Aqua-Soft ForumsFound a link at eMaculation to a rather interesting theory regarding Apple's choices for it's next OS..(Motorola notwithstanding 
)
http://www.overclockers.com/articles676/
A very nicely written article. Well worth a read...
Siddharth
Intersting Article...
Yes, I read this yesterday
Makes some good points, especially about the difference between the pc and mac aesthetic
I can only hope for a x86 port one day!
That is quite a good article.
I would love to see Apple release an x86 version of OS X. I think it's about time MS has some real competition in the commericial desktop arena.
I'd find it very gratifying to run a desktop Unix wth a nice GUI, and don't mention Linux to me. I tried it several times and I just can't be bothered with it any more.
Peace,
Grusic
Im not too versed in programming, but would you be able to run windows based applications in an x86 based MacOS, it wuldnt be too hard, kinda do like the mac classic mode in the existing osx
yea i been following this since 2 days but i couldnt post on the boards, they were slow as hell. but anyway i really hope they do convert it, then maybe i will actually BUY it.... welll.... i'll think about buying it 
Originally posted by ztiworoh@Jan 2 2003, 01:51 AMIm not too versed in programming, but would you be able to run windows based applications in an x86 based MacOS, it wuldnt be too hard, kinda do like the mac classic mode in the existing osx
No! that is impossible...that would make OS X lose all it's advantages on the x86 platform. Developers will have to recompile their applications to take advantage of the Carbon API which underlies OS X. However they may not run as well as they may on a Mac since Carbon technology is incorporated into the architecture of the PowerPC itself...
Siddharth
No! that is impossible...that would make OS X lose all it's advantages on the x86 platform. Developers will have to recompile their applications to take advantage of the Carbon API which underlies OS X. However they may not run as well as they may on a Mac since Carbon technology is incorporated into the architecture of the PowerPC itself...Siddharth
Ok, I understand, I guess if they do ever release it, I could dual boot OSes so I can still run my old windows apps if i needed to
This would tho make porting a hell of a lot easier .
Originally posted by ztiworoh@Jan 2 2003, 08:46 AMNo! that is impossible...that would make OS X lose all it's advantages on the x86 platform. Developers will have to recompile their applications to take advantage of the Carbon API which underlies OS X. However they may not run as well as they may on a Mac since Carbon technology is incorporated into the architecture of the PowerPC itself...Siddharth
Ok, I understand, I guess if they do ever release it, I could dual boot OSes so I can still run my old windows apps if i needed to
Actually it wouldn't be that difficult to have Win apps run on OS X86.
If Apple incorporated WINE or a similiar emulation technology, perhaps Virtual PC even, into OS X86, it would not be much of a problem at all.
There are several Win emulators out already that run most Win software well enough. I'm not including games in that software list as they represent a special case.
But for apps like Office, Outlook etc, there are viable solutions.
As we used to say when I was a programmer, nothing is impossible given enough time.
Peace,
Grusic
siddarth is completely right. its virtually very hard, not forgetting that unfortunately apple makes their profit out of the hardware and not the software. But like all of us, i wanna see what will happen when OSX will be released on the x86 chips. that would be like SHEeeeeeeeee.....
BUT as a matter of fact, APPLE has ALREADY made a secret x86 compatible OSX which was successfully tested and reviewed and is kept in one of their offices drawers.
Its a true thing, im very serious.
Son Goku
Grusic I agree that Apple could make some sort of VirtualPC emulator which will allow Win32 apps to run on OS X x86 but that wasn't the question ztiworoh was asking.....
He was asking whether Win32 apps will run natively on OS X x86 i.e. you just buy Office XP off the shelf and install it on OS X x86. That is impractical if not impossible and even if it were what would be the point in doing that?? It would mean that the apps would run exactly like Windows apps do without taking advantage of any of the features of OS X.
Siddharth
The thing that keeps wine from working on OSX or a mac in general is that it's not an emulator. It requires an x86 based CPU to function. But with OSX on x86 it would have the CPU that is required by Wine. You could use x-darwin if needed. But I do agree that they probably wouldn't include binary support for x86 natively. Though they probably could add it if they wanted to. OSX is mostly added subsystems running over the Mach core so they could add a win32 one especiallly if it is running on x86.
But it would be a bad idea. Because people would see and especially if it runs them well they would not want to make their apps native. That was a big problem with OS/2.
Anyway, it's not farfetched at all to have Mach based OS' running on x86. There has been OpenStep, Rhapsody, and now the rumored marklar. As a matter of fact there was a framework that allowed you to run .app's on windowsNT. The real million dollar question is would they ever release it (OSX x86 that is).
I kinda doubt that
Yeah, I know what Goku's talking about, I heard Boeing and a couple other big players were involved in the secret X86 Mac Project. I believe it is already out, but Apple prolly doesnt want to relese it. Basically, I see these 2 outcomes
1) Motorola ends up killing their processor division, and leaves apple with the remaining. From there, apple makes a move into the X86 world, relizing that the G4 processor (or anything off of a motorola simi-conductor) has died.
2) Motorola releases a Grand and Glorious new Processor that even rivals Intel (HA!), and Apple continues its Hardware crusade.
