# OS X for x86?



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

I've heard rumors about OS X being created for the x86 platform, so I wondering for anyone else has any more details on that.


----------



## Squashman (Apr 4, 2003)

Apple will never do it. But you can run OS X ontop of Virtual Machine Software. Look at PearPC.


----------



## AvvY (Oct 8, 2004)

Why wouldn't apple support the x86 arch?

Late,


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

i think it wouldn't be a bad idea, especially if they marketed it cheaper then windows, give ppl another option to windows.


----------



## AvvY (Oct 8, 2004)

I have to admit I'm not that familiar with the workings of a mac, but surely they will change their arch over to x86 and the 64bit processors that are coming onto the market. surely they'd make a version of osX that makes use of it?

Late,


----------



## Squashman (Apr 4, 2003)

bigavvystyle said:


> 64bit processors that are coming onto the market. surely they'd make a version of osX that makes use of it?
> 
> Late,


Edit: What do you think the G5 processor is?


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

Yea, that rumour has been around for many many years - in various shapes and shades. As most rumours, there are at time a certain degree of fact w/in it. For more info, check out the following sites; keep in mind that I've included in the following a wide selection from various time periods to give a brief flavour; a google or a9 search will reveal much more... 

http://artificialcheese.com/story/2002/8/31/161044/348
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/02/20050225022048.shtml

http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/mac/2001/12/21/darwin.html - scroll down about 1/4 of the way... 

For example, just a couple sites regarding the above mentioned PearPC:
http://forum.osnn.net/archive/index.php/t-3712.html
http://www.neowin.net/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t165720-0.html


----------



## AvvY (Oct 8, 2004)

Squashman:



bigavvystyle said:


> I have to admit I'm not that familiar with the workings of a mac


I don't know a huge ammount about macs - I don't use them, thus I wouldn't know what the heck a G5 is, or equivilant to in PC talk.

Late,


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

bigavvy, no prob.  just FYI, the G5 is Apple's latest, most powerful "chip"; esp. the dual G5... she purrrrrrrrrr's!!!  Anyhow, the G5, which has been out now for some time, since 2003, indeed has 64-bit technology. Already. 

if interested, can check out:
http://www.apple.com/powermac/
and
http://www.thescreamonline.com/technology/applehistory/applehistory.html


> 2003  G5
> 
> The PowerMac G5 was Apple's long-awaited fifth generation PowerPC-based machine. In an important move, Apple decided to break with Motorola, and used an IBM-designed processor. Motorola had been chronically delayed for both processor design and shipment, and was at least a year away from its fifth-generation PowerPC CPU. Apple and IBM had worked closely together for nearly a year of the PowerPC 970 Processor (publicly referred to as the G5), and the 64-bit PowerMac G5 represented a huge leap forward in both processor and machine design.
> 
> Housed in an innovative new Aluminum enclosure, the PowerMac G5 was the first 64-bit consumer-level desktop computer ever sold. It featured either a single 1.6 or 1.8 Ghz processor, or dual 2.0 Ghz processors. It included a variety of motherboard enhancements, including PCI-X slots, and 8X AGP slot, a Serial-ATA bus, and up to 8 GB of RAM. Most impressive of all was the front-side bus speed, which was increased to half of the processor speed-up to 1.0 Ghz. This represented a more than six-fold improvement over the previous PowerMac G4 model.


Couple more sites regarding the OS X upon x86 chip subject:
http://www.macworld.com/news/2001/06/13/morphing/index.php
http://www.transitive.com/technology.htm
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/02/20050225022048.shtml
...*NOTE: please read the comments there for more take on this subject too*...


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

yea i got a 64 bit AMD... and i would prefer not to use windows, granted XP 64 is still beta. and only some linux distro have 64 bit. even for some $$$ i would love the 64 bit OS X


----------



## Squashman (Apr 4, 2003)

two1361 said:


> yea i got a 64 bit AMD... and i would prefer not to use windows, granted XP 64 is still beta. and only some linux distro have 64 bit. even for some $$$ i would love the 64 bit OS X


I would say Most Linux distros have 64 bit capability.


----------



## Front242 (Apr 28, 2005)

Hi, I am new to this forum, but this topic caught my interest. As far as the DarwinOS x86 is concerned most of the news on the net is very old; PII era in fact. Version 7.xx.xx Does seem to work with some stability on AMD systems. At this point I have only tried it with 2.2 gig processor on a Via Chipset. But I am going to attempt it on a nForce2 Chipset this weekend. I will keep you up to date on my progress.


