For us apple lovers

[eternals layre]

http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/04/0238235&tid=118&tid=3&tid=137

[Cozmo D]

Shit, I hope not!!!

[Etherspin]

that has been rumored a few times on there in past months.. notice theres no mention that it would be intels X86 architecture stuff.. if theres truth to it could it be intel would be making PowerPC stuff??

[eternals layre]

maybe apple owns some rights to ppc stuff. Im praying its going to move to x86. I wouldn't mind if they never made apps for it outside of generic install. The open source community would come to its aid.

I have a rockin p4 it tiger would feel good on.

[eternals layre]

more details?

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=23714

[Cozmo D]

Did y'all code talkers see this?

http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/06/03/23TCtiger_1.html

Maybe you can hook up that P4 right now EL?

[eternals layre]

darwin is just the underlying system of osx. It lacks coca and the rest of the gui. However there is a report that from the time of jaguar there is a x86 osx full build working. With microsoft being hated so much right now (spyware virus security). I think apple would take 40% of users right off the top. There are ways they can make the move and not hafe to worry about recompiling all the apps. It will be emulation but the faster intel chips could do it. <a href="http://www.transitive.com/products.htm#p2">one option</a> The same way the new ppc chips do with the classic os's. Apples stock was down last week, im sure it will skyrocket today. There is a group of people that keep this x86 build going at apple.

Apple would make tons of money. cheaper hardware raise the price of the os just below microsoft for x86. They make their own cases still. Alienware was beem making money doing hardware. I think its a plus plus for apple. I dont care what runs osx as long as its osx.

2 EST today we will know for sure

[eternals layre]

Marklar is the code name for the x86 build

[Cozmo D]

If I could do it I'd convert my Pentium 4 in a heartbeat!

[eternals layre]

Mac OS X has been leading secret double life. Every Mac project build for Intel and PowerPC and Intel. Every release of Mac OS X has been built for both Intel and PowerPC-based Macs. For the last 5 years. Mac OS X is cross-platform by design. Apple's demo is on an Intel-based system. Jobs shows all Mac OS X Tiger features are already compatible with Intel-based processors. Not done yet. Will put into the developer hands to help Apple finish it. [10:32 am]

[eternals layre]

Its Official !!!! Osx On My P4

[eternals layre]

Jobs talked about the major transitions in the Mac's life -- starting from the Mac's Motorola 68000-series processor to PowerPC. "The PowerPC set Apple up fro the next decade. It was a good move," he said.

"The second transition was even better -- the transition from Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X that we just did," he continued. "This was a brain transplant. And even though these operating systems (9 and x) vary only by one in name, they are very different, and this has set Apple up for the next 20 years."

As the Intel logo lowered on the stage screen, Jobs said, "We are going to make the transition from PowerPC to Intel processors, and we are going to do it for you now, and for our customers next year. Why? Because we want to be making the best computer for our customers looking forward."

"I stood up here two years ago and promised you 3.0 GHz. I think a lot of you would like a G5 in your PowerBook, and we haven't been able to deliver that to you," said Jobs. "But as we look ahead, and though we've got great products now, and great PowerPC products still to come, we can envision great products we want to build, and we can't envision how to build them with the current PowerPC roadmap," said Jobs.

Intel processors provide more performance per watt than PowerPC processors do, said Jobs. "When we look at future roadmaps, mid-2006 and beyond, we see PoweRPC gives us 15 units of perfomance per watt, but Intel's roadmap gives us 70. And so this tells us what we have to do," he explained.

Transition to Intel by 2007, and yes, Marklar exists

"Starting next year, we will introduce Macs with Intel processors," said Jobs. "This time next year, we plan to ship Macs with Intel processors. In two years, our plan is that the transition will be mostly complete, and will be complete by end of 2007."

Jobs then confirmed a long-held belief that Apple was working on an Intel-compatible version of Mac OS X that some have termed "Marklar."

Mac OS X has been "leading a secret double life" for the past five years, said Jobs. "So today for the first time, I can confirm the rumors that every release of Mac OS X has been compiled for PowerPC and Intel. This has been going on for the last five years."

Jobs demonstrated a version of Mac OS X running on a 3.6GHz Pentium 4-processor equipped system, running a build of Mac OS X v10.4.1. He showed Dashboard widgets, Spotlight, iCal, Apple's Mail, Safari and iPhoto all working on the Intel-based system.

Apple needs developers' help to complete the transition

"We are very far along on this, but we're not done," said Jobs. "Which is why we're going to put it in your hands very soon, so you can help us finish it."

