Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Guess what is coming on the x86 OSX! (true news) with Aqua
- Thread starter DJ_TRicks
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This would be cool if it were true, but it probably isn't.
And the name "Project Marklar" was a joke (see South Park).
And the name "Project Marklar" was a joke (see South Park).
Get a clue kids... Where did X come from to begin with?!?!?! Answer that and it'll give you ****CONFIRMATION**** as to X running on x86.
Marklar *IS* real and if anything X running on PPC should have been called Marklar since the PPC *IS* the "ALIEN" (not x86).
Originally posted by DaveGee
Get a clue kids... Where did X come from to begin with?!?!?! Answer that and it'll give you ****CONFIRMATION**** as to X running on x86.
Marklar *IS* real and if anything X running on PPC should have been called Marklar since the PPC *IS* the "ALIEN" (not x86).
Um, yer kidding right?
X = 10 (though I see now Ed beat me to it). NeXT was x86 compatible, and so is OS X's Unix underpinning, but OS X.x itself is specifically built on PPC hardware. I'm sure "Marklar" (though I doubt it's called that. Sheesh one web site makes up a name, suddenly it's fact. Do the research) exists in some form or another, but X for x86 would require a bit of a software recompile.
Do you really think they can just sell a version of OS X to be installed on any Intel/AMD computer? Hey, they can even make it as a Windows upgrade, keeps all your settings and programs (that was sarcasm BTW). Which version of Photoshop would you use? Mac or PC? Or would they have to do a whole recompile, making everyone have to upgrade their hardware AND software all over again? Would be nice, but I don't see this happening anytime soon.
You were kidding, right?
OK, one thing that I would have to hear be resolved before I really believe that OSX may really be coming to the x86 platform.
ALL current Mac applications run with PPC binaries, NOT X86!! ALL software that currently runs in OSX would have to be recompiled from the original source or else it's useless, and there are probably a bunch of other changes that would be necessary to make in the code to make it work as well as it does on the PPC.
Do we really want to force us developers to do this all AGAIN like we did from OS 9 to OS X? I think not. Apple would have to do some real innovation in order to make an emulator of some sort to run PPC code on the x86...
Sorry... you still have to convince me.
ALL current Mac applications run with PPC binaries, NOT X86!! ALL software that currently runs in OSX would have to be recompiled from the original source or else it's useless, and there are probably a bunch of other changes that would be necessary to make in the code to make it work as well as it does on the PPC.
Do we really want to force us developers to do this all AGAIN like we did from OS 9 to OS X? I think not. Apple would have to do some real innovation in order to make an emulator of some sort to run PPC code on the x86...
Sorry... you still have to convince me.
can't we just close the book on these stupid rumors
Is it me or does it sound like this DJ_TRicks just read a bunch of old threads and re-hashed them. I was really hoping that these rumors were dead and buried! He even mentioned lalal or something as a possible program to allow syncing this PDA, then why did apple spend so much time developing iSync!? If nothing else this should shoot his rumors in the foot, stop the madness! Don't fight over some mundane rumor that someone started, I'm sick and tired of coming into threads where someone posts TRUE STORY or something just to read the same old meekrop. Do us all a favor, unless your friend is Steve Jobs, don't post the same old rumors again!
Is it me or does it sound like this DJ_TRicks just read a bunch of old threads and re-hashed them. I was really hoping that these rumors were dead and buried! He even mentioned lalal or something as a possible program to allow syncing this PDA, then why did apple spend so much time developing iSync!? If nothing else this should shoot his rumors in the foot, stop the madness! Don't fight over some mundane rumor that someone started, I'm sick and tired of coming into threads where someone posts TRUE STORY or something just to read the same old meekrop. Do us all a favor, unless your friend is Steve Jobs, don't post the same old rumors again!
