| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jakeOSX
Ninja
Joined: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 1373
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 11:06 am Post subject: OSX on Intel |
|
the rumors are true, Apple is going Intel.
some neat things, Rosetta which will emulate PPC for non-converted software. a new version of XCOde designed to make both PPC and intel binaries (in one package)
I think Steve Jobs using a 3.6 gig P4 is scary. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sardisson
Town Crier
Joined: Feb 01, 2004
Posts: 4588
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
Well, it's certainly a good thing we scheduled the Neo/J launch away from WWDC....
Hopefully things will have died down by the time Neo/J 1.1 is ready to go out the door 
Smokey
_________________
"[...] whether the duck drinks hot chocolate or coffee is irrelevant." -- ovvldc and sardisson in the NeoWiki |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ovvldc
Captain Naiobi
Joined: Sep 13, 2004
Posts: 2352
Location: Zürich, CH
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 1:14 pm Post subject: Re: OSX on Intel |
|
| jakeOSX wrote: | | I think Steve Jobs using a 3.6 gig P4 is scary. |
Interestingly, one of the main reasons is power to heat ratio.
But AMD has better power to heat ratios these days. So I wonder what Intel is sitting on at the moment that made Jobs go with Intel rather than AMD.
I guess that 'fat binary' compilation option is going to be pretty useful for putting applications in a single package.
Best wishes,
Oscar
_________________
"What do you think of Western Civilization?"
"I think it would be a good idea!"
- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OPENSTEP
The One
Joined: May 25, 2003
Posts: 4752
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 7:20 pm Post subject: |
|
Well, I think it honks for multiple reasons. Apparently Rosetta won't support CFM based applications. This is going to break a significant number of my older applications as well as some of the ones from manufacturers that are out of business. Second, Metrowerks users are left in the dark. Doesn't affect Neo, of course, but there are a lot of us in the real world still using Metrowerks. Not to mention little endian...don't get me started on the "fun" all Mac guys will have implementing byte-swapping code to read our files.
What frustrates me is having Jobs' quotes about how simple it is to move to Mactel being quoted profusely...and that people are believing them. It's going to be a non-trivial amount of work for a lot of Mac programs, and I suspect you'll see many disappear.
My general OOo specific reaction is here:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=151831&cid=12739433
The worst part of this is the damn hardware cost. Apparently not only is it restricted to paid developer programs, but according to a friend who was at the keynote you have to return the Apple prototype x86 hardware. You get nothing to show for your $1000 (or $1500 if you have to join a program too). That's a ridiculous fee to impose upon developers for the privilege of doing business on a Mac, especially open source developers who give away applications for free.
At least I got to keep my BeBox so I can still turn it on and watch the lights bounce up and down.
ed |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Waldo
Oracle
Joined: Dec 03, 2004
Posts: 239
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 9:15 pm Post subject: random thoughts |
|
I wonder what kind of opportunities this will create for Mac gaming and other bleeding-edge areas where fine-tuning to the processor is essential. I bet this would increase the odds of fast, just-as-good Mac games.
Will Macs now be able to use x86-optimized libraries and drivers written for Windows machines (as many Linux apps already do)?
I also wonder if DRM/palladium (whatever the acronym is now) will become more of a privacy issue. How will Apple lock-out OS X from clones or virtualized computers running in sandboxes from other machines? Is it going to be like XBox with a "signed operating system" type of thing w/serial #s for OS X? If so, that could be bad in a lot of different areas. Will dual-booting or alternate operating systems be permitted on Macs? Will itunes or other files be locked a chip's serial # (I know there are GUIDs in current macs, but still..)
WINE for OS X just got more important. So did openstep, I think.
Rosetta-- the rosetta stone translated both ways.. where's the bochs/qemu-like emulation for the PPCs? Oh wait, i guess i have to pay Microsoft for it. Well, Connectix made a ton of money on SpeedDoubler once upon a time doing something similar. I wonder if qemu could be made into a system extension somehow...
W
| OPENSTEP wrote: | Well, I think it honks for multiple reasons. Apparently Rosetta won't support CFM based applications. This is going to break a significant number of my older applications as well as some of the ones from manufacturers that are out of business. Second, Metrowerks users are left in the dark. Doesn't affect Neo, of course, but there are a lot of us in the real world still using Metrowerks. Not to mention little endian...don't get me started on the "fun" all Mac guys will have implementing byte-swapping code to read our files.
What frustrates me is having Jobs' quotes about how simple it is to move to Mactel being quoted profusely...and that people are believing them. It's going to be a non-trivial amount of work for a lot of Mac programs, and I suspect you'll see many disappear.
