68k Macintosh Liberation Army Forums

68k Macintosh Liberation Army Forums

Home | Members | Search | FAQ

All Forums

Lounge

OS X on x86?

Author	Topic
llamaboy487 Full Member USA 516 Posts	Posted - 03 Jan 2003 : 19:37:12 There was a lot of dicussion on OSNews (http://www.osnews.com) about whether or not Apple will release an x86 version of OS X. This seems plausible; Darwin has already been ported to x86 so that work is already done, but i dont think it'll happen because it puts Apple directly on MordorSoft's home turf, which is not a very good place to be. Or, it could be that an x86 version will run on an x86 based Mac, since the Motorola contract is coming to an end. What do you guys think? PS I would have posted this yesterday but or little MordorSoft server problem kept me from accessing the forums... ------------- Special Ops, 578th Performa Division 68k Macs Liberated: 2 ...because no one expects the Spanish Inquisition! Edited by - llamaboy487 on 03 Jan 2003 19:38:48
boredomconquersall Full Member Canada 613 Posts	Posted - 04 Jan 2003 : 02:08:52 a) they have planned to make OSX for X86 based chips, so hold tight b) I'd think that being on microsoft's hom turf would be a good thing, especially if it draws some attension to apple for being all good and junk c) they will not change all macs to the X86 arcitecture. it would completely cripple them. all existing software would stop working (instead of having a half decent emulator like classic, you will have something like VPC, which dun work worth squat for anything that made the mac special like good graphics and blah.) and it would open them up to viruses galore... but this is where ur stockpile of old macs comes in!! hehehehhe! they may make a mac based on an AMD chip, but they wouldn't change everything over abruptly. and besides, that would feel really dirty. -shiver- 10000Th poster and 1000Th topic creator in lounge. and remember, if you try and install mac OS 10.2 on an early G3, you will go insane, and aquire a thirst for blood!
cory5412 68KMLA Comrade-in-Arms USA 4679 Posts	Posted - 04 Jan 2003 : 12:23:18 hehehe... when Apple Switches to to using X86, I'm rushing right out to buy a SGi or Sun workstation... no switching for them Official 68k videographer
thelip Full Member USA 729 Posts	Posted - 04 Jan 2003 : 12:47:31 they will never port to x86, and if they do you can kiss apple hardware goodbye and possibly the company. It would still be the same situation where people won't switch because they would still need to replace all their software to be x86 osx compatible. Not to mention, none of the existing Mac osx software would work either, so they would be starting a new OS platform to the same people that the have desired for years and compeiting with themselves. Darwin on x86 was and always will be for testing purposes only. I would expect the 970 to come out sometime next year which would kick the 74xx's butt, but there's still a wait. Even though motorola is going out, they've let IBM use the altivec instruction set. Hopefully a little more patience will pay off. I don't expect anything awesome to come from MWSF this time around. I recommend reading at www.thinksecret.com or www.macosrumors.com. Alhough this is the first year that i can remember that the two have not agreed with predictions, so i don't know what that means, but i personally trust thinksecret a little more, but it's up to you. _______________________ Sgt. Thelip Heavy Weapons Specialist - 950 division Keeper of the MLA Tracker - mlatracker.dyndns.org
oldmacman Full Member USA 713 Posts	Posted - 04 Jan 2003 : 15:48:31 Apple is now making UNIX workstations, not PCs. When someone buys a workstation, they are looking for the ultimate in useability and reliability. A workstation is expected to be extremely stable, very powerful, and graphically advanced. If Apple were to port the OS to x86 and support the wide variety of devices that Windows supports, they would face the same obstacles that make Linux a pain in the @ss on x86. There is so much hardware to support that only the most common bits have good drivers. Linux has kernel panicked many times on my x86 machines, but OpenStep has never kernel panicked on my iMac. Why? OpenStep works very well with a limited number of (then) top-of-the-line devices, but Linux drivers for myriad devices are eternally buggy and incomplete. If Apple decides to go with x86 hardware, they must support only certain, specified hardware configurations, or they must manufacture their own x86-based designs. Otherwise, the advantages that make Mac OS X great will be lost, and Apple will go in the crapper. Official 68kMLA Music and NeXT Expert Macs Liberated: SE (2), LC, IIsi, PB 145b, Quadra 700 (2), LC 575, 6100 (2), PB 5300, PowerMac 5400/200, Performa 6400/180 PCs liberated from Windoze: 3