Just to play devils advocate...those arguing that Apple probably has an x86 port as a fallback plan, wouldn't you think they would be smart enough to implement the same on the software side for/with the larger developers when they got rolling on carbon and cocoa for X? They do have a number of patents on FAT binary technologies from both Apple of old and NeXT. That's not to say that some things wouldn't need serious attention.
An x86 port as a fallback plan would be a horrible fallback plan if the software side was not addressed along with it. Many developers with eggs in both Windows and Mac baskets would likely drop the Mac version if there is no safety net. I can see the x86 port as more of a technological demo than fallback plan.
I'd say that the day that Apple buys Adobe will signal the coming of the x86 Mac within a year of that. Not necessarily for the highend as I still think Apple could stay PPC on the high end if IBM holds up their end of the bargain. Apple would simply kill off the Windows versions of the Adobe products and transition their consumer market to be x86 based. I don't believe merging with or buying anyone else will accomplish the same results needed...not Macromedia, Corel, etc. Adobe is just too important to Apple.
An x86 port as a fallback plan would be a horrible fallback plan if the software side was not addressed along with it. Many developers with eggs in both Windows and Mac baskets would likely drop the Mac version if there is no safety net. I can see the x86 port as more of a technological demo than fallback plan.
I'd say that the day that Apple buys Adobe will signal the coming of the x86 Mac within a year of that. Not necessarily for the highend as I still think Apple could stay PPC on the high end if IBM holds up their end of the bargain. Apple would simply kill off the Windows versions of the Adobe products and transition their consumer market to be x86 based. I don't believe merging with or buying anyone else will accomplish the same results needed...not Macromedia, Corel, etc. Adobe is just too important to Apple.
Re: can't we just close the book on these stupid rumors
two dumbest rumors...a mac shaped like a cube
a sphere shaped mac...well, we got half that
two dumbest rumors...a mac shaped like a cube
a sphere shaped mac...well, we got half that
...I think everyone is missing the point here. They don't have this so they can one day move OS X over, it's there so they can compare performance between a G4 and a P4 (or a Clawhammer and a PPC 970, or whatever)...using the same OS. Windows (no pun intended) are a bit sluggish on OS X...are they sluggish on a 3 GHz P4? How the heck else are you going to test somehting like that...?
DJ_Tricks Sneers with Pleasure...
Has anyone heard that DJ_Tricks is trying to port OSX to his car radio? Imagine! a Car Radio that works on OSX!!! I can hardly wait...
-------------------
... there is no dark side of the moon, matter-of-fact its all dark.
PinkFloyd
Has anyone heard that DJ_Tricks is trying to port OSX to his car radio? Imagine! a Car Radio that works on OSX!!! I can hardly wait...
-------------------
... there is no dark side of the moon, matter-of-fact its all dark.
PinkFloyd
even if apple were going to drop the ppc (which it almost certainly will not) it would not waste it's time building computers around the x86 architecture. x86 is is old and dying, apple would build machines based on something like amd's 64 bit chips. anyway... this entire thread is giving dj_tricks what he wants, a lot of attention to his posts, the best way to discourage the resurgence of "g5 sphere" and "apple pda" and "osx to intel" threads is to ignore them. maybe tricks is right, and if he is, he'll gain instant credibility in the community and will have every right to say "i told you so". but i dont believe it, so lets stop wasting time on this thread.
OS-X on Intel
I wouldn't be surprised if a version of OS-X exists ported to Intel. If you were in charge of a company as large as Apple, you would be an IDIOT if you didn't have some insurance. No company can allow a vendor (Motorola, IBM) to hold them "hostage", with their entire survival in their hands. IF- Apple were to have NO CHOICE, I'm sure they would port to another chipset. However, I have no doubt they would design/produce their own motherboard and other chipsets necessary to ensure hardware/software compatibility. If that were to happen, there would be 2 sets of OS-X (older/new) and that would suck, but it would suck a lot less than being out of business. I would expect Mr. Jobs to explore (and continue to update/support) these options.
As long as their is a viable "G5" or next generation chipset however, they will not release an Intel/Athlon alternative. Apples are not hardware or software, they are the INTEGRATION of the two.