Which one looks more likly in the future?
No matter what, there would be big hurdles in moving it to X86. But if you ask me, they are ones they sould start taking before its too late. LongHorn is expected to be a big release, and I believe if apple's gonna make the move, they need to do it before its too late. And I agree, its time MicroShaft got some competition. And I mean REAL compitetion. Of course linux is great, but it needs the flexabilty of something that Mac to make it in the PC world. Well, thats my 10 cents.
There will never be a public version of OS X for x86, that just wont happen. As Goku pointed out Apple makes profict on the hardware not the software, if they were to produce an OS X version for x86 they would loose all that hardware market.
as far as the processor for the new Apples, IBM and Apple are working together ina RISC processor, it has been mentioned a few times in Slashdot
Well, the way I see it, the Apple hardware market is going to die anyways. I dont see the X86 version as a "head on attact to microsoft", I see it as a "survival plan". Apple would probably go out with a bang rather than die a slow and painful death by sticking with their dying hardware arcitecture.
As for the better processor that is trying to be sold to Apple from IBM, I beleve that will only DELAY the death.
Originally posted by Goku@Jan 2 2003, 08:08 PMBUT as a matter of fact, APPLE has ALREADY made a secret x86 compatible OSX which was successfully tested and reviewed and is kept in one of their offices drawers.
Its a true thing, im very serious.
He's right.
Marklar!
Now.. If we can only get our hands on that cd..
I wonder why no one leaked it yet, apple must put it secure somewhere.
Originally posted by Telmo@Jan 2 2003, 08:56 PMThere will never be a public version of OS X for x86, that just wont happen. As Goku pointed out Apple makes profict on the hardware not the software, if they were to produce an OS X version for x86 they would loose all that hardware market.
as far as the processor for the new Apples, IBM and Apple are working together ina RISC processor, it has been mentioned a few times in Slashdot
TRUE.
i read about that in slashdot actually.
my roomate and myself are geekin around that site and thats where we get the info.
but if anyone thinks that the osx will be compatible w/ the x86 series cause of an ibm chip than its wrong.
apple is still obligated to motorola, but already started targeting ibm incase motorola will keep the negative growth.
GOKU
Originally posted by Siddharth@Jan 2 2003, 10:46 PMGrusic I agree that Apple could make some sort of VirtualPC emulator which will allow Win32 apps to run on OS X x86 but that wasn't the question ztiworoh was asking.....
He was asking whether Win32 apps will run natively on OS X x86
Sid,
I didn't see him mention anything about running Win32 apps "natively" on OS X86.
You and I both know that natively running apps compiled for Win32 on OS X86 would be impossible.
His question was rather vague and I answered what I *felt* he was asking. That comes from years of consulting experience and having to decipher users questions.
I didn't come here to debate programming, I just came here to enjoy the forum
Peace,
Grusic
Originally posted by Grusic+Jan 2 2003, 11:08 PM-->QUOTE(Grusic @ Jan 2 2003, 11:08 PM)
Funny thing is, theres gotta be some problems when it comes to drivers for Marklar. I mean, OS X only has to support so many devices. For example, Apple doesnt sell GeForce2's in their systems, so there probably isnt support for it. they will probably have to make supports far a LARGE number of devices before they even step into the X86 world.
Originally posted by TheRaginAsian@Jan 3 2003, 12:25 AMFunny thing is, theres gotta be some problems when it comes to drivers for Marklar. I mean, OS X only has to support so many devices. For example, Apple doesnt sell GeForce2's in their systems, so there probably isnt support for it. they will probably have to make supports far a LARGE number of devices before they even step into the X86 world.
Hmm.. I never thought about this. That is correct, they will need drivers for almost all the components out there, and some of the hardware may STILL not be compatible with mac. Maybe they will release generic drivers or something, or OSX will have a "required to install: minimum requirements" and they HAVE to have those requirements or it will not install. Hmmmm...
Originally posted by TheRaginAsian@Jan 2 2003, 10:25 PMFunny thing is, theres gotta be some problems when it comes to drivers for Marklar. I mean, OS X only has to support so many devices. For example, Apple doesnt sell GeForce2's in their systems, so there probably isnt support for it. they will probably have to make supports far a LARGE number of devices before they even step into the X86 world.
Umm... This eMac I'm typing on has an Nvidia GeForce2MX in it and so do those LCD iMacs. You are probably thinking of the iBooks laptops with the ATI Rage Mobility chips.
But I don't think x86 is going to happen. Intel will eventually switch to 64bit Itanium (which has had some performance probs) and AMD is supposed to have the Hammer X86 64bit architecture.
IBM will be coming out with a 64bit PPC in the last part of this year which has an Altivec compatible vector unit like the G4. Rumor has it that Apple may be using this chip atleast in their Xserve servers and it is backwards compatible with 32bit PPC software written for the G4 and G3.
Whoops, sorry bout that. I was trying to think of hardware that I run that OS X prolly wont support but I guess I goofed on that one! But yeah, thanks for clearing up my post!
Also, something that nobody seems to be considering is the fact that Microsoft owns part of Apple.