Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intel Ports Developer Tools to Mac OS X

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the dogs-and-cats-living-together dept.

turnitover writes "According to eWEEK, "Intel Corp. will port its software developer tools to Mac OS X and will ship its first beta later this year, the chip maker told developers on Tuesday at its first-ever session on Mac OS X at the Intel Developer Forum in San Francisco." This, as Apple is working on its first Intel-based Macs, due sometime in 2006. Will the promise of the same feature set and the same tools (for Windows, Mac and Linux) mean the future of cross-platform development is here?"

11 of 259 comments (clear)

  1. the promise? by mov_eax_eax · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Will the promise of the same feature set and the same tools (for Windows, Mac and Linux) mean the future of cross-platform development is here?
    the present of cross plataform is already here, it's called GCC.

    1. Re:the promise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This here is a great example of why there's no need to be so mean to people. FLAGGR comes off looking like a huge jerk simply because he wanted to be mean to mov_eax_eax. Even if mov_eax_eax had been wrong, correcting him politely would have been much nicer than the venomous reply that was actually posted.

      No one is going to think you're cool just because you're mean to someone. You'll get more respect if you reply in a nicer fashion; and who knows, maybe the politeness will come back to you in the future.

    2. Re:the promise? by Guy+Harris · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Just because Apple support GCC (and will continue doing so unless ICC for OSX suddenly becomes free or they start charging for XCode) doesn't mean they shouldn't compile their entire O/S with ICC to take advantage of the speed.

      If, however, the article is correct when it says that "The Intel tools ... will not provide a compiler for Objective C", that means that they couldn't compile the entire OS with ICC.

  2. ho hum? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So it doesn't compile ObjC-Cocoa apps.... And Apple is abandoning the Classic environment available on the x86 platform...

    And there's no IOKit....

    So what's this going to compile? Core Foundation apps and Carbon apps without any vector code?

    Ummmm. Well, it's a start.

  3. Crossplatform? by klingens · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes it's crossplatform alright if the compiler in question works for x86, x86 and you guessed it: x86.

    What's making the porting hard in case of different software ecologies is not the compiler, cause gcc is really crossplatform and ubiquitous for years now. It's all those OS and otherwise libraries (gtk vs. cocoa vs. GDI) which do it. And I don't see Intel selling any crossplatform versions of those

  4. The future is sort of here... by wealthychef · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Will the promise of the same feature set and the same tools (for Windows, Mac and Linux) mean the future of cross-platform development is here?"

    Yes, if you define "cross platform" as being restricted to Windows, Mac and Linux. Also, this does not include PPC, which is another platform that Mac runs on. I am not optimistic that this is any sort of harbinger of great things, but it will be very nice to have three platforms that share the *same* hardware architecture, roughtly speaking.

    --
    Currently hooked on AMP
  5. Cross-Platform Development by linguae · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Will the promise of the same feature set and the same tools (for Windows, Mac and Linux) mean the future of cross-platform development is here?"

    Because all mainstream personal computers will use the same x86 processor in the next two years, certain programmers who deal with assembly issues will be relieved. However, we still have Carbon/Cocoa, Win32, and GTK/QT/POSIX to deal with.

    And we currently have cross-platform tools. It's called the GNU toolkit (autoconf, gcc, gdb, gmake, and a few other handy applications that are used on just about every platform availiable).

  6. Re:WTF????? by A.K.A_Magnet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple is switching from gcc to intel's compiler? What the hell is going on here, all of a sudden apple is becomeing less OSS friendly...

    IBM compilers (xl* compilers) were proprietary software and still were ported to OS X too, and AFAIK had better performances than gcc on PPC970 (even though Apple did help on optimizing gcc on G4/G5), just like ICC is better than gcc on x86 for most purposes (check benchmarks for yourselves).

    No I'm not an Apple fanboy (please! I don't have any Apples nor plan to buy any) and I don't care much about Intel either. I'm more a free software guy trying to run only free software as far as I can for different reasons... And still I don't see how Apple could be less OSS friendly just because some other company (may it be Intel or not) releases closed softwares.

    Where does it say Apple will stop using gcc themselves (and distributing it with OSX)? gcc runs on plenty of hardware and os'es ... ICC only runs on x86. OS X had its native "made by processor designers' home company(tm)" compiler when it was (and still is) on PowerPC, now that Apple's going to Intel, it just seems logical that Intel does this. At least to show a little support to Apple.

    However, I'm not saying Apple is supporting "open source" software. I'd say that they're using FOSS smartly for now, but I don't see them in the OSS camp.

    Lastly, ICC having better results than gcc gives the gcc team a great challenge and gcc4 is already a big improvement. ICC on OSX gives more choices to OSX developpers who would need good optimization for intensive arithmetic operations (where ICC shines). Anyway, gcc has strictly nothing to fear from icc, they're aimed at totally different "markets", and gcc is free, so what's to fear? :)

  7. Re:A Big Deal by Darth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now that all the major options for desktop systems run on intel, they want to see os competition. Erosion of Microsoft's desktop monopoly by Apple no longer equates to loss of market share for intel. Now they'd like to see Microsoft's influence reduced and be the only 800 lb. gorilla in the x86 world.

    I dont think they are focused on IBM powered consoles as much as they are focused on being the last monopoly standing in the desktop market....or at least making sure that if AMD takes them down in court, nobody else is standing either.

    --
    Darth --
    Nil Mortifi, Sine Lucre
  8. Re:Foul! by oscast · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >"When Apple tried to "prove" that the G5 was "better" than the Intel, it purposely didn't use the Intel tools, but used the GNU tools instead."

    Yes, that was to level the playing field... not to show which one was faster... because Apple could have used their own compiler and got faster results too... but the goal was to see which was faster... and then the G5 was indeed faster.

    >"Their desire to use the Intel tools now demonstrates that they didn't use the Intel tools in their G5/Intel benchmarks because they knew Intel tools outperform GNU for Intel."

    You're right but then, they never said otherwise. You, like so many others equated the use of GNU rather than Intels compiler as a means of skewing the results when it was about creating a level playing field.

  9. Re:A Big Deal by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Intel has been trying for years to advance the PC, but they keep getting held back by the mass-market nature of the platform. People would rather have older technology very cheaply than better technology that costs more.

    With Apple, they've finally got a company that doesn't care about all that legacy PC crap. Apple will build the x86 machines that Intel has always wanted.

    That's why Intel considers this to be such a big deal.