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

Welcome Front242 to TSG! 

Thanks for the info, and look forward to hear what results you get. :up:


----------



## Front242 (Apr 28, 2005)

Here is some up to date info on Darwin x86: http://macslash.org/article.pl?sid=02/04/19/2239200&mode=thread

Thanks for the welcome MSM Hobbs.


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

heheh yea took off because of cheapness, free downloads and such. but if apple made OS for the pc, i would spend $129 on it. better then spending money on windows. lol im sure if enough people pressured Apple they might consider it


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

lol... two1361, I'm afraid that there would be one heck of a long line for that!


----------



## AvvY (Oct 8, 2004)

I'd kinda like the idea of the MAC OS for PC. But it is built on BSD linux anyhow, so to get a similar effect, you can just use a Linux distro. Although, from what I read in an article about the new Tiger release of OSX, it looks far out!

Late,


----------



## amethystjw (May 9, 2005)

AvvY said:


> I'd kinda like the idea of the MAC OS for PC. But it is built on BSD linux anyhow, so to get a similar effect, you can just use a Linux distro. Although, from what I read in an article about the new Tiger release of OSX, it looks far out!
> 
> Late,


Uh, no. OSX is built on BSD but saying that it must be like Linux is about as accurate as assuming that Windows 98 and Windows 3.1 must be the same because they're both built on DOS. OSX is less flexible than Linux since it's not open source and requires a PowerPC processor but it's also about a hundred times easier to use. You'll never have to compile a package in OSX or install a driver or troubleshoot, well, anything.

As for Apple releasing OSX (or any other OS) for the x86, not a chance. Apple makes almost all of its profit from its hardware (its excellent hardware, by the way -- visit an Apple store sometime) and would be shooting itself in the foot to start supporting x86. Besides, Apple probably loves supporting only its own hardware because that way there are no surprises when it comes to incompatible hardware.


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

Welcome amethystjw. 

Correct on that part for sure about Apple much more preferring less compatibility surprises if they had to support both their own software and then the hardware from their own and the vast number of other manufacturers. One of the big reasons for the beauty of Apple's safety, security, and robustness is that they do control both software and hardware so tightly - which tho' is one aspect of 'em that drives many that love to tinker w/ computers to not like 'em. Which to me, I'll take the pros of Apple any day over the negatives, perceived or real, any day!


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

AvvY said:


> I'd kinda like the idea of the MAC OS for PC. But it is built on BSD linux anyhow, so to get a similar effect, you can just use a Linux distro. Although, from what I read in an article about the new Tiger release of OSX, it looks far out!
> 
> Late,


BSD and Linux are completely different, and no linux distro is anything like OS X.


----------



## Front242 (Apr 28, 2005)

Well After wiping out two partitioned HD's I still am unable to get it to boot past the apple icon. Just spins forever. I am still going to continue working on it though.


----------



## sudo (May 12, 2005)

There is already a program that allows you to run Mac OS X on Windows, it's called PearPC. I used to use it with my 1.7Ghz Intel Celeron and it emulated a 600Mhz PPC G4.
http://www.pearpc.net/


----------



## AvvY (Oct 8, 2004)

I had looked at possibly using pearpc, but I don't want to run OS X from within Win XP. It almost sounds counter productive. I fail to understand why you can't actually install OS X onto a PC and boot it like WinXP or a *Nix distro.

Late,


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

If it were available for x86, Apple wouldn't be able to sell nearly as many computers, and they'd lose a lot of business to piracy. I believe the OS X Terms of Service actually forbids running on an emulator such as PearPC.


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

would os x(tiger) run on an emulator w/ a 64 bit pc?


----------



## sudo (May 12, 2005)

yes :]


----------



## Squashman (Apr 4, 2003)

AvvY said:


> I fail to understand why you can't actually install OS X onto a PC and boot it like WinXP or a *Nix distro.
> 
> Late,


Kernel and Processor!


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

AvvY said:


> I fail to understand why you can't actually install OS X onto a PC and boot it like WinXP or a *Nix distro.
> Late,


just like windows won't run on an Apple


----------



## AvvY (Oct 8, 2004)

Sorry to sound stupid about it all, my understanding of how software and hardware interact isnt very good. I thought that both a pc and a mac run similar arcitechture, as in, they all use the same computer parts. thus, i dont see how one couldnt run mac os on a pc, or windows on a mac rig.

