Coffeehouse Thread

71 posts

Apple announce OSX on PC.

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    Rossj

    Well no they haven't, but if they did would you switch or would you wait?

  • User profile image
    rhm

    An OS that doesn't run Windows apps and wouldn't run any Mac apps until vendors made ports available. Can't see the use in that.

  • User profile image
    Rossj

    rhm wrote:
    An OS that doesn't run Windows apps and wouldn't run any Mac apps until vendors made ports available. Can't see the use in that.


    Yeah I'd assume that most mac developers would get their stuff re-compiled to run on it. I was more interested if it were just the hardware issue that stops people looking at it, but judging from your comment about running windows apps, I guess not.

  • User profile image
    rhm

    The device support issue is a real one of course. The smartest thing BillG ever did was shift the burden of hardware support onto hardware vedors in the Windows3 timeframe (previously MS had mostly written the drivers). But assuming an x86 version of OSX could support all my hardware I still wouldn't put it on my main machine because I need to use the software I have now.

    It's exactly the same reason most people won't put Linux on their main machine. If I'm buying a machine for a specific purpose (server or desktop) then other OSs come into consideration, but no OS is going to shift Windows off the PCs already out their in the main.

  • User profile image
    jamie

    If i were bill id do it for them Wink

    "Windows - the best way to run any application or OS"

    so long as he keeps win the default install at oem level.. why not support everything .. yes i mean everything  (plus didnt microsoft buy virtual mac or whatever)

  • User profile image
    Cider

    Rossj wrote:
    Well no they haven't, but if they did would you switch or would you wait?


    I can't see the point.  There's nothing I can't do in Windows I could do in OS X.

    Whilst we are talking hypothetically though, assuming Apple are able to turn Mac Minis out at a profit, if Apple worked with Microsoft on a method of being able to dual-boot OS X and Windows (not via Virtual PC) on a Mac Mini - that would be a major winner in the education market

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    If Apple does indeed make Marklar, then I will indeed buy it.

    Although I do suspect they'll call Marklar off because of the MiniMac.

  • User profile image
    Manip

    I myself would buy a second PC as a dedicated Mac OS X box (cheaper than a mini-mac Big Smile)

  • User profile image
    Cairo

    Rossj wrote:
    Well no they haven't, but if they did would you switch or would you wait?


    I'm already reaching for my wallet. Don't tease!


  • User profile image
    NeoTOM

    W3bbo wrote:
    If Apple does indeed make Marklar, then I will indeed buy it.

    Although I do suspect they'll call Marklar off because of the MiniMac.


    Marklar?

  • User profile image
    Cairo

    NeoTOM wrote:
    W3bbo wrote:If Apple does indeed make Marklar, then I will indeed buy it.

    Although I do suspect they'll call Marklar off because of the MiniMac.


    Marklar?


    Apple maintains a working version of OSX on X86 hardware. Word has it that Marklar exists for two reasons:
    1. Hedge bets vis-a-vis the PowerPC processor market
    2. Maintain portability of OSX (much like MSFT developed NT on a non-X86 processor)

  • User profile image
    FluffyDevil​Bunny

    Cairo wrote:

    Apple maintains a working version of OSX on X86 hardware. Word has it that Marklar exists for two reasons:
    1. Hedge bets vis-a-vis the PowerPC processor market
    2. Maintain portability of OSX (much like MSFT developed NT on a non-X86 processor)


    What MacOS/Marklar actually is (simplistic form):

    MacOS runs similar to Windows on Dos or Gnome on Linux. MacOS is the windowing or x-windows software for Darwin.

    Darwin is a Unix based OS that is derived from BSD (I believe). There are differences though, such as Darwin NOT being case-sensitive like Dos is. (Please note that commands switches in Darwin software are often still case sensitive. Such as /k and /K meaning to different things.)

    MacOS sits on top of Darwin. Any program you create for Darwin will run in the MacOS Terminal Window (like the Command Window). But you use the MacOS API's (Cocoa and such). MacOS is not required to run Darwin software. Such as Dos programs don't require windows.

