This is Exciting! I think....

Been a while since I've written... lots going on here:

Both kids have had birthdays and been sick, the wife has been to Canada and back, the troupe has left one gig and started another.... all in all, it's been a busy month or so.

But this... the news that Apple is switching the Mac from PowerPC to Intel x86 chips has finally roused me from my writing slumber.

When I first heard the rumors of this last Friday, I was, frankly, scared out of my wits. It was as if the world was upside down.

Then I realized that it might not be such a bad thing. For all it's intellectual and manufacturing might, IBM hasn't been able to crack the 3GHz barrier with the G5 and the possiblity of a G5 PowerBook (which, like many other folks, I was waiting for) was looking more and more like pure fantasy.

And, let's face it, Apple has done this before. Twice, in fact: the transition from 68000 to PowerPC and then the transition from "Classic" Mac OS to Mac OS X.

Both were bumpy, but I never lost the ability to do work during either transition, and the other side of the process was SO much better than what I'd had before.... I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt simply based on those two experiences.

To top it off, a careful reading of today's announcement reveals that this transition might be even smoother than the two noted above:

• "Fat Binaries" are back! - During the transition from 68000 to PowerPC CPUs, Mac applications had to be created with executables for both processors inside. (Hence the term "Fat Binary.") I've repressed most of the memories of how this was done, but I seem to remember it was a pain in the tukus. This time however, Xcode (Apple's excellent and FREE development environment) will automatically create Fat Binaries containing both x86 and PowerPC executables. This should let us easily create software that's native to both architectures and ship it in a single application. This means that owners of older PowerPC-based Macs will be able to run almost any new software that comes out DURING and AFTER the transition.
  
• Rosetta - Basically, this sounds like a PowerPC "Classic" environment. Supposedly, it will let you run your PowerPC-based apps on x86-based hardware. This means that owners of x86-based Macs should be able to run just about any old software that came out before the transition.
  

I suppose the biggest question I have to work out right now is, "Can I recommend today's Macs to my customers?" This isn't a small consideration: I've got 4 major clients that are Mac-based and two of them are just at the point of upgrading several of their systems. So, do I have them buy new Macs or wait (for a year!) till the x86-based Macs start showing up?

Fortunately, the process of simply writing out the question has revealed the answer: Of course I can recommend today's Macs.

Switching to Windows is simply not an option. (When you get right down to the bottom of the Mac vs Window argument, it really isn't the hardware that's the issue, it's the OS itself.)

Waiting a year is simply not an option.

So, Mac it is.

But, aren't today's Macs a dead end? Absolutely not. It will be two full years before the transition to x86 CPUs is complete and a Mac purchased today should provide a viable system for at least that long. (My server is a 4 year old iBook. The computer I type this on is a 2 year old PowerBook and most of the machines my clients are looking to replace are more than 5 years old. [Those original iMacs sure have some staying power!])

Macs simply have a longer usable lifespan than an equivalent Windows machine. That fact, combined with the fact that we'll have x86+PowerPC Fat Binaries around for at least 2 years after the end of the CPU transition (scheduled for the end of 2007) means that a Mac purchased today is going to be viable until at least the end of 2009. Not too bad a life span for a machine with a dead-end CPU.

Of course, there are questions still to be answered:

• What will happen with OS 9 Classic mode? (Yes, there are still users that must run OS 9 software. I don't run in to them that often these days, but you can bet they'll be making a stink over the next year or so.)
  
• Will Intel go out of its way to create Altivec-compatible instructions in a next-gen x86 chip? If not, how much of a performance hit will older multimedia apps take under Rosetta?
  
• What new form will Virtual PC take? At the very least, it should be much faster once x86 CPU emulation is no longer necessary.
  

So, that's it then. The future is coming and it looks a lot like the past: nothing but unexpected change and oppourtunity.

Sounds good to me!

Diz