Da Penguin Senior Member USA 1094 Posts	Posted - 04 Jan 2003 : 18:50:00 The closest you are probably going to get is rhapsody DR2 for intel. It has an 8.0 interface, even on x86 hardware, and a OS X-ish background. Granted, it isn't any "jaguar," but it is pretty impressive to see it runing on a PC. But yeah, I doubt this is going to happen. There was a good talk on the ability to be done though over in MAF rumourmill. If anything, apple will either keep it in the wings for fun, or possibly an EXTREME backup. I higly doubt we will ever see much past DR2 though. I am just holding tight for 970's, that would be cool. Of course, if that doesn't happen, I'm not going to switch. It would be interesting to run a poll and see if mac users would switch to x86 hardware if it had OS X, and also what percent of current PC users would "switch" over. Hmmm... \| Want free 68kmla email? Drop me a line \| \| Captain, Intelligence Operations / Space Cowboy \| \| 68khotline.no-ip.org <-- Official Hotline Server \|
llamaboy487 Full Member USA 516 Posts	Posted - 04 Jan 2003 : 20:28:04 <offtopic> hmm... speaking of DR2, is it on the .68k FTP server? i can't seem to log in to that server anymore with RBrowser on Jaguar, is it my client or is it the server? </offtopic> All of this brings up an interesting question: what will Apple do when the Motorola contract runs out? keep using the PPC, or add an emulation layer to support PPC apps (because every Mac app is for PPC other than the 68k ones...) but i agree, I don't think we (the general public, that is) will ever be able to get our hands on an x86 OS X, but i wouldn't be surprosed if Apple has one in progress or already has one, just to fall back on. ------------- Special Ops, 578th Performa Division 68k Macs Liberated: 2 ...because no one expects the Spanish Inquisition! Edited by - llamaboy487 on 04 Jan 2003 20:28:38
Da Penguin Senior Member USA 1094 Posts	Posted - 04 Jan 2003 : 22:09:36 About the PPC only apps... A progammer on MAF was talking about carbon, and its brilliance in use. He said, if there was to be an x86 version, carbon apps would only ahve o be recompiled to generally work, and a very small amount of code changed to be optimized. I thought that was pretty interesting myself. About my server, it is having difficulty and will be shut off for a bit coming up for me to switch some stuff. Sorry if that causes a problem. ~The Penguin \| Want free 68kmla email? Drop me a line \| \| Captain, Intelligence Operations / Space Cowboy \| \| 68khotline.no-ip.org <-- Official Hotline Server \|
boredomconquersall Full Member Canada 613 Posts	Posted - 04 Jan 2003 : 22:18:05 if the motorolla contract runs out, they go to IBM. simple as that. both with apple at the moment. THnx *...... 10000Th poster and 1000Th topic creator in lounge. and remember, if you try and install mac OS 10.2 on an early G3, you will go insane, and aquire a thirst for blood!
cory5412 68KMLA Comrade-in-Arms USA 4679 Posts	Posted - 05 Jan 2003 : 00:35:28 ok... yeah... if apple switches anything to X86, they are going under, even worse? if they only switch part of their product line... and EVEN WORSE???? well how could you get ANY worse thatn that you ask????? if they use the same cases and continue to call those EVIL monsters "macs" if this happens, we know what we must do... so if Apple begins to produce X86 hardware in this way... who would agree to help me storm apple and kill them before they do something stupid, then reopen them selling a nice line of 68ks... each for a various purpose :P... we'll work our way back up thru history making better decisions for apple Official 68k videographer