I wouldn't be surprised if a version of OS-X exists ported to Intel. If you were in charge of a company as large as Apple, you would be an IDIOT if you didn't have some insurance. No company can allow a vendor (Motorola, IBM) to hold them "hostage", with their entire survival in their hands. IF- Apple were to have NO CHOICE, I'm sure they would port to another chipset. However, I have no doubt they would design/produce their own motherboard and other chipsets necessary to ensure hardware/software compatibility. If that were to happen, there would be 2 sets of OS-X (older/new) and that would suck, but it would suck a lot less than being out of business. I would expect Mr. Jobs to explore (and continue to update/support) these options.
As long as their is a viable "G5" or next generation chipset however, they will not release an Intel/Athlon alternative. Apples are not hardware or software, they are the INTEGRATION of the two.
and now i see this https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?threadid=14233
it looks like the time for me to eat crow has arrived. it remains to be seen what this all means, but it looks like tricks was more right than wrong. sorry for the flaming dj_tricks.
dear fattty
thank you very much for the post you dont know how much i ment to me
i just want people to understand that even though my posts might have errors in the spelling its not because i dont spell check them or i dont research my info
the x86 OSX is not just a backup to let you all know as apple might want you to think its a way that apple might make grid computing and clustering over intel and PPC easier
further knowledge i have gotten points to a recent test in apple labs that put 5 Dell Servers with OSX Panther and 2 beta test 64 bit PPC chip systems with the help of ibm to push the technology of the new PPC Chip. Well anyway the test was to make a cluster that dosnt require identical hardware and it worked. Something with a new coding in the OS allows for standardized Wintel boxes and PPC systems to work together with a stanard system where its kinda a updated driver list on what to do for each task and stuff well anyway the idea blew me away when my freind told me cuz the cluster was able to compile both the PPC and the x86 systems by switching who was the master of the cluster and dropping all the compiled info on to two of the new fiber apple raid drives for the x serves.
my freind was very very vague when he told me this but from the way he puts it it would be like compiling your kernel for a 86 chip set by making a basic skimatic of what your system is then though some im taking a wild guess some sort of emulation level allowing the compiling of the system on another chip system
anyway its to complex even for my brain to fully understand....
can anyone tell me if this is possible?
With the growing power we as computer geeks shall rule the world!!!
thank you very much for the post you dont know how much i ment to me
i just want people to understand that even though my posts might have errors in the spelling its not because i dont spell check them or i dont research my info
the x86 OSX is not just a backup to let you all know as apple might want you to think its a way that apple might make grid computing and clustering over intel and PPC easier
further knowledge i have gotten points to a recent test in apple labs that put 5 Dell Servers with OSX Panther and 2 beta test 64 bit PPC chip systems with the help of ibm to push the technology of the new PPC Chip. Well anyway the test was to make a cluster that dosnt require identical hardware and it worked. Something with a new coding in the OS allows for standardized Wintel boxes and PPC systems to work together with a stanard system where its kinda a updated driver list on what to do for each task and stuff well anyway the idea blew me away when my freind told me cuz the cluster was able to compile both the PPC and the x86 systems by switching who was the master of the cluster and dropping all the compiled info on to two of the new fiber apple raid drives for the x serves.
my freind was very very vague when he told me this but from the way he puts it it would be like compiling your kernel for a 86 chip set by making a basic skimatic of what your system is then though some im taking a wild guess some sort of emulation level allowing the compiling of the system on another chip system
anyway its to complex even for my brain to fully understand....
can anyone tell me if this is possible?
