Transcoding tool to the rescue
Programs written will require various amounts of effort -- from a few days of tweaking to months of rewriting -- depending on the tools used to create them.
Some software that's insulated from the underlying chips, such as widgets and Java applications, will work without modification, Jobs said.
Going forward, Mac developers will be able to create universal binaries of their programs that will run on both types of chips.
In the meantime, Apple has a transcoding tool called Rosetta that will allow programs written for PowerPC chips to run on Intel-based machines. "Every application is not going to be universal from Day 1," Jobs told the audience.
A Microsoft executive said the company would create universal binaries with future versions of Office for the Mac. And Adobe Systems CEO Bruce Chizen told developers they can be "absolutely sure" his company would support Apple's transition.
"The only question I have, Steve, is: what took you so long?" Chizen said.
Also on Monday, Jobs said the next version of OS X, called Leopard, will be released in late 2006 or early 2007. That is the same time frame as Microsoft's next Windows update, dubbed Longhorn, he noted. Microsoft has said Longhorn will be released by late 2006.
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.
Talkback
AAAAAARGHH!!!!
NOOOOOO!!!!!!
It's the end of the world!!!
Does this mean my next Mac will have a stupid 'Intel Inside' sticker on it?
Ah well, as long as they don't stick any Celeron's in there, I'll survive.
to be honest, apple should ditch the mac and just stick to selling their OS as an alternative to windows. It would be better for them in the long run.
Who the hell needs or wants a mac nowadays and what can they do that an intel machine cant?
In reply to myles 'the programmer's previous post': Who the hell needs or wants a mac nowadays and what can they do that an intel machine cant?
This must be the most stupid comment ever. Millions want a Mac, and haven't you heard that they actually work better than anything out there. Being a programmer, have you ever used X Code?
I can only gather from your ignorance, that you haven't ever really used a Mac!
If Apple are going to code OSX to work with their own Intel-based Macs, what's to stop everyone buying just the software and sticking it on their existing Intel PCs?
Apple say that all their machines will be Intel-based by the end of 2007, but I think it far more likely that OSX will be Microsoft-based by then and Apple will be just another notch on (Wild) Bill's acquisition handle.
There are presently four (count 'em : four) FABs in the world that can make 90nm or 65nm processors with 300 million transistors.
Intel owns 3 of them!!!
IBM hitched its wagon to the Games console manufacturers... so this was bount to happen if Apple is to keep the faithfull happy
I'm holding my Intel Stock!!
You know, I've never really been interested in Mac's until recently, always been a Windows (looks at self in disgust) boy, then a Linux boy but when I saw OS X and particularly Aqua I must admit, I was impressed, so if Apple were to release OS X for Intel, not just Intel Mac's I'd certainly buy, I just love building my own machine, from scratch, thanks very much. Oh and I agree with *Anonymous* I sure hope they don't chuck an Intel Inside sticker on it, or a celeron for that matter.