thelip Full Member USA 729 Posts	Posted - 05 Jan 2003 : 01:00:04 a using carbonlib for x86 to me would be SCARY. It would be slow. VERY SLOW emulation due to recompiles to a completely different platform which would remove the point of the "faster" processors. That would be sorta the same as some of the excuses that macplay and others have released calling ports of pc games. A great example is Unreal Tounrament. The underlying code is identical to the pc side, all the mac and linux distros have are different launchers that translate the code for the platforms. That's why i get the less fps on my (now, thanks to a little more overclocking yesterday) 500 mhz g4 as a 400 mhz pc of many years ago. A x86 carbonlib would work in theory, but i would guess that it would be vpc quality and not worth it for users to switch. If i get around to it, i'll find the links that xlr8yourmac put up a few months ago for the 970. It sounds amazing. This macworld will be dissapointing from what apple has to offer. they are moving away from releasing new products to avoid the nasty sale trends they created. Apple's days of innovating are over, now it's called surviving. _______________________ Sgt. Thelip Heavy Weapons Specialist - 950 division Keeper of the MLA Tracker - mlatracker.dyndns.org
oldmacman Full Member USA 713 Posts	Posted - 05 Jan 2003 : 07:21:21 Apple's still innovating more than ever. Their focus has shifted from hardware to software, though. Computers have hit the point where you will get more-than-acceptable performance on internet, email, digital media, and desktop publishing. MS Word, an MP3 player, and the Internet feel almost the same in terms of speed on a 2 GHz WinXP box, a dual G4/1.25 GHz, a 600 MHz Win98SE box, and a 266 MHz G3. Most computer users are not going to be doing anything that requires a really fast processor. Even those who do need more power are more than satisfied by Apple's latest offerings. Instead of concentrating on hardware, Apple has made, IMHO, the best consumer operating system ever and the best server operating system ever. It is easy to use, its multitasking is excellent, its developer environment is unrivaled, there is a wealth of existing software that can be compiled or run out of the box on OS X, it doesn't crash, and it looks cool. What more could you ask for? Official 68kMLA Music and NeXT Expert Macs Liberated: SE (2), LC, IIsi, PB 145b, Quadra 700 (2), LC 575, 6100 (2), PB 5300, PowerMac 5400/200, Performa 6400/180 PCs liberated from Windoze: 3
II2II Junior Member Canada 115 Posts	Posted - 05 Jan 2003 : 07:53:57 I don't see how Apple would survive a transition to Intel: they have invested a great deal of effort into convincing Mac users that Intel processors are inferior, the would have to convince developers to compiler Intel versions of the software, and they would probably have to drop all Classic support (except, maybe, what can be obtained through Carbon). The foundation has been laid for such a transition under OS X, but that is different from convincing everybody to make the move. The other thing is that they could never beat Microsoft on their own turf, so Apple would have to lock their users into a proprietary hardware. If you don't believe that assertion, look at the number of corpses of operating systems for IBM compatibles. II2II Intelligence officer in training.
scchicago Full Member USA 936 Posts	Posted - 09 Jan 2003 : 15:28:10 alright, I use Linux x86 as my main OS and I have never once has a kernel panic! Drivers haven't been buggy to me either. _________________ Leutennant SCCHICAGO HotLine:scchicago.homeip.net Website:http://scchicago.homeip.net Forum: http://scchicago.homeip.net/forum
cory5412 68KMLA Comrade-in-Arms USA 4679 Posts	Posted - 12 Jan 2003 : 00:14:01 I agree... the Macintosh is now like a workstaion, and darn near the only real workstion with a workstation OS that I can think of, and Apple is doing alot to have a laptop on a workstion platform Official 68k videographer
oldmacman Full Member USA 713 Posts	Posted - 12 Jan 2003 : 07:57:44 One can only hope that it won't fail like Sun's Voyager did. It was a revolutionary portable desktop setup that failed because there was no real market for it. Maybe there's a market for a portable workstation now. Official 68kMLA Music and NeXT Expert Macs Liberated: SE (2), LC, IIsi, PB 145b, Quadra 700 (2), LC 575, 6100 (2), PB 5300, PowerMac 5400/200, Performa 6400/180 PCs liberated from Windoze: 3
cory5412 68KMLA Comrade-in-Arms USA 4679 Posts	Posted - 12 Jan 2003 : 16:44:13 wow... I must have this sun voyager... many PEESEE manufacturers make "workstation grade" desktops, and lately 2 of them, Dell and IBM are making workstation grade notebooks also... but like I mentioned earlier... doesn't really count because they run windows Official 68k videographer
