Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

Intel Mac upgrades - has anyone made the jump?


Dan South

Recommended Posts

It seems as though most software companies are promising compatibility but haven't delivered upgrades yet.

 

Any word on how NI's Kontakt-style streaming is going to work on these new Macs? I have a few East West libraries that rely heavily on this technology.

The Black Knight always triumphs!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 33
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Originally posted by Dan South:

It seems as though most software companies are promising compatibility but haven't delivered upgrades yet.

Dan, this can help you find out which apps are compatible:

 

Macintosh Products Guide | Universal Applications

 

I imagine the transition will be much closer to complete after MacWorld and The NAMM Show in January.

 

Best,

 

Geoff

My Blue Someday appears on Apple Music | Spotify | YouTube | Amazon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other issue is the core duo aspect. Some companies have not addressed tweaking code for multi-processing. DAWs are not the only programs that need to address core duos. On the Microsoft Windows platform some VSTis exhibit problems when more than one instance is loaded and those instances are on separate processors or cores. From statements I have read by some developers it is a problem associated with using global variables. I don't expect Macs to be any different.

 

Robert

This post edited for speling.

My Sweetwater Gear Exchange Page

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW - I got a 1.83GHz Core Duo MacBook Pro from GC during their last "List" sale ($999 - couldn't pass). The power is stunning. I'm running more stuff in realtime in Logic than I could have run frozen on my 1GHz G4 PowerBook. Well, maybe that's a little bit of hyperbole, but not much.
A ROMpler is just a polyphonic turntable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by kanker, apparently:

Actually, Macs have been dual processor aware for so long, that I don't think that it is a problem at all on the Mac side.

So have PC's, but not all developers are dual processor aware. :D

 

My biggest disapointment is Imposcar. The programmer acknowledged a problem with noise when more than one instance is running on a dual core, but after almost a year has not fixed the issue. Some VSTi developers are releasing updates for core duo and some are choosing to stick their head in the sand and hope the duo's go away. Either way, the duo has moved multi-processing machines from power-users to common users. I need to get the latest upgrade to Ableton Live. Like some other companies they are addressing core duo in a upgrade rather than a maintenance release.

 

Robert

This post edited for speling.

My Sweetwater Gear Exchange Page

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by soundscape:

Originally posted by kanker, apparently:

BTW - I got a 1.83GHz Core Duo MacBook Pro from GC during their last "List" sale ($999 - couldn't pass).

$999?!!??! No typo?
Nope. I nearly shit myself when I saw that price on the List.
A ROMpler is just a polyphonic turntable.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Dave Bryce:

I have a black Mac Book, but it's my mobile work computer - no music apps on it.

 

dB

That reminds me...

 

Will the PER's editor run on the intel Macs, or are there plans to update that software?

The Black Knight always triumphs!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by RABid:

Originally posted by kanker, apparently:

Actually, Macs have been dual processor aware for so long, that I don't think that it is a problem at all on the Mac side.

So have PC's, but not all developers are dual processor aware. :D

 

My biggest disapointment is Imposcar. The programmer acknowledged a problem with noise when more than one instance is running on a dual core, but after almost a year has not fixed the issue. Some VSTi developers are releasing updates for core duo and some are choosing to stick their head in the sand and hope the duo's go away. Either way, the duo has moved multi-processing machines from power-users to common users. I need to get the latest upgrade to Ableton Live. Like some other companies they are addressing core duo in a upgrade rather than a maintenance release.

 

Robert

Most code developed to run natively on OSX is multithreaded already. Thus, it will automatically get scheduled to run in an optimal manner on the Intel Core Duos.

 

On the other hand, the real issue that remains unresolved is the regression from 64-bit ppc to 32-bit x86 code. This is supposed to be resolved when Apple releases Leopard (OSX 10.5) sometime during the first quarter of next year--if they release it on time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by kanker, apparently:

Originally posted by dp2:

if they release it on time.

Dude - it's Apple. We're not talking Vista here. ;)
In all fairness, Apple doesn't make all of its deadlines too. For example, the first version of OSX shipped a few months late. How do I know this? Well, I was working at IBM at the time, and I worked with some of the developers to help build and test some of the software that got bundled with the first Macs that shipped with OSX.

 

Nevertheless, Jaguar shipped on time, and Panther and Tiger shipped early (I believe).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question. Can I dual boot OSX and WinXP on an intel Mac(seperate hd's of course)? I've thought about getting a Mac to play with but don't want to drown ;)

 

I've got a PC running Linux I use as a secondary machine and I assume it's not that far to Unix.

 

It never hurts to learn something new :)

 

Darkon the Incandescent

http://www.billheins.com/

 

 

 

Hail Vibrania!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vista is a huge overhaul of Windows with tons of new technologies and a whole new basic API (WinFX vs. Win32.) It is a certainty that Leopard will incremental by comparison, and therefore there is less scope for the sort of delays that have occurred with Vista.

 

Not that 'on time' is necessarily a good thing with software, as it frequency means 'buggy.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by soundscape:

Vista is a huge overhaul of Windows with tons of new technologies and a whole new basic API (WinFX vs. Win32.) It is a certainty that Leopard will incremental by comparison, and therefore there is less scope for the sort of delays that have occurred with Vista.

 

Not that 'on time' is necessarily a good thing with software, as it frequency means 'buggy.'