The future of Mac OS X development is moving to Xcode, said Jobs. Of Apple's top 100 developers, more than half -- 56 percent -- are already using Xcode, and 25 percent are in the process of switching to Xcode. "Less than 20 percent are not on board yet. Now is a good time to get on board," said Jobs.
--
Quid quid latine dictum sit, altum videtur

[Cozmo D]

Well, I only hope that it's a good thing. I guess it's not the Intel hardware that's fukked up, but Windows. I know 1 thing, if I will be able to BUILD a Mac with PC parts, it's goodbye to Wndows for me! :D

[Cozmo D]

Hey Eternals, got a link? :)

[eternals layre]

http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/06/06/powerpcintel/index.php

[Cozmo D]

That was quick, thank you sir! :)

[eternals layre]

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.html
offical

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20050606corp.htm

of course im on a mac

[SaintHax]

looks like I'll be running OSX on something soon

[eternals layre]

maybe if apple allows it to be that open. darwin only runs on one chipset. but im sure it will be hacked

[Etherspin]

smart cats

[Harmeister]

Even though OS X will run on intel hardware, they are not opening it up. You will still buy a mac from apple, the difference will be under the hood only. Other than that it will pretty much be the same as before.

Other than the fact that yes, P4's are faster that PowerPC's are, which is why Apple is making the switch.

[Etherspin]

i was just trying to make sense of it in fact.. think i assumed this would mean mac os running on non apple hardware.. at this point i think it would be a good thing with the apparent rise in popularity.... they were having trouble with the laptop processors generating too much heat?

[Cozmo D]

Even though OS X will run on intel hardware, they are not opening it up. You will still buy a mac from apple, the difference will be under the hood only. Other than that it will pretty much be the same as before.

Other than the fact that yes, P4's are faster that PowerPC's are, which is why Apple is making the switch.
Then what is the purpose of them porting the OS to x86? If OSX will run on a Mac Pentium 4, what would stop it from running on any other Pentium 4?

Intel delivered on their dual core while IBM has failed on their promises, I think that was the final catalyst.

[eternals layre]

apple im sure will try and limit it to their own boxes. However we do know there is 5 osx systems that run on plain x86 we do know alot of apple is now open source. Im guessing openfirmware will be what controlls what osx can be installed on. Then im sure there will be hacks to make it run on any x86. prob not as stable or even as fast. In the long run I can now see apple letting a generic install to compete with ms. I dont think they will support it keeping only drivers and etc to their boxes.

This will allow programs such as wine easy access into osx letting native windows dll's to be used to run native ms code.

The pearpc team might even be helpful in porting osx into full x86.

[eternals layre]

i take some ,it looks from the apple open binary format DOC. it wont be a openfirmware bios. theres calls for some basic bios functions. So it might be a chip. (hackable also)

from the doc
"Macintosh computers using Intel microprocessors do not use Open Firmware. Although many parts
of the IO registry are present and work as expected, information that is provided by Open Firmware
on a Macintosh using a PowerPC microprocessor (such as a complete device tree) is not available in
the IO registry on a Macintosh using an Intel microprocessor. You can obtain some of the information
from IODeviceTree by using the sysctlbyname or sysctl commands. "



damn im a geek

[Etherspin]

does this mean itll be slightly easier to port stuff so that maybe we'll get better performance on apps originally written with PC in mind ?

[eternals layre]

yes and games may hit at the same time on both platforms

[SaintHax]

if they don't port it to run on "normal" x86 hardware I give it 3-6 months before it's hacked and running on everything.



There also seems to be a chance of Apple making a dual boot system, so it will run OSX and Windows on the same system. It might even go a step further and run both at the same time since no emulation will be needed for either OS.

[Etherspin]

i wish that would mean that if one crashed the other would continue functioning... ahh well

either way.. as long as it means better cross compatibility/ faster porting im all for it

[Cozmo D]

Well, Panther NEVER crashes on me and XP HARDLY EVER and I'm still running SP1, sooooo.... :)

It would make sense to me that you should be able to run them both at the same time since you can do it now with emulation. Without emulation should be even easier. :D

[Cozmo D]

Only thing that scares me is now I'm sure I'll have to run anti-virus shit for OSX. I'm spoiled. :D

[eternals layre]

i doubt it. same os same security

[Cozmo D]

I hope you're right. I just wonder if a lot of the reason that we're not assaulted with viruses is because the virus creators are ignoring us. This could change that.

[eternals layre]

yea script kiddies cant afford a mac