oldmacman Full Member USA 713 Posts	Posted - 12 Jan 2003 : 19:17:27 Nobody ever thought of the SGI Visual Workstations as real workstations because they ran Windoze NT. Official 68kMLA Music and NeXT Expert Macs Liberated: SE (2), LC, IIsi, PB 145b, Quadra 700 (2), LC 575, 6100 (2), PB 5300, PowerMac 5400/200, Performa 6400/180 PCs liberated from Windoze: 3
Citon X600 Junior Member Canada 206 Posts	Posted - 12 Jan 2003 : 19:44:20 Just a small note Rhapsody went to PR1 before the First OS X Beta arrived. But as per a copy of this, I have been searching but found nothing but it does exist. And as for switching platforms, Apple is going to do this very carefully because it remembers what happened when they switched from M68K to PPC. If it wasn't for the 68k emulation code, they would have been stuck because many developers did not want to move to PPC. So, it's not going to be an easy thing. But, IMHO, Apple could make a small killing creating custom x86 boxes that run specific hardware such as servers etc., because it could offer them at a lower price than thier PPC lines but still have the same stability. Not to mention Apple has an inner working of thier PPC chips so they could if need be, design a emulation or compatibility layer to allow Legacy PPC Applications to operate under X86. Even commercial companies are working on PPC Emulation. (Simics has a working PPC Simulator which can boot Linux. It is theorized that this Linux can run MOL, but at the moment it is quite slow because it uses an indirect method of simulation since it was not "designed" to emulated Mac Hardware.) I think that if someone designed a Hybrid CPU capable of speaking all current computing languages, this would give all companies a run for thier money, especially Intel, IBM, Motorola and AMD. No longer would they be market leaders in one architecture, they would be forced to change thier thinking on how thier machines think. My two cents.
llamaboy487 Full Member USA 516 Posts	Posted - 13 Jan 2003 : 19:31:08 hmm that brings up an interesting point: i might speculate that apple will release x86-based servers running os x server, but leave the workstation os x on PPC so they don't have to worry about it getting killed... or, would there be no point to doing that, since they have ppc servers that work fine (or do they? does apple even make servers?) ------------- Special Ops, 578th Performa Division 68k Macs Liberated: 2 ...because no one expects the Spanish Inquisition!
cory5412 68KMLA Comrade-in-Arms USA 4679 Posts	Posted - 13 Jan 2003 : 21:48:48 I would be able to fly with that... because right now I'm runnin my own server on linux Debian with an X86 system... and it runs SETI faster than it did in .NET RC1 2k3 Official 68k videographer
oldmacman Full Member USA 713 Posts	Posted - 14 Jan 2003 : 06:42:25 Yes, Apple makes servers. Very good servers. The Xserve runs OS X Server with one or two G4 processors. Yes, Apple could switch their servers to x86. But would it really be worth it to redesign the whole architecture when it works very well as it is? Official 68kMLA Music and NeXT Expert Macs Liberated: SE (2), LC, IIsi, PB 145b, Quadra 700 (2), LC 575, 6100 (2), PB 5300, PowerMac 5400/200, Performa 6400/180 PCs liberated from Windoze: 3
llamaboy487 Full Member USA 516 Posts	Posted - 14 Jan 2003 : 16:53:14 quote: Yes, Apple could switch their servers to x86. But would it really be worth it to redesign the whole architecture when it works very well as it is? hmm probably not. end of discussion ------------- Special Ops, 578th Performa Division 68k Macs Liberated: 2 ...because no one expects the Spanish Inquisition!
cory5412 68KMLA Comrade-in-Arms USA 4679 Posts	Posted - 14 Jan 2003 : 21:48:22 well the idea is that they KEEP the XSERVE for the things it was intended for, multimedia serving and high impact work, and they maybe introduce a lower cost server in the less than 2 grand range... Dell makes servers that cost $499... this is Sans OS of course... so you put linux on it or whatever... so if Apple can have server HARDWARE that costs less than 1000 designed for workgroup or light internet serving... that you can have like... a 50 client liscence for..... iServe Official 68k videographer

68k Macintosh Liberation Army Forums

� 2001-2003 68kMLA

68k of the Week: kastegir's PowerBook 180.