Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Hardware, OS, WWDC, Steve Jobs
An Open Letter to Steve Jobs: Push Ahead with the Intel Move
James Duncan Davidson, one of the co-authors of Mac OS X Panther Hacks, posted an open letter to Steve Jobs on his blog today. The letter isn't the type of open letter that we are used to seeing; it isn't filled with complaints and requests for things being done differently. Instead, Davidson comes out praising Apple for being on the ball on the cross-development of OS X on both PPC and Intel chips over the years.
He anecdotally goes through a list of different developers who easily ported their code over to an Intel-based system in hours or days over the course of WWDC, rather than months. He then notes, "At this point, I think that the transition is going to be a non-issue. In fact, I think we're going to be ready for shipping Intel hardware as soon as you can have them ready. And of course, quite a bit of the credit for that goes to the Marklar team for making sure the system was ready for Intel and the Xcode team for giving us the tools to make our applications work. . . . In conclusion: Push onward. We'll be ready. Let's get on with it."
If the delay in the projected switchover to Intel-based Macs has nothing to do with contracts with IBM, inability to produce the hardware now, and other distribution related issues, but rather, simply a stalling tactic to give the developers time to transition, then perhaps if more voices like Davidson's come to the fore, Steve and Apple might decide to begin their innovation a little sooner than originally predicted.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Caius Durling said 11:55AM on 6-15-2005
I actually missed your rants over the weekend CK. I was quite scared when I realised that I was actually missing your continual posts.
Reply
Greg said 11:55AM on 6-15-2005
I guess there are plenty open issues for Apple to carefully examine before the production of Intel Macs can begin. Bios vs EFI (vs OpenFirmware), x86 vs x86-64 and also mind all the outdated, useless features (like MMX) that are kept for backward compatibility and taking precious die space on the silicons. Hope, they will drop out all that crap and will use the opportunity to start from a blank page.
Reply
fishpatrol said 11:55AM on 6-15-2005
Whether they push up the transition date or not, Apple's definitely going to need to do more PR/education about the switch. Everywhere you look people seem to be asking whether they should buy a new Mac now or wait for the Intel version. Does Apple think people won't wait that long, or just shrug and buy a new Mac anyway? I sure wouldn't rest on that hope. Let's just those remarked-upon new products Steve mentioned at the keynote come out soon enough and are impressive enough to keep consumer interest high. This is no time to dawdle.
Reply
j. said 11:55AM on 6-15-2005
At the bottom line of the transition, we have a question: how easy will it be for developers to recompile their entire codebase? If it is as it seems so far - so easy it's almost a non-issue - then we will see an amazingly easy transition, and hopefully, some exciting technologies come from the partnership. Otherwise, we might see a rough time for Apple.
With Jobs at the helm, we know that he and his team are looking at all the angles, trying very hard to make sure this goes well, and it's obviously been an option they've had open for a very long time, as seen by the ease developers have had so far in porting code. We hope that Rosetta is as it sounds, as this could only make things better.
The bottom line is that all we can do is wait and see. I for one have not discouraged anyone from buying an Apple, and will be buying one or two more before the end of the year. Apple's always been great at backwards compatibility, there's no reason to think that they'd be any different when it comes to cross-compatibility.
Reply
Sam said 11:55AM on 6-15-2005
I agree... let's push up the timetable. I realize the original timetable, as suggested by ArsTechnica, was probably driven by Intel's Pentium M-based lineup. But get at least one entry in the low, laptop, and high end lineup going to Intel in less than a year. Even if you have to use a 200 Watt power hungry Pentium 4 in the desktop and offer it alongside the existing iMac and PowerMac G5 lineup.
The choice to switch to EFI is a valid one, the 64-bit question is a big one, and I'm sure there are 1,000 others. But Apple would lose less money hiring a zillion contractors to solve these issues than waiting 2 years to get a high-end Intel machine. Time to spend some of that money they're sitting on and push this thing through fast.
Reply
The Jeremy said 11:55AM on 6-15-2005
If Microsoft Office 2004 is already with the x86 version, then the time is now to release the Pentium M based iBooks and PowerBooks. The "back to school" season is coming up. Slash prices on the G4 models and get the new ones on the market. I wonder how long it will take before Quark is available for x86 Macs...
Reply
iFelix said 11:55AM on 6-15-2005
If the software is not the issue (days rather than months for the transition of applications) what is the delay down to?
If OS X has always run on Intel chips (as said by Steve during the Keynote) then surely OS X is not the issue, what is the delay down to?
Intel are allegedly quite good at making chips and haven't being suffering the problems or delays a certain IBM have (nor are they producing lots of chips for certain consoles), it can't be a chips shortage, what is the delay down to?
Are they just trying to make us get all really use to the idea and then hype it up?
What is the delay down to?
Reply
Doogs said 11:55AM on 6-15-2005
I'd be shocked if Apple doesn't already have prototypes up and running of a Pentium-M-based Powerbook, a dual-P4 PowerMac, etc.
When they are announced, I'm sure there will be little to no warning (i.e. Mac Mini), and they will just suddenly be available. And I'm certain it will be sooner than we think. I mean, they've been compiling OS X to run on Intels for five years. What else have they been up to?
My guess? The first Intel-based Macs arrive in August. More follow through November for the holiday season.
Reply
suri said 11:56PM on 7-13-2005
its good.
Reply
Alfredo Metere said 6:07AM on 7-22-2005
I think that the most huge mistake in apple's story is to switch to intel.
Intel CPUs are power hungry and toy-like powerful.
I'd better prefer Apple passing to itanium2 based systems
or just Take 250 GFLOPS IBM Cell CPU and stick it on newer Apples.
X86 Macs ... the beginning of the end.
Steve, GO FOR CELL CPUS!
Reply
Alfredo Metere said 6:35AM on 7-26-2005
I think that the most huge mistake in apple's story is to switch to intel.
Intel CPUs are power hungry and toy-like powerful.
I'd better prefer Apple passing to itanium2 based systems
or just Take 250 GFLOPS IBM Cell CPU and stick it on newer Apples.
X86 Macs ... the beginning of the end.
Steve, GO FOR CELL CPUS!
Reply