Yeah, and besides... Vista is only a couple weeks behind schedule.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by steadyb:

Originally posted by soundscape:

It is a certainty that Leopard will incremental...

Were Tiger's 200+ new features incremental???
Compared to Vista as against XP, yes. It's still much the same platform--Cocoa and Carbon API's, Quartz/Quartz Extreme, etc. (In the case of Quartz Extreme [the '3D' OpenGL windows compositing that enables features such as Expose's scaling], of course, Vista is playing 'catch-up'.)

 

I mean, put it this way--Vista adds 'Spotlight' (10.4) and 'Quartz Extreme' (10.2) among many other things.

 

As for Tiger vs. Panther, it was a worthwhile upgrade and I look forward to the new features of Leopard, hopefully more information than given at the WWDC keynote will be public within a few months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Darkon the Incandescent:

Question. Can I dual boot OSX and WinXP on an intel Mac(seperate hd's of course)? I've thought about getting a Mac to play with but don't want to drown ;)

 

I've got a PC running Linux I use as a secondary machine and I assume it's not that far to Unix.

 

It never hurts to learn something new :)

 

Darkon the Incandescent

I don't think that you need separate hard drives, but the guys at an Apple Store should be able to clarify this for you.

 

LINUX and OSX are both varieties of UNIX. At the command line, there's not that much difference. That said, most Mac OSX users will never have to open up a terminal window and run UNIX commands. (To do so can actually be a little bit risky.) The GUI lets you do everything that you need to do unless you're writing computer programs from scratch the old fashioned way or unless you're installing a web server like Tomcat. If you're an IT geek (like me), have at it; otherwise, you'll never need to worry about typing a UNIX command on a Mac OSX system.

The Black Knight always triumphs!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yo Darkon,

 

If you're not dependent on stuff like external USB 2.0 devices, you might want to give Parallels a look. Instead of dual-booting, run Windoze in a window at reasonably fast speeds. It's not good for graphics intensive stuff like games because they don't have the drivers for graphics cards yet, but for lots of stuff, it's plenty fast.

 

You can download a trial from Parallels.com and see if it works for you, and they have a support forum on their site.

"I'm so crazy, I don't know this is impossible! Hoo hoo!" - Daffy Duck

 

"The good news is that once you start piano you never have to worry about getting laid again. More time to practice!" - MOI

Link to comment
Share on other sites

P.S. Yeah, the terminal stuff in OS X is pretty much UNIX. In fact, for Tiger, Apple switched the default shell to bash so it would be an easier switch for Linux users (though it's not like y'all couldn't change it yourself...). OS X is based on variants of BSD. To me, it all looks like UNIX. :D

"I'm so crazy, I don't know this is impossible! Hoo hoo!" - Daffy Duck

 

"The good news is that once you start piano you never have to worry about getting laid again. More time to practice!" - MOI

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Darkon the Incandescent:

Question. Can I dual boot OSX and WinXP on an intel Mac(seperate hd's of course)? I've thought about getting a Mac to play with but don't want to drown ;)

 

I've got a PC running Linux I use as a secondary machine and I assume it's not that far to Unix.

 

It never hurts to learn something new :)

 

Darkon the Incandescent

Yes, you can dual boot OSX and WinXP on different HDs too. For that matter, you could also add Linux and BSD to the mix. :)

 

By the way, both Linux and OSX are Unix-like OSs. Technically, the key difference between Unix-like OSs and Unix OSs (like Solaris, HP-UX, etc) is that the company behind the OS paid lots of $$$ to the Open Group (http://www.opengroup.org/certification/unix-home.html) to certify :rolleyes: its Unix-like environment. Stated another way, both OSX and Linux are--for all intents and purposes--Unix, :cool: but they're not UNIX branded. :eek: Certified Unix-like OSs also carry the UNIX brand. Make sense? :D:thu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Dan South:

It seems as though most software companies are promising compatibility but haven't delivered upgrades yet.

One of the key reason why many companies continue to promise--haven't delivered--upgrades is that they're waiting for Leopard. Tiger on ppc is 64-bit code; tiger on x86 is 32-bit code. Apple's decision to go with Intel hardware was pretty disruptive--both for consumers and developers alike. When Apple make public their decision to go with Intel, they created lots of extra work (most of it to rewrite the ppc specific code to run on x86).

 

Additionally, when Apple released the x86 Tiger code, they released a 32-bit OS promising to deliver a 64-bit OS later. For most companies, it's easier and more profitable to retarget their 64-bit ppc code for 64-bit x68. Later, Apple changed their minds about releasing 64-bit x86 Tiger code, and decided to release another full (or major) version of OSX (aka Leopard) which will be 64-bit. In any case, it would have costed most companies roughly several hundred thousand to several million--multiplied by 3 (1 for 32-bit Tiger, 1 for 64-bit Tiger [which was scrapped], and 1 for 64-bit Leopard). It doesn't take a rocket-scientist to figure out that this is prohibitively expensive for most companies. Additionally, any development resources (ie coders), that are dedicated to develop code for 32-bit Tiger, would not be available to develop for 64-bit Leopard.

 

Speaking from experience, it can take anywhere from 3 months to a year to port an application--depending upon its complexity--from one platform to another. I suspect that some ADC (Apple Developer Connection) Premium members already have--or soon will have--a copy of Leopard. Either when or soon after Leopard is released, I suspect several of those vendors will also release their upgrades, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...