    MacOS makes using Darwin really easy. For example, a Mac user normally thinks that a program is this little icon. No matter where they drag it to, it runs correctly. Behind the scenes they are dragging a directory not a program. Any directory that ends in .app is seen as a program to MacOS. Inside that directory are all the dll's and a manefest file describing things like a description of the program, what icon to display and even what interpretor to run (like java). So MacOS just makes Darwin easier to use.

    Darwin has an x86 brother. Darwin is also open source. So yes, in theory you can already run MacOS on intel hardware. You just won't have Marklar, which is the windowing software.

    Porting your apps from Darwin PPC to Darwin x86 is the part that vendors have to deal with (Darwin is 64-bit for one thing), porting MacOS to Marklar is a no brainer because the API's don't change.

    From Apple's point of view having thier OS only run on Apple harware, makes the software more stable. They don't have endless hardware configurations to deal with or driver problems like we do in windows.

    From a user perspective, we want the ability to choose and to get better prices from competition. If you can deal with being in a closed hardware environment, then this will be the best OS that you'll ever use. Infact I think it is the fastest way to learn UNIX. All Mac users end up learning Unix in the end, the same way that Windows users end up learning DOS.

    BUT. If Apple ever had to release thier OS to the x86 they would then become plagues with driver issues and irq conflicts and everything else that makes our PCs not work. MacOS would degrade in performance and stability.

    If Darwin picks up as Linux and BSD have, then perhaps more drivers will be ported to it. If Darwin gets the support that Linux has then maybe Apple will release thier OS to x86. If Apple does this AND it problems can be minimized, Microsoft will have a nightmare bigger than Linux. But Apple is smart, they won't release anything that can't run as expected.

  • User profile image
    Deactivated User

    Comment removed at user's request.

  • User profile image
    Deactivated User

    Comment removed at user's request.

  • User profile image
    Rossj

    Cider wrote:
    I can't see the point.  There's nothing I can't do in Windows I could do in OS X.


    So do you also say things like , there's nothing I can't do in XP that I could do in Longhorn? Smiley

    Beer28 wrote:

    Why do you need mac on x86 when there's linux and solaris for free?


    Because I like my desktops to be usable Wink

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    FluffyDevilBunny wrote:
    What MacOS/Marklar actually is (simplistic form):


    I don't think you can ever truely represent an OS in "simplistic form" without omitting very important details

    FluffyDevilBunny said:
    MacOS runs similar to Windows on Dos or Gnome on Linux. MacOS is the windowing or x-windows software for Darwin.


    WTF!? No.... MacOS != MacOS-X, anyway... Windows is not an windowing system... never was, its always had its own kernel. MacOS-X doesn't come with X11 out of the box anyway, but you can install it.

    FluffyDevilBunny wrote:
    Darwin is a Unix based OS that is derived from BSD (I believe).


    This is true....

    FluffyDevilBunny wrote:
    There are differences though, such as Darwin NOT being case-sensitive like Dos is. (Please note that commands switches in Darwin software are often still case sensitive. Such as /k and /K meaning to different things.)


    Not true... all UNIX OSes have to be case-sensitive to meet POSIX requirements. What you're describing would be something implemented at the shell level.


    FluffyDevilBunny wrote:
    MacOS sits on top of Darwin. Any program you create for Darwin will run in the MacOS Terminal Window (like the Command Window). But you use the MacOS API's (Cocoa and such). MacOS is not required to run Darwin software. Such as Dos programs don't require windows.


    MacOS-X is based on Darwin.

    And Darwin cannot run DOS programs, I don't know where you got that idea from

    FluffyDevilBunny wrote:
    MacOS makes using Darwin really easy. For example, a Mac user normally thinks that a program is this little icon. No matter where they drag it to, it runs correctly. Behind the scenes they are dragging a directory not a program. Any directory that ends in .app is seen as a program to MacOS. Inside that directory are all the dll's and a manefest file describing things like a description of the program, what icon to display and even what interpretor to run (like java). So MacOS just makes Darwin easier to use.


    Have you ever used a Mac? Because that certainly isn't true. (Granted, the last time I used a Mac 'properly' was back in '99, but I cannot imagine Apple "simplifying" the OS to this level.... nor have I heard Daring Fireball comment on this at all.....ever.

