Steven P. Jobs, chief executive of Apple, at the company’s Worldwide Developers Conference on Monday. (Credit: Kimberly White/Reuters)(Updated with more information at 1:45 p.m. EDT)
(Corrected OpenCL definition at 10:05 p.m. EDT)
At the outset of his presentation at the opening session of Apple’s Worldwide Developers Conference, Steve Jobs showed a slide of a stool with three legs to describe the company’s businesses: Macintosh, music and the iPhone.
The company is making another bet on parallelism, and the implications may be more profound than anyone yet realizes.
In describing the next version of the Mac OS X operating system, dubbed Snow Leopard, Mr. Jobs said Apple would focus principally on technology for the next generation of the industry’s increasingly parallel computer processors.
Today the personal computer industry is going through a wrenching change in trying to find a way to keep up with the speed increases that were the hallmark of the PC business until about five years ago. At that point, companies like Intel, I.B.M. and A.M.D. had simply lived off their continual ability to increase the clock speeds of their microprocessors. But the industry hit a wall as chips reached the melting point.
As a consequence, the industry shifted gears and began making lower-power processors that added multiple C.P.U.’s. The idea was to gain speed by breaking up problems into multiple pieces and computing the parts simultaneously.
The problem is that, having headed down that path, the industry is now admitting that it doesn’t know how to program the new parallel chips efficiently when the number of cores goes above a handful.
On Monday, Mr. Jobs asserted that Apple was coming to the rescue.
“We’ve added over a thousand features to Mac OS X in the last five years,” he said Monday in an interview after his presentation. “We’re going to hit the pause button on new features.”
Instead, the company is going to focus on what he called “foundational features” that will be the basis for a future version of the operating system.
“The way the processor industry is going is to add more and more cores, but nobody knows how to program those things,” he said. “I mean, two, yeah; four, not really; eight, forget it.”
Apple, he asserted, has made a parallel-programming breakthrough.
It is all about the software, he said. Apple purchased a chip company, PA Semi, in April, but the heart of Snow Leopard will be about a parallel-programming technology that the company has code-named Grand Central.
“PA Semi is going to do system-on-chips for iPhones and iPods,” he said.
Grand Central will be at the heart of Snow Leopard, he said, and the shift in technology direction raises lots of fascinating questions, including what will happen to Apple’s partnership with Intel.
ADDED: Snow Leopard will also tap the computing power inherent in the graphics processors that are now used in tandem with microprocessors in almost all personal and mobile computers. Mr. Jobs described a new processing standard that Apple is proposing called OpenCL (Open Compute LibraryComputing Language) which is intended to refocus graphics processors on standard computing functions.
“Basically it lets you use graphics processors to do computation,” he said. “It’s way beyond what Nvidia or anyone else has, and it’s really simple.”
Since Intel trails both Nvidia and A.M.D.’s ATI graphics processor division, it may mean that future Apple computers will look very different in terms of hardware.
Just this week, for example, a Los Alamos National Laboratory set the world supercomputer processing speed record. The machine was based largely on a fleet of more than 12,000 I.B.M. Cell processors, originally designed for the Sony PS3 video-game machine.
If Apple can use similar chips to power its future computers, it will change the computer industry.
From 1 to 25 of 104 Comments
Have you seen the new supercomputer. It uses parallel wisely.
— ScottYawn. People have employed GPUs as general-purpose computational accelerators for a while now. The fact they have only narrow application in HPC reminds us they’re good for some algorithms that can be expressed as pipelined computations, but useless for others.
A lot of people have worked on automatic parallelization of sequential programs since the 1950’s with only modest success, showing little to date that will help the average Java programmer fire-and-forget his program to an eight-core machine. I smell a tangy hint of Apple hype.
— RodThis is just another reason that Apple with its nimble and unincumbered status as a minor player in the industry and its hardward/software integration is and will be superior to Microsoft’s medglomaniacal efforts to dominate every area of computing. Apple re-wrote OSX from soup to nuts. Microsoft can’t do that to big an installed base. Apple swichted chips from IBM to Intel and could go to a third if they chose to do so. Microsoft can’t do that ever. Hell they can barely upgrade their existing operating system. XP is better than Vista. Since OSX, Apple has not had that challenge. Apple’s next trick is to rewrite thier softward again to take advantage of the hardware reality of multiple core. They could blow by Microsoft like it was a huge school bus stuck in the mud while Apple will be driving a sleek new sports car.
— ChuckIt may be 99% apple hype, but I’m hopeful.
— PeteBThere’s been a disconnect between the research and the practice. The time is right for an IDE that includes tools to help parallelize your program as you develop. For the number of cores we’re looking at in the near future I think there is a lot of low hanging fruit for someone that wants to take it.
Woah..Woah…If there ever was an interesting article that needs to be fleshed out, its this one. What are they doing, change the world ..how? C’mon give us some meat on this.