My general OOo specific reaction is here:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=151831&cid=12739433
The worst part of this is the damn hardware cost. Apparently not only is it restricted to paid developer programs, but according to a friend who was at the keynote you have to return the Apple prototype x86 hardware. You get nothing to show for your $1000 (or $1500 if you have to join a program too). That's a ridiculous fee to impose upon developers for the privilege of doing business on a Mac, especially open source developers who give away applications for free.
At least I got to keep my BeBox so I can still turn it on and watch the lights bounce up and down.
ed |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OPENSTEP
The One
Joined: May 25, 2003
Posts: 4752
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 9:32 pm Post subject: Re: random thoughts |
|
| Waldo wrote: | | Will Macs now be able to use x86-optimized libraries and drivers written for Windows machines (as many Linux apps already do)? |
Libraries, perhaps, but drivers no. Drivers will still need to be written to IOKit which is unique to Darwin/OS X. Rosetta also will not support PowerPC kexts and drivers (which really isn't that surprising). Unfortunately that will do nothing but irk device developers yet again following up on the Tiger change to the interfaces. I have to debug drivers at work and this is yet another reason to be mad... 
I doubt you'll see much in the way of games because most games are dependent on DirectX 9 these days (or perhaps XNA). Gaming really is becoming a realm where the consoles are dominant. Perhaps I'm biased though...as long as I have Starcraft and Civ II my life is complete. Of course Civ II is a CFM application...grrr....
ed |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jakeOSX
Ninja
Joined: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 1373
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 4:36 am Post subject: |
|
so i just saw a slashdot post on how this means OO.o2.0 will now work on a mac.
are people really that clueless?
all this really means is that the subcontractor who makes the chips is changing. this does not mean that WINE and OO.o etc will just magically work.
MAGIC
just like the aqua version of OO.o that sun is working on.
then again, after FIVE YEARS of keeping OSX on intel a secret, i'd believe just about anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
val1984
Oracle
Joined: May 30, 2005
Posts: 229
Location: France
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 5:12 am Post subject: |
|
| jakeOSX wrote: | | all this really means is that the subcontractor who makes the chips is changing. this does not mean that WINE and OO.o etc will just magically work. |
Well, Wine already exists for Darwin so I think it will work on Mactel 
Yesterday, I was quite astonished by this announcement but today, I feel it is in fact not a completely bad piece of news. PowerPC support will have to remain several years because of the large installed base.
And Rosetta seems to be a good enough piece of software, quite like the 68K emulator in these old days  But that's different here since the OS will be fully native and the iApps also 
Valentin, slowly accepting the fact that his next Mac will include an Intel processor |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jjmckenzie51
The Anomaly
Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 1055
Location: Southeastern Arizona
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:08 pm Post subject: |
|
| val1984 wrote: |
Well, Wine already exists for Darwin so I think it will work on Mactel
Yesterday, I was quite astonished by this announcement but today, I feel it is in fact not a completely bad piece of news. PowerPC support will have to remain several years because of the large installed base.
And Rosetta seems to be a good enough piece of software, quite like the 68K emulator in these old days But that's different here since the OS will be fully native and the iApps also
Valentin, slowly accepting the fact that his next Mac will include an Intel processor |
It appears that MacOSX Tiger was built for both PPC and Intel platforms. It would be 'neat' to see a Dell with MacOSX on it. I would be glad to see that day.
James |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Waldo
Oracle
Joined: Dec 03, 2004
Posts: 239
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
| jjmckenzie51 wrote: | It would be 'neat' to see a Dell with MacOSX on it. I would be glad to see that day.
James |
And as soon as someone virtualizes the new Intel Macs so it runs inside x86 Linux, you will
W |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fabrizio venerandi
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
| ps. what about neooffice/j 1.0 on apple intel? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jjmckenzie51
The Anomaly
Joined: Apr 01, 2005
Posts: 1055
Location: Southeastern Arizona
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:13 am Post subject: |
|
| Waldo wrote: | | jjmckenzie51 wrote: | It would be 'neat' to see a Dell with MacOSX on it. I would be glad to see that day.
James |
And as soon as someone virtualizes the new Intel Macs so it runs inside x86 Linux, you will
|
What I was trying to point out is that Apple, has in the lab, porting MacOSX to an Intel based platform. What I was trying to point out is that several companies, including Dell, have approached Apple about buying the rights to place the MacOSX operating system on their systems as an alternative to Windows2003(TM). What I was saying is that it would be very interesting for this to actually happen. It appears that we will definately see an Intel based Apple computer with MacOSX as the primary operating system. This may/many not change the efforts to 'port' OOo to MacOSX.
However, I do look forward to seeing MacOSX as a viable alternative to the Industry dominating Operating System.
As a person who has 'been there, done that', I've used OS/2 (a great operating system that was snatched from the jaws of Victory) and various Linux distributions.
James |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
