intel was its foe.

The cycle is simply continuing.

I drive a German car. That would not have been the case in 1943.

Link to comment

quote:

Originally posted by Kevin:

I don't see what the big deal is. As Travis points out, those early Macs had Motorola processors and IBM was its archenemy.

Then Macs had IBM processors and Intel was its foe.

The cycle is simply continuing.

That may be true for hardware; the question is, will Nemetschek continue to update and upgrade the Power-PC-based version of VW (assuming they haven't killed future development of the Power-PC version already)? What about Maxon (Cinema 4d), Maxwell Render, Informatix (Piranesi), etc.? What about Photoshop? Does anyone truly think it makes business sense for Nemetschek or any other software company to continue to pour money, time, and other resources into a shoring up a technological and economic that's already a dead end?

No doubt, companies will continue to "support" the current version and squash a few minor bugs, but does anyone really think there'll be a G4/G5 version of VW 12 that's functionally equivalent to the Intel versions?

[ 06-12-2005, 01:32 PM: Message edited by: fsung ]

Link to comment

quote:

Originally posted by Sean Flaherty:

[QB] I don't think users buying G5 machines now have much to fear since Apple and its developers have a large installed base of those machines that they'll need to support during some period of overlap. I know NNA (then Diehl Graphsoft) continued to support 68K machines for many years after the release of the PowerPC-based machines.

No doubt Apple and its developers will continue to "support" PowerPC-based systems for a period of time going forward; the real question is, will it be anything more than life support? More to the point, how long will, NNA continue to improve and upgrade VW/RW/Industry Series for PowerPC-based hardware? Will there be a PowerPC version of VW 12.whatever eighteen months from now that is functionally equivalent to the the *tel version?

[ 06-12-2005, 01:45 PM: Message edited by: fsung ]

Link to comment

quote:

Originally posted by fsung:

No doubt, companies will continue to "support" the current version and squash a few minor bugs, but does anyone really think there'll be a G4/G5 version of VW 12 that's functionally equivalent to the Intel versions?

The way my understanding of it is the programs will be written for one "platform" and "recomplied" for PPC with the tools provided, and as an example shown at the recent WWDC, easily and quickly. To me this does not mean twice the programming effort, merely ensuring the translation process works correctly.

If you think about it we open Mac created Vectorworks files on Windows machines and vice versa so it must be a similiar exercise in the programming world.

According to some users there is already some performance, functionality difference between the two platforms now. This move would be a step towards that not being so would it not?

Also Nemetschek lets you change platforms at upgrade time so no doubt when it comes to upgrade your Apple in a year or two's time you can change it then.

Apple and software companies supported older machines and OS for quite some time after the change overs they instigated, so why would they not do this again given that this change it appears has a far lesser impact than the changes made before.

Alan

Link to comment

quote:

Originally posted by alanmac:

[QB]
quote:

Originally posted by fsung:

No doubt, companies will continue to "support" the current version and squash a few minor bugs, but does anyone really think there'll be a G4/G5 version of VW 12 that's functionally equivalent to the Intel versions?

The way my understanding of it is the programs will be written for one "platform" and "recomplied" for PPC with the tools provided, and as an example shown at the recent WWDC, easily and quickly. To me this does not mean twice the programming effort, merely ensuring the translation process works correctly.

So the demo went smoothly: big deal. Does anyone really believe that Apple didn't spend hours tweaking the demo code to ensure that it compiled without a hitch?

Pardon my cynicism, but as a former programmer who lived through the switch from the 680x0 platform to the PowerPC and from System 9 to OS X and heard the same BS about how quickly and easily programs could be recompiled using Apple's tools, I'll believe it when I see it happen with real-world code. (And don't get me started on the problems of code optimization.)

Link to comment

mclaugh

I'll make no comment on your opinion as to the ease at which the transition Apple claim it to be, as you have a greater knowledge than me of any programming matters.

Would you not say that despite the problems that happened during the various transitions from 680x0 to Power PC and from System 9 to OSX that these changes has advanced Apple and its operating systems?

Where do you think Apple would be now if it had remained with using 680x0 processors or an operating system based around and up to OS9?

[ 06-13-2005, 05:56 PM: Message edited by: alanmac ]

Link to comment

Geez... I have to comment here one more time.

You know OS 10 or "Red" as it was called was going to be the next rev of System 9. It was actually a really big deal until it became several years late to market after Scully got the boot. It was a protected kernel OS that was written to take advantage of the PPC risc family for speed. By the time Jobs came back it didn't have a chance. Job's NextStep was then purchased and reworked into OSX and "Red" was tossed out. We'll never know about how great System 10 would have been. Funny all of Scully's big innovations Newton, PPC, and Red are going to be "tears in the rain" as far as Apple goes. I guess maybe it wasn't such a great idea for Scully to fire Jobs after all.

Anyway the point is these transitions are painful and if you are in a mission critical environment it makes sense not to be the first to depend on it.

Strangely enough I'm really happy with where we ended up so far, especially based on Apple's management history. This company has shot itself in the foot so many time they have no legs left below the knees.

I'm NOT going to try to move to Windows again. At the risk of being called an Apple Moony, somehow I think it's going to all work out ok. It's always been the worst, most stupid acting company with a long proven track record of the best, most incredible products.

"and those who can not do it will be destroyed on the lathe of heaven"

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...