so i wonder what happens if you take pearpc, load panther, load vpc, load pear...
dont mind me, just too much time on my hands
Your PC crashes!
As for what people are reporting about usability, You have to bear in mind that people have a tendency to exaggerate in all their excitement. Let's see some benchmarks and then we can see just how well performance is.
If you poke around the website you will note that the 500x slower ONLY applys to the GENERIC CPU code set they use, which is for porting. The x86 only coded CPU runs much faster (then 1/500th of a true PPC) at 40x worse!
That is impressive!
Quote:
PearPC emulates the following hardware:
* CPU GENERIC: Sort of G3, no altivec yet. A portable (but unported :-) CPU. Using this CPU, the client will run about 500 times slower than the host. It features a modest command-line debugger.
* CPU JITC-X86: Sort of G3, no altivec yet. A very fast CPU for x86 systems that translates PowerPC instructions into x86 instructions on-demand. By caching these translations, a lot of speed is gained. Using this CPU, the client will run about 40 times slower than the host. Only works on x86 hosts.
The project is ok as a proof of concept. It does not have any useful application nor is it legal. Isn't OS X meant to be run on Apple hardware only as per the license agreement? For one thing, I would like to see someone render a movie 40 times slower (assuming Altivec is implemented).
The Apple experience is the sum of both hardware and software.
The project is ok as a proof of concept. It does not have any useful application nor is it legal. Isn't OS X meant to be run on Apple hardware only as per the license agreement? For one thing, I would like to see someone render a movie 40 times slower (assuming Altivec is implemented).
The Apple experience is the sum of both hardware and software.
Not legal??? Err how is the project not legal? They provide software that emulates the PPC arch... you can use this to run PPC based Linux and other PPC OSs (MorphOS, *BSD) on x86 hardware. Yes OSX seems to run on it, but that is the user's choice to use OSX on non Apple hardware, so the project is in the clear. Providing tools that 'can' be used to do something illegal is not illegal in itself. Is it illegal for weapon manufactures to sell guns knowing people could do something illegal with it? There are many legal applications for this this project, and I personally think it's a great example of good programing.
And nobody will be using this software to render movies... think porting on a budget.
If I buy a $129 copy of Panther, why cant I run it on PPC emulators? Long before VPC was bought by M$, the mac guys were emulating windows, and there are other non-M$ wintel emmulators for PPC, so why the anger when the wintel guys turn the tables?
If I buy a $129 copy of Panther, why cant I run it on PPC emulators? Long before VPC was bought by M$, the mac guys were emulating windows, and there are other non-M$ wintel emmulators for PPC, so why the anger when the wintel guys turn the tables?
Because when you buy a license for Windows you can use it as you wish... but when you buy a license for OSX part of the license prevents you from running it on non-Apple hardware. Apple is a hardware company, their license is a smart move for them.
Because when you buy a license for Windows you can use it as you wish... but when you buy a license for OSX part of the license prevents you from running it on non-Apple hardware. Apple is a hardware company, their license is a smart move for them.
There have been 68k emmulators for years, why, if this is true, did apple not bust them?
AND>>>>
OSX panther was installed on a windows box live on techtv the other day, on TSS, and something tells me that a lawer read the EULA before he did it, breaking laws,rules,contracts on national tv is bad news for the network, and giveing a step by step tutorial would be like salt in the wound.
There have been 68k emmulators for years, why, if this is true, did apple not bust them?
Well back then all you had to do is own an Apple computer to use the OS. By extracting the ROM from the computer and using it on your PC (which is needed to emmulate a 68k) you were still fallowing the license. Today's Macs use Open Firmware, so the license was altered to reflect the changes.
Quote:
Originally posted by a_greer
OSX panther was installed on a windows box live on techtv the other day, on TSS, and something tells me that a lawer read the EULA before he did it, breaking laws,rules,contracts on national tv is bad news for the network, and giveing a step by step tutorial would be like salt in the wound.
What do they care? TechTV was sold off and most of the staff are getting the axe. They can pull some crazy shit if they wanted. Also, I have seen many TechTV shows that teach you how to do many things "illegal"... hell have you seen The Broken? Once again, it is the user's choice to do this, the program has many other uses.
....What do they care? TechTV was sold off and most of the staff are getting the axe. They can pull some crazy shit if they wanted. Also, I have seen many TechTV shows that teach you how to do many things "illegal"... hell have you seen The Broken? Once again, it is the user's choice to do this, the program has many other uses.
Well..they would care because they don't want to be named in an apple lawsuet...THATS what kevin cares, don't piss off the fruit, their lawers are better than anything the hosts could afford and comcast doesnt give a rats ass about the TSS cast so they would just as easily cut them loose, not to mention, comcast is liable for allowing that on one of their properties.
It's been awhile since we've had a devout pissed-off-that-Macs-don't-run- on-PeeCee's-person on these forums. Technical reasons aside, it usually takes about five pages of red-in-the-face flamewars to get the thread locked without once cracking it through their skulls that to allow the Mac OS to ported to the free-for-all world of PeeCees would result in the complete and utter downfall of the company.
It's been awhile since we've had a devout pissed-off-that-Macs-don't-run- on-PeeCee's-person on these forums. Technical reasons aside, it usually takes about five pages of red-in-the-face flamewars to get the thread locked without once cracking it through their skulls that to allow the Mac OS to ported to the free-for-all world of PeeCees would result in the complete and utter downfall of the company.
Now, how many pages will THIS thread go?
I love the apple hardware, but I can't build one for 600$, where as I CAN do that on the wintel side, makeing it work with pee-cees would be cool, but I can see the hell it would raise with software and driver compadibility and over all stability, my solution:
APPLE, PLEASE I beg you, releace a budget desktop without a built in display!!!!!!!!!!
it could be like 200$ cheeper than a comprable emac because all that is needed is a video out and no bulky display, for me, a PM is over-kill, and the low end is just a stupid buy when the DP is so close in price.
FTLOG: I HAVE GREAT MONITORS, I want to switch but I loath buying equipment that I do not need.
The JIT build is "only" 40x slower, but in real-world usage, it's much faster than that. Granted, no one's going to be running iMovie on it any day soon, but for simple word processing, the speed is surprisingly decent.
Very usable for certain tasks, not very much so for others.
Installation took about five to six hours (with only the essential system software - no BSD, no printer drivers, no iTunes, no nada).
Panther starts up in about roughly two to four minutes.
About This Mac reports "G3 at 0Mhz"; System Profiler reports "PowerMac G3 with G4 at 0Mhz". Hilarious.
WOOOOO_HOOOOOO if apple will not do it, source forge will!
If I buy Panther, I can use it NOW and get used to it before I switch to apple hardware, if the open source people can do this, why the holy hell cant Apple. Smackdown windows by partnering with HP to get OSX into all stores and in front of the consumers, apple hardware is still sexier and cooler and HP boxes arent and will not be as cool, thus people will get an osx box on the low-end cheap and then be turned to Apple.
AW hell who the f**k am I kidding? this will never happen, the stogy, I-AM-BETTER-THAN-YOU-ARE mac community wouldnt have it, as eleitests, Apple seems to think that Mac/OS is only good enough for the people who can/are willing to shell out 