With the growing power we as computer geeks shall rule the world!!!
hmmmm this kinda sounds like the new amiga stuff
im not trying to do any like conpirsity stuff but the way it sounded just remined me of the new amiga system that allows for live emulation on any platform for their games and auto screen scaling as well .... did anyone see it on tech tv or read the article on slashdot.org anyway if apple could do something like that so you could compile cross system imagine the power you could do by taking chips and presetalbe system specs and cross platforming them into a cluster or grid system ........ *shivers* oh the power
im not trying to do any like conpirsity stuff but the way it sounded just remined me of the new amiga system that allows for live emulation on any platform for their games and auto screen scaling as well .... did anyone see it on tech tv or read the article on slashdot.org anyway if apple could do something like that so you could compile cross system imagine the power you could do by taking chips and presetalbe system specs and cross platforming them into a cluster or grid system ........ *shivers* oh the power
my perspective
Apple always has things in development, most of which never will see the light of day. I wouldn't doubt that Apple has a version of OS X to run on an x86 chip. Apple relies on 2 companies to currently make chips for them. IBM and Motorola, of course. But in this industry & economy, what would happen if one of those companies decided to drop development of PPC chips to pinch some pennies? Or, what if they just stopped meeting the standards mac users demand? Not likely right now, but if it were to happen Apple would completely have to turn it's own development around for a different chip. This takes a LONG time and a lot of money. If this were to happen, Apple would be in big trouble. Having this very logical backup plan would surely come to the rescue. OF COURSE it would all be proprietary. This is Apple. Running OSX on any run-of-the-mill PC made in your basement would sure be one crazy support nightmare. I don't see Apple as a company changing in any respect other than what chip they use in their machines. I am sure the proprietary boot rom will still be there, you probably won't see it as any easier to make PC equipment work on the mac. But you will have a machine that is still competitive and cheaper than today. Personally, I am really looking forward to seeing the PPC 970 in my next mac. But if somthing should happen, Apple has their arse covered.
Apple always has things in development, most of which never will see the light of day. I wouldn't doubt that Apple has a version of OS X to run on an x86 chip. Apple relies on 2 companies to currently make chips for them. IBM and Motorola, of course. But in this industry & economy, what would happen if one of those companies decided to drop development of PPC chips to pinch some pennies? Or, what if they just stopped meeting the standards mac users demand? Not likely right now, but if it were to happen Apple would completely have to turn it's own development around for a different chip. This takes a LONG time and a lot of money. If this were to happen, Apple would be in big trouble. Having this very logical backup plan would surely come to the rescue. OF COURSE it would all be proprietary. This is Apple. Running OSX on any run-of-the-mill PC made in your basement would sure be one crazy support nightmare. I don't see Apple as a company changing in any respect other than what chip they use in their machines. I am sure the proprietary boot rom will still be there, you probably won't see it as any easier to make PC equipment work on the mac. But you will have a machine that is still competitive and cheaper than today. Personally, I am really looking forward to seeing the PPC 970 in my next mac. But if somthing should happen, Apple has their arse covered.
Re: hmmmm this kinda sounds like the new amiga stuff
Watch out, Amiga has a contract with the devil (MS) on some sort of development project.
Can't remember what it was, something about games or such ...
Oh well, it's probably in their news at www.amiga.com or in their forum (click through OS).
Add - was the Amiga Anywhere Content Engine and their new "App Pak" - and the first fruits of the devils works in for the Windows Powered Pocket PC and Windows Smartphones.
Watch out, Amiga has a contract with the devil (MS) on some sort of development project.
Can't remember what it was, something about games or such ...
Oh well, it's probably in their news at www.amiga.com or in their forum (click through OS).
Add - was the Amiga Anywhere Content Engine and their new "App Pak" - and the first fruits of the devils works in for the Windows Powered Pocket PC and Windows Smartphones.