— Chris WestI think you are mistakenly combining two different things that Apple announced. Grand Central is a system for dealing with multiple cores. OpenCL is a development tool that specifically works with graphics chips to run certain types of computations.
I’d argue that the big announcement is Grand Central. Getting performance benefits out of many cores is the biggest challenge facing developers right now. Overemphasizing the GPU as a CPU angle distracts from the real story. Whatever kind of chip you are using, no one knows how to do parallel easily and well.
Chips using the Cell architecture were distributed in the PS3 but the architecture itself was developed by Sony, Toshiba, and IBM with a much broader range of applications in mind; making the fastest supercomputer in the world, for example. The cell chip in IBM’s machine was designed and built for the purpose. It is very very different from a GPU.
— EthanI had read elsewhere that Snow Leopard will apply only to Intel Macs, and not to the older Power PC Macs. If so, millions of long-time Mac users, including me, will be left out in the cold.
— GarakGarak and others, I too will be left out in the cold with my aging and old dual 1.8 GHz G5. It will be time to buy a new desktop or notebook.
After about 5-6 years with this computer it will be time.
— Alan Smith@5,
— D.H.If, as the article indicates, Snow Leopard won’t have any new features the user can access but rather an updated backend designed to take advantage of processors with 4+ cores, why would you care if your older machine can’t run it?
“…The machine was based largely on a fleet of more than 12,000 I.B.M. Cell processors, originally designed for the Sony PS3 video-game machine.
If Apple can use similar chips to power its future computers, it will change the computer industry.”
Interestingly if they did it would mean reverting back from the Intel chips currently used as the Cell processors are PowerPC based chips. In light of the rumours that Snow Leopard would possibly drop support for PowerPC this would be interesting.
— Rick CurranThis article appears as though it was written by someone with an extreme case of ADD. The constant switching back and forth between barely related topics would be confusing to anyone unfamiliar with Apple’s plans.
There are several distinct issues:
Grand Central: To be a new, core piece of Snow Leopard. This will allow programmers to much more easily (read: not trivially) access more and more CPU cores as they become available (currently as high as 8 in a Mac Pro and may go as high as 16 by the time Snow Leopard ships). It will very likely include a whole new set of Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) to which programmers will have access.
OpenCL: This will allow programmers to write programs that can be accelerated significantly when fast graphics hardware is available. Apple has done work with additional processors for acceleration for over 15 years (most notably the DSP chip in the Mac 840AV way back when).
PASemi purchase: Apple purchased PASemi for its people and its intellectual property. That team knows how to take a current design (in the original case PPC) build low power, fast processors. What’s to keep this team from taking the current chips in the iPhone or iPod and tweaking them for Apple specific hardware and making them significantly better? Nothing. This has nothing to do with Apple’s relationship with Intel. Apple does *not* currently use Intel CPUs in either the iPod or iPhone. Thus there is no loss of sales by Intel to Apple if Apple uses PASemi expertise to tweak the non-Intel chips to make them better.
Graphics Processors: Currently Apple uses graphics cores from all three vendors: Intel, AMD and Nvidia. Don’t expect that to change. The only likely change is *IF* and when Intel gets their graphics chips up to the standard of AMD and Nvidia for the mid to high end graphics world, Apple may support stand alone graphics cards based upon Intel chips. At the moment there are no such cards, so Apple clearly does not support something that does not exist.
— SamWhen Steve Jobs speaks , it is to create hype and he does it like no other CEO in the world. The move to parallel processing software shift seems promising but is this overconfidence the beginning of the end for Job’s second innings .The first time it was a few product bombs and a Mr Scully who took him down. While Ballmer can survive a bad Vista, can steve really survive a bad Snow leapord
With money from Bill Gates and offering to run on intel machines , Jobs is now much more business pragmatic than before. Howver by focusing on high end machines and thus higher profits he will risk the bread and butter apple fans the ones who stick to their old apples.
The recently cut price for IPhone , (to counter the GPhone and its exclusive and failed ATT partnership openly cracked globally), Ipod’s price threat from Zune ,etc (and the fixed IP rule to control the uncontrollable music piracy) , and now a shift in Mac’s focus……hopefully Steve wont press auto destruct this time around……
and how does this new development counter Google’s cloud computing is something for Jobs to understand and maybe explain better. http://www.decisionstats.com Ajay ,India
— Ajay“millions of long-time Mac users, including me, will be left out in the cold”
Maybe that’s why they’re calling it SNOW Leopard. :-)
— Boratus@7,
— Andy HainGet real. Your PowerPC Mac will still operate just as it’s done since you purchased it. However, it will not suddenly awaken to start walking and talking.
Until the day that Apple becomes an “open” OS and it can match the business app’s which are solidly entrenched at the corporate level, it will remain like Linux but even more disadvantaged except to gearheads and graphics/music artists who prefer it.
