Tuesday, June 14, 2005
Analysis: Here's what Apple's big switch to Intel means
Apple dropped a bombshell last week on its hardware and software developers - not to mention millions of the computer maker's faithful users - when it announced that starting next year its Macintosh computers will be powered by the same chips used in Windows PCs.
CEO Steve Jobs told the audience at Apple's annual Worldwide Developer's Conference that future Macs will use as-yet-unnamed chips from Intel instead of PowerPC chips manufactured by IBM and Motorola spinoff Freescale Semiconductor.
The news has left many Mac users as well as iPod fans contemplating a move to a similarly stylish Apple computer - confused.
To help consumers make sense of Apple's decision, Gannett News Service talked with Jason Snell, editorial director of Macworld magazine and a longtime Mac industry observer.
Here are Snell's answers to some of the most frequently asked questions about Apple's decision to put Intel inside.
Question: What's the advantage of Apple replacing PowerPC chips with Intel processors such as the Pentium?
Answer: "Clearly Apple thinks the future is much more promising with Intel chips than with PowerPC architecture," Snell says. Apple hasn't been able to deliver 3-gigahertz Power Macs, which Apple CEO Jobs promised about two years ago, or a Mac laptop built around the G5, the most powerful PowerPC processor. G5 processors run too hot and draw too much power to work well in portable computers.
"That's a big red flag," Snell says. "This isn't the kind of dramatic change the company would make if they didn't feel they had to make it. They're looking at where chip technology is headed from 2007 through 2015, and Intel has a lot more invested in research and development. PowerPC chips are a relatively minor part of IBM's business. They're clearly focusing on high-end servers and game consoles."
Q: IBM plans to use PowerPC processors or its next-generation Cell processor in upcoming game consoles from Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft. Why couldn't Apple use these chips in its Macs?
A: The chips IBM is designing for game consoles are very different than the chips required for a general-purpose computer, Snell says. "Game consoles aren't computers. Console chips (such as the Cell) are designed to run games really well. Chips for PCs are something different. A good example is the kind of chips you need in a laptop. They need to be really efficient in terms of how they use energy and how much heat they give off." Snell says energy efficiency and heat dissipation don't matter as much in game consoles because they don't need to be as compact as a 1-inch-thin Mac PowerBook or operate on batteries.
Q: If I own a PowerPC Mac now, will I need to upgrade to an Intel-powered Mac in the future?
A: You probably won't have to consider buying a Mac with an Intel processor for the next several years because Apple is making a gradual transition to Intel, Snell says. "Apple is not going to stop making some PowerPC systems until late 2007. They say the next version of OS X (called Leopard) won't be out until around then, and that version will run on PowerPC systems." Whether subsequent OS X releases will run on PowerPC isn't clear yet, but Snell says Apple will provide "OS X mileposts where you can see the obsolescence of your computer coming, but if you have a relatively new Mac, you don't need to worry."
Q: But what if I have an older Mac and am thinking of upgrading? Or what if I want to buy my first Mac? Should I wait?
A: Snell says Apple's transition strategy should benefit consumers. Because Tiger, the current OS X release, and Leopard, the next release, will run on PowerPC chips, you should be able to enjoy a full Mac experience for the next few years. He adds that there might be pitfalls if you wait to buy one of the first Intel-powered Macs. "The first Intel systems are probably going to be a little weird," he says, explaining that when Apple transitioned from Motorola 68000-series chips to PowerPCs in the mid-1990s, software actually ran slower on the new processors because it hadn't been optimized.
Q: Will programs designed for current Macs work on upcoming Macs with Intel chips?
A: They should, Snell says. Apple has given developers a year to update their programs to run on Intel processors. If they've followed Apple's development guides, software companies should be able to update programs in a few hours or a few days. Snell says the processor isn't as important as the operating system when it comes to getting programs to run correctly. "Before OS X, there was NextStep, which ran on both Intel and Motorola processors. NextStep and now OS X include layers of abstraction so developers don't have to tell the chip to do this or that."
Apple also has created two technologies to help smooth the transition for software developers. Rosetta converts PowerPC code to Intel code on the fly (with a small speed penalty), and "dual binaries" will allow the optimized version of a program to run on either Intel or PowerPC chips. Snell says dual binaries make sense for programs such as Photoshop, which use one set of instructions, called AltiVec, for optimized performance on PowerPC and another set, called MMX, on Pentium processors.
Q: With Macs running on Intel chips, will I be able to run Windows on my Mac, too?
A: This question has stirred up a lot of confusion, Snell says. It probably will be possible to boot a Mac with an Intel processor using either OS X or Windows, but he expects more elegant solutions will emerge. He says he wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft updates its Virtual PC software to run Windows applications at close to full speed within OS X. "You wouldn't want to shut down the machine to reboot into Windows when you might be able to use Windows apps at full speed." Snell says he can envision Microsoft selling a "Super Office" package that includes the Mac version of Office, Virtual PC and Microsoft programs, such as the Visio diagramming software, that only run on Windows.