Re: my perspective
it never stopped microsoft
they could have said, "oh well, we finally have a secure os with windows nt but not a very compatible one...let's just give up"
ms went with windows 2000 which was supposed to be their be all end all system and it didn't make the mark
did ms give up then?
no, now they have xp and it meets the security standards of an nt os and the muldimedia standards of a windows 98
apple needs to have growth and innovation on their menu at all times and they can't exist forever in a closed bubble
they are the only company left with this model and slowly, they have taken on more common standard's like the pc world's uma, tcp/ip, and intel's usb
apple is not stupid and they will hopefully always keep quality as their top priority for us
it never stopped microsoft
they could have said, "oh well, we finally have a secure os with windows nt but not a very compatible one...let's just give up"
ms went with windows 2000 which was supposed to be their be all end all system and it didn't make the mark
did ms give up then?
no, now they have xp and it meets the security standards of an nt os and the muldimedia standards of a windows 98
apple needs to have growth and innovation on their menu at all times and they can't exist forever in a closed bubble
they are the only company left with this model and slowly, they have taken on more common standard's like the pc world's uma, tcp/ip, and intel's usb
apple is not stupid and they will hopefully always keep quality as their top priority for us
Mac OS on PCs is nothing new...
The common hardware reference platform that barely got off the ground was supposed to make this a reality 7 years ago. Still I sincerely doubt Apple would do it so that it could run on any PC clone. Apple is first and foremost a hardware manufacturer and makes most of their sales on hardware. It would take a huge effort to become software only. They have a hard enough time supporting their own hardware with software, and is the only company to even do that on the scale that Apple does. Imagine how difficult it would be if Apple didn't control the making of the hardware or at least its specs. We'd see the problems of the Mac clones all over again.
The common hardware reference platform that barely got off the ground was supposed to make this a reality 7 years ago. Still I sincerely doubt Apple would do it so that it could run on any PC clone. Apple is first and foremost a hardware manufacturer and makes most of their sales on hardware. It would take a huge effort to become software only. They have a hard enough time supporting their own hardware with software, and is the only company to even do that on the scale that Apple does. Imagine how difficult it would be if Apple didn't control the making of the hardware or at least its specs. We'd see the problems of the Mac clones all over again.
what problems with clones?
...except for not handling the financial side of the licensing agreement and really cashing in on it...if any other company who is successful now did it, they would have likely cashed in
it is apple's financial failure with the clone debacle
if ms can make an os that works for many machines, why can't apple? i trust apple's os dev people more than ms os people
Re: my perspective
Apple does not have the resources to support running an OS on the generic PC. Although it would save many of the PC users that are too ignorant to just by an Apple computer, but are completely fed up with windows. Apple will not die if they do not make a x86 OS. They are very successful as it is. What set's Apple apart from the rest of this industry is that it makes it's own hardware and has to spend less of it's time and money fixing and working around compatibility issues. That=more R&D time and money=better computer. There are a few places macs are lacking which i wouldnt necessarily say speed but the overwhelming crush factor we were used to a few years ago. Right now the OS is the best OS around. A little bloated, but my computer handles is extremely well and it is only a dual 533. Running this OS on a x86 chip won't change anything but some code and possibly the price of the machine. Apple would still have hardware and their OS proprietary. I am sure someone will then hack OS X to run on other, non-authorized boxes, but those won't be supported by Apple. You guys should know how these things go by now. Apple is not making an os for every pc, so don't get your hopes up.
Apple does not have the resources to support running an OS on the generic PC. Although it would save many of the PC users that are too ignorant to just by an Apple computer, but are completely fed up with windows. Apple will not die if they do not make a x86 OS. They are very successful as it is. What set's Apple apart from the rest of this industry is that it makes it's own hardware and has to spend less of it's time and money fixing and working around compatibility issues. That=more R&D time and money=better computer. There are a few places macs are lacking which i wouldnt necessarily say speed but the overwhelming crush factor we were used to a few years ago. Right now the OS is the best OS around. A little bloated, but my computer handles is extremely well and it is only a dual 533. Running this OS on a x86 chip won't change anything but some code and possibly the price of the machine. Apple would still have hardware and their OS proprietary. I am sure someone will then hack OS X to run on other, non-authorized boxes, but those won't be supported by Apple. You guys should know how these things go by now. Apple is not making an os for every pc, so don't get your hopes up.