[kerryd]

Go with the Intel. The PowerPC is yesterday's technology and you'd be making a mistake buying it. PowerPC software will run under Rosetta without a hitch and although it is slower due to the emulation its not that much slower - it runs my apps at about the same speed as my Powerbook which was 3 years old and I was more than happy with its performance. However, once the software is Universal Binary - that is able to run natively on the Intel Mac it runs amazingly fast. Programs start in an instant and respond crisply. Tons of software has already been made UB but alas a few of the big guys are dragging their feet - such as Microsoft but they will be there.
Don't buy yesterday's technology when the new stuff is here.

[rossde]

i'd wait if you want to use adobe software. the next upgrade of their software will not be backwards compatable, so good bye to all the g3 - g4 and g5s used in the printing and publishing industries. do a google for -"Frequently Asked Questions about Adobe's Support for Intel-based Macs". maybe not a problem till next year, but still a problem

[d00d]

That is complete FUD and completely wrong.
What about the following do you not understand?
"Adobe plans to support both Intel and PowerPC processors in the next versions of its creative applications for Mac OS."
"Moving our Macintosh software development to Apple's Xcode, so we can deliver Universal applications that run natively on both the new Intel-based Mac computers and on legacy PowerPC-based Mac systems."
Adobe is planning on supporting both fully.

[macnuke]

heh.. just read your post.
and thank you Derik for coughing up the links.
considering the currently installed customer base, Adobe would not want to just shoot that many customers and say, "well, to run the current versions, you gotta go buy a new computer also."
eventually, yes, but for now, plan on support for at least as long as Apple is supporting PPC. which AppleCare still hasn't hit the 3 year timeframe. when 100% of PPC systems are no longer covered, then you will "may" see it's death, but considering how many firms prefer to use computers till it just won't run anymore, that may be longer than you think with Adobe.

[rossde]

may i suggest you go here
http://www.adobe.com...=en_us&term=MACINTELSUPPORT

download the Pdf "faq about adobes support for intel based mac computers", it's result 1 right at the top. you can't miss it, read page 2 then get back to me

[macnuke]

OK.. I read it.
Instead, we are focused on delivering the next versions of these products as Universal applications that will run natively on the new Intel-based Mac computers.
now get back to me with which part of Universal you don't understand.

[DarthMac]

In reply to:

---

now get back to me with which part of Universal you don't understand.

---

Obviously the whole part.

[Martian]

There is also a broader and more generic misunderstanding here than simply the special case of misunderstanding Universal applications. It relates to the concepts of obsolete vs obsolescent. When the first Intel-only version of Photoshop is finally released some years from now, the preceding universal version(s) will remain fully functionalthus possibly obsolescent but still not obsolete.

[DarthMac]

Exactly. I continued to use CyberStudio for years after Adobe took the software over, ported it to windows and renamed it GoLive.

[d00d]

Universal Binary Definition
Read it and get back to me.

[VeggieBeefcake]

Let me just get this straight.
Will Apple be supporting PPC, x86, and x86-64 simultaneously? The G5 is PPC and 64-bit (the latter seems to be often neglected), the Core Duo is x86 but 32 bit, and the Core Duo 2 (which Apple is surely to adopt) will be x86-64bit. Obviously the Duo 2 will also run 32-bit applications natively, but will Apple be supporting all of these platforms equally (specifically where the 64-bit functionality of the G5 and the upcoming Core Duo 2 are concerned)? Perhaps this isn't a "big deal," but is a subject of curiosity for me.
As I understand it, Apple made it easier for developers (or so I've read) to code 32-bit and 64-bit binaries, but that applied to the G5. Will the same be true of the upcoming Core Duo 2?

[d00d]

I don't see any reason they couldn't. It comes down to how useful the 64 bit version really is (in most cases, it's not).