I just dont see why you need an emulator and such. especially because you can run linux on both pc and mac - im not 100% sure of that, but from what iv been told.

Late,


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

their are some hardware that would run on both, like since apple and pc's not have SATA, makes it easier to get HDD's. similar with RAM. but the core of each are different. x86 chips don't understand the language of mac os, and vice versa with windows and macs


----------



## brendandonhu (Jul 8, 2002)

AvvY said:


> Sorry to sound stupid about it all, my understanding of how software and hardware interact isnt very good. I thought that both a pc and a mac run similar arcitechture, as in, they all use the same computer parts. thus, i dont see how one couldnt run mac os on a pc, or windows on a mac rig.
> 
> I just dont see why you need an emulator and such. especially because you can run linux on both pc and mac - im not 100% sure of that, but from what iv been told.
> 
> Late,


PC and Mac have completely different architectures. x86 and PowerPC. Linux can be compiled for any architecture.


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

well then.... my next computer will be a MAC..... OS X is much nicer than windows... and MAC hardware is decent too.... although on the other hand I am also an AMD fan.... what conflicts..


----------



## AvvY (Oct 8, 2004)

I never liked macs in so far as you couldnt upgrade thme like u can a pc, but with the power mac towers, aparently you cant quite easily.

I like the mac os, but not enough to justify having a mac computer. maybe if i ever had the cash to have both. i am also a fan of amd's - only coz i hate how intel has an almost manolpoly. 

Late,


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

i used macs from time i was 12...through HS... used PC's since. i just was using a mac and kinda missed it. true, MACs are not known to upgrade, but if ya get one configured well, would you need to upgrade it anytime soon?


----------



## Squashman (Apr 4, 2003)

two1361 said:


> well then.... my next computer will be a MAC..... OS X is much nicer than windows... and MAC hardware is decent too.... although on the other hand I am also an AMD fan.... what conflicts..


IBM makes the chip for Mac's and they also help AMD develop their cpu's as well. So you are getting what you want.


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

hmm i been out of the loop about MAC hardware, but didn't Motorola make the chips for Mac's?


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

As mentioned above, the platforms do carry some similar hardware, but how they process the info/code is different. For example, the CPU, which is the actual heart/brain of the computer, is very different in each, as they access memory in different ways, and run different instruction sets. The Apple chips are more RISC oriented, whereas the Intel Pentium type are more CISC oriented. A few very good articles explaining the diffs betweent the RISC and CISC, along with the post-RISC/CISC era, giving some good pros/cons to each are at:

http://cse.stanford.edu/class/sophomore-college/projects-00/risc/risccisc/

http://www.amigau.com/aig/riscisc.html

and then: http://arstechnica.com/cpu/4q99/risc-cisc/rvc-1.html


----------



## guitarman1 (Nov 27, 2004)

I was reading latest out here in Oz ,UK mag PCExtreme and they explained what
was going on in the different CPU's and it said..... virtually all modern CPU are RISC including most recent AMD and Intel ones,but therein lies a problem,the x86 instruction set used by PC software and Windows in particular is CISC,  A brute force solution is used ,although AMD/Intel chips are fed CISC-based program code an extremely quick translation unit is built-in to the CPU which chops the CISC instructions into RISC pieces.If they run on pure RISC ,it said,it would probably run a lot faster.
It does make you wonder why you can't get around this !
Check out this place lots on various OS platforms.
OSNews


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

guitarman - excellent site, thanks! :up:

Esp. the pages:
http://www.osnews.com/topic.php
and
http://www.osnews.com/resources.php


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

be nice if some way Apple would make it cheaper to buy their hardware... i know they got a tight hold on there hardware and also its real nice. plus what if i want a 2ghz G5 but not dual?


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

Part of this higher price, remember, is that, in no particular order, speaking in general terms, and relative to the PC biz: 
(a) Apple does control the market
(b) there are fewer manufacturers of the parts
(c) there are fewer buyers of the parts
(d) Apple requires that each piece of hardware is compatible w/ each other
(e) Apple requires that all software is compatible w/ all others, and the hardware
and
(f) the parts are produced to a theoretically higher quality.

As has been stated tho' in other threads herein and elsewhere on the 'net, depending upon how you look at it, taking ALL things into consideration w/ an open/honest mind, an Apple does have a very attractive price-per-performance price point, esp. if not a person that is interested in creating your own radical machine, and taking security into account as another potential positive for Apple. But, this is fodder for a different thread...  

PS: btw, Apple did decrease their price for the latest G5 power tower iterations, and also added some sweet upgrades - nothing earthshaking, but taken all together, pretty cool. :up:


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

true lol but why also the higher speed chips are your forced to get dual setup? lol dual is nice but yet the cost is way up


----------



## guitarman1 (Nov 27, 2004)

Hey MSMH, did you find these crazies at OSNews, MENUETOS The Assembly Language Programmers OS!(their description of themselves)


> MenuetOS is a hobby Operating System for the PC written entirely in 32bit assembly language, and released under the GPL. It supports 32 bit x86 assembly programming since this allows for smaller, faster and less resource hungry applications to be created.
> 
> Menuet has no roots within unix or the posix standards, nor is it based on any particular operating system. The design goal has been to remove the extra layers between different parts of an OS, which normally complicates programming and create bugs.....Menuet.org


http://www.menuetos.org/
PCExtreme describes menuet OS and its users...."For people so GEEKY that they don't even program in programing languages, but prefer to work directly with the processor! " 
It looks OK , a nice looking GUI, linux/unix command knowledge a HUGE advantage.

ReactOS sounds real interesting Windows like with absolutely NOTHING in common ,yet some windows NT software will run, how interesting!
http://www.reactos.com

Or this ones so obscure that its not at OSNews ,Eros-OS,Extremely Reliable Operating System
http://www.eros-os.org/

Don't understand a lot of this stuff but I find it super-fascinating.


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

g'man... :up: very interesting, but yea, more than just a tad over my noggin too... 

As to some additional info regarding Apple using Intel chips...  :

http://www.computerworld.com/softwa...0801,101942,00.html?source=NLT_MAC&nid=101942



> *Report: Apple explores use of Intel chips for Macs*
> The move would represent a major shift by the computer maker
> 
> MAY 23, 2005 (REUTERS) - Apple Computer Inc. has been in talks that could lead to a decision soon to use Intel Corp. chips in its Macintosh computer line, The Wall Street Journal reported today.
> ...


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

> *Analysis: Intel and Apple like apples and oranges*
> News Story by Tom Krazit
> 
> MAY 23, 2005 (IDG NEWS SERVICE) - With a buzz factor that far exceeds its market share, Apple Computer Inc. is the darling of technophiles, graphics artists, and vocal nonconformist computer users around the world.  The world's largest chip company might also be smitten with the Mac maker, according to a report in today's Wall Street Journal.
> ...


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

On one hand, I can see the potential benefits of such an agreement between Apple and Intel. However, the rebel w/in me would hate to see it.  But, in the end, what ever is in the long-term best interests of Apple, will support. Maybe most probably...


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

when is Apple stop using Motorola for there chips? like i may have mentioned before.... i been away from apple for many years so i haven't followed them as closly


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

two1361, did ya see the previous post I had made?  

"When Apple made the transition from Motorola Inc.'s 68000 family of processors to chips based on the PowerPC architecture in the early 1990s, the company lost about half its market share, said Nathan Brookwood, principal analyst with Insight 64 in Saratoga, Calif."

Some good history articles can be found at:
http://www.thescreamonline.com/technology/applehistory/applehistory.html
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/ppc-1.ars/1
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/3682/applehistory.html


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

FWIW, check out emoxley's thread at: http://forums.techguy.org/showthread.php?p=2672637


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

im glad to see that with this switch would bring change in the OS to run on PC's, hehehe i miss using Mac OS, just can't afford Mac hardward.


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

two1361 - two words... Mac mini.


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

lol..... absolutly not heheh, that would not cut it for me


----------



## two1361 (Apr 13, 2005)

though i would enjoy it if apple decided to have new OS X run on any x86 machine, but doesn't appear that is what they are gonna do, or am i wrong? keep it the same as now... need a Mac machine to use OS X


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

Thought this kinda funny...


----------



## MSM Hobbes (Apr 23, 2004)

Article regarding Apple and Dell...



> *Mac OS on a Dell? Dell in favor, Apple opposed
> Though Dell expressed interest in the idea, Apple isn't biting*
> 
> JUNE 17, 2005 (IDG NEWS SERVICE) - If Apple Computer Inc. ever decides to let its Mac OS X operating system outside of its confines, the company can count Dell Inc. founder and chairman Michael Dell as a possible customer.
> ...


----------