    FluffyDevilBunny wrote:
    Darwin has an x86 brother. Darwin is also open source.


    x86 brother? Builds and ports to another CPU architecture don't count as "brothers"... they're all the same source code, just compiled differently.

    FluffyDevilBunny wrote:
    So yes, in theory you can already run MacOS on intel hardware. You just won't have Marklar, which is the windowing software.


    No, you CANT run MacOS on x86 CPUs, MacOS-X is MUCH more than just the BSD-based infrastructure.

    And "Marklar" is just the internal code-name for the commerically released build of MacOS-X for the x86 and/or IA64ET/AMD64 (x64) architectures. Marklar is NOT the 'windowing software'

    FluffyDevilBunny wrote:
    Porting your apps from Darwin PPC to Darwin x86 is the part that vendors have to deal with (Darwin is 64-bit for one thing), porting MacOS to Marklar is a no brainer because the API's don't change.


    Now you're saying that Marklar is actually a platform? You're not making any sense. And yes... APIs do change, especilly for lower-level hardware options.... PPC is RISC, x86 is CISC and other hardware is vastly different. Many apps are probably impossible to port due to their reliance on "expected hardware features"

    FluffyDevilBunny said:
    From Apple's point of view having thier OS only run on Apple harware, makes the software more stable. They don't have endless hardware configurations to deal with or driver problems like we do in windows.


    We don't have driver problems with Windows NT5.1 or 5.2 either.... thanks to "driver signing", and Apple does have to deal with 'hardware configurations'.... why else are there PCI-X slots in the PowerMacs? (Note... PCI-X != PCI Express)

    FluffyDevilBunny said:
    From a user perspective, we want the ability to choose and to get better prices from competition. If you can deal with being in a closed hardware environment, then this will be the best OS that you'll ever use.


    Indeed... but I doubt the DoJ will see things in the same way

    FluffyDevilBunny wrote:
    Infact I think it is the fastest way to learn UNIX. All Mac users end up learning Unix in the end, the same way that Windows users end up learning DOS.


    WTF.... NO!

    I know LOADS of people who know Windows perfectly well, and they don't know jack schitt about DOS! The NT-Based OSes have nothing to do with DOS in the first place!

    MacOS hides UNIX behind the frontend... Go ahead... name one person who'se learned UNIX entirely from using MacOS-X or DOS from Windows.

    FluffyDevilBunny wrote:
    BUT. If Apple ever had to release thier OS to the x86 they would then become plagues with driver issues and irq conflicts and everything else that makes our PCs not work. MacOS would degrade in performance and stability.


    I doubt it... Kernel panics only really happen with seriously FUBAR'd drivers...Apple would learn from Microsoft and have a "driver signing" initive.

    FluffyDevilBunny wrote:
    If Darwin picks up as Linux and BSD have, then perhaps more drivers will be ported to it. If Darwin gets the support that Linux has then maybe Apple will release thier OS to x86. If Apple does this AND it problems can be minimized, Microsoft will have a nightmare bigger than Linux. But Apple is smart, they won't release anything that can't run as expected.


    Whatever....

    either way... get your facts straight before posting anything.

  • User profile image
    Rossj

    W3bbo wrote:

    Any directory that ends in .app is seen as a program to MacOS. Inside that directory are all the dll's and a manefest file describing things like a description of the program, what icon to display and even what interpretor to run (like java). So MacOS just makes Darwin easier to use.


    Have you ever used a Mac? Because that certainly isn't true. (Granted, the last time I used a Mac 'properly' was back in '99, but I cannot imagine


    Actually OSX makes wide ranging use of Bundles for both Applications and Widgets and Frameworks.  Sometimes it is nice that your application (complete with external dependencies) is all nicely wrapper up in something that is a folder, but looks like an single executable - this is why I can move whole apps from my desktop to the Apps folder to my homefolder by dragging a single icon and without worrying that I missed some DLL or other. And why uninstall involves dragging an icon to the trash Wink 

  • User profile image
    AndyC

    W3bbo wrote:

    name one person who'se learned UNIX entirely from using MacOS-X


    I can name people that have, but they did because they wanted too and not because they had to.

    It's easy to use Mac OS X without ever learning anything about Unix, just as it's trivial to use Windows without ever knowing of the existence of DOS.

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.