Good friend bought in the Apple hype and got a Powerbook a few months ago, had it two weeks and gave to a friend for the simple reason that app’s he was accustomed to using were either not available on Apple or their equivalents required to much of a learning curve to be practically worthwhile.
Translate to a large scale corporation and facotr in the retraining costs for existing staff and you have your answer.
— Dennis Y@ D.H.
The reason for concern for our old Macs is this: Once this new from-the-ground-up OS is out, all new programs for Mac will run on that, and almost certainly won’t function under our old, tired, Panther, or whatever other pre-parallel OS we have. With previous changes, there was usually an easy upgrade path, as long as you had enough memory.
It’s not about features, it’s about new programs that become available, or newest versions of old stand-bys like productivity software. . . Think about the folks who have their heels dug in for XP, since Vista is awful, but it’s starting to become “necessary”, due to this exact issue. :(
I have the last of the pre-Intel G5s, and I’d like to keep running on it for a few more years.
— Carol M.Mr. Markoff,
You likely:
(1) Failed to understand Apple’s announcements.
(2) Failed to employ your comprehensive reading skills.
(3) Do not have solid foundation for understanding operating systems, parallel processing, or semiconductors.
Or some combination thereof. I strongly suggest you try much, much harder on your future pieces, or make room for someone who knows of what they speak. This hack demeans you and the NYT.
— Esmaeil KhaksariSnow leopard will not leave out PowerPC processors. THAT was a rumor, which did not come true.
I believe there will shortly be an thorough analysis of this news at roughlydrafted.com and probably anandtech.com. This is exactly the sort of thing they’d be interested in and want to write about it at length and in detail. Anyone interested should keep an eye out on those sites. I apologize if links are not allowed, but I think people will want to read more by going to those two excellent sites.
— KenC“…and it’s really simple.”
We’ll see.
— DaveLighten up, Esmaeil, you didn’t add anything except rancor.
I have a PowerPC Mac. Even if Apple lets Snow Leopard into my machine, it won’t run very well. The usual speed/memory limitations. Fine. The Mac Mini let me leave my PC and get into the OS X world at a low price. I’ll buy a new Mac next year, and Snow will already be installed.
— maxwell314True multicore support is the Holy Grail of software programming these days. If Apple can solve this problem, they may steal a serious march on Microsoft. The problem is, they will never fully capitalize on that advantage because they do not resell their OS on non-Apple systems. If I could buy OS X for Intel for my new system build, I never would have installed Vista on my 8 GB RAM Penryn system.
If Apple were to actually do this, they would stand a chance to disrupt Microsoft’s core market. Vista is a clear flop, and Office 2007 has not met with a good reception. This product cycle has been a failure for Microsoft, and only their monopoly position has protected them. (How has Steve Ballmer held onto his job?) Apple has still markedly increased their market share as a result. Too bad OSX as a discrete OS will never happen. By the way, I seriously doubt Snow Leopard multicore support will apply to PPC. Apple stopped PPC development some time ago.
— rgrace“Good friend bought in the Apple hype and got a Powerbook a few months ago, had it two weeks and gave to a friend for the simple reason that app’s he was accustomed to using were either not available on Apple or their equivalents required to much of a learning curve to be practically worthwhile.”
Dennis, seems your friend failed to research whether his/her favorite app either had a Mac equivalent, or wait, was it the learning curve?
I would assume that your “good friend” was accustomed to using this app on Windows. Did he/she tried VMWare Fusion or Parallels, Boot Camp even?
Yes, you are right, Microsoft and Wintel are much more pervasive in the corporate world, but increasingly, corporate users are demanding Mac-compatible applications and web-based content suitable for browsers like Safari or Firefox as several of them do in fact have Mac’s at home, mainly because they can’t get them at their work place, yet.
If there is one thing about Apple and Steve Jobs, that is patience.
Regards to your “good friend”
— AlexThe entire computing industry has been working on how to fully utilize multiple cores. Then suddenly Steve Jobs says he’s going to revolutionize the process, and people believe him? Come on, guys, grow up … If anyone else had said this, it wouldn’t even make news. This is posturing. I’ll believe it when I see it, and so should all of you.
— J.D.The software I use (Stata) charges a lot more for MP versions than for single processor versions. Unless the OS somehow tricks the software on this point I won’t see much gain using my preferred software from going with MP Mac and and new OS. The move towards MP MACs, though, may result in inroads into the business apps and increased sales in that sector?
— bWill Apple still use the bomb icon with some cryptic message like “error type 11″ when they crash?
For many years the Wintel systems handled multitasking better than Apple. I am willing to be persuaded that Apple will be superior with parallelism, but doubt it. I work on both platforms so I don’t hate Apples, nor do I think they are divinely inspired. I do think they over promise and under deliver. Then again, there is Vista…..
— hunter