Those are some excellent pics, Chucker. I have Rhapsody DR2 that only works on 8500s, 8600s, 9500s and 9600s, as well as BeOS 4 that works on Pentiums 1-3, pre-XP Athlons, and pre-G3 PowerPC Macs. Although I haven't gotten any of them going yet... my two computers are an iBook and an Athlon XP so I can't exactly use 'em. I'll find something to run them sometime.
If it were to be introduced close enough to now that we'd be able to see screen shots, we would have heard leaks, unless they're keeping the lid on this better than ever. I don't rule out the chance of it happening someday, but I don't think it's in the works right now, at least not as anything more than a few notes jotted somewhere in Cupertino.
Um, I seem to recall amongst the first round of Marklar threads that it's been up and running for a while and is usually kept on spec with the most recent PPC release, so it's a good deal more than a few notes on paper.
That said, the 970 situation seems to have put Marklar on the back-burner, and we'll probably never see it in the wild.
Uhm, wouldn't Marklar screenshots look exactly like regular Mac OS X screenshots?
Yes (apart from the about box, the uname -a output, etc.). Marklar is Mac OS X on x86 instead of Mac OS X on ppc32. There is proof that it used to exist (see my earlier post) back when Mac OS X was still Rhapsody. There is no proof that it's still being developed (nor is there proof that its development ever actually stopped).
The most interesting thing about rhapsody is when you compile an app it asks if you want it for Intel PPC or both.. I wonder if this means if marklar is released you WONT have to recompile all apps? Food for though.
What an empty thread. And without a match between the thesis statement and the final conclusion, as my Language Arts teacher used to say. If you want some shots of a Dull running OS X, I'd be happy to Photoshop you some. What do you think these forums are? Apple's oracle? Non of us know, and if we did...well, we'de be under NDA.
Comments
Maybe a picture taken of the screen and the machine that is running the port...
Originally posted by Cosmo
Assuming it is a successful port, wouldn't the screenshot of X on 86 look exactly the same as OSX on a mac?
Yes. Plus there is no reason to believe the "port" wouldn't be "successful". Have you all forgotten about Rhapsody? http://www.pegasus3d.com/rhapsody/rhapsody_screens.html
Originally posted by Chucker
Yes. Plus there is no reason to believe the "port" wouldn't be "successful". Have you all forgotten about Rhapsody? http://www.pegasus3d.com/rhapsody/rhapsody_screens.html
Those are some excellent pics, Chucker. I have Rhapsody DR2 that only works on 8500s, 8600s, 9500s and 9600s, as well as BeOS 4 that works on Pentiums 1-3, pre-XP Athlons, and pre-G3 PowerPC Macs. Although I haven't gotten any of them going yet... my two computers are an iBook and an Athlon XP so I can't exactly use 'em. I'll find something to run them sometime.
That said, the 970 situation seems to have put Marklar on the back-burner, and we'll probably never see it in the wild.
Originally posted by JLL
Uhm, wouldn't Marklar screenshots look exactly like regular Mac OS X screenshots?
Yes (apart from the about box, the uname -a output, etc.). Marklar is Mac OS X on x86 instead of Mac OS X on ppc32. There is proof that it used to exist (see my earlier post) back when Mac OS X was still Rhapsody. There is no proof that it's still being developed (nor is there proof that its development ever actually stopped).
But then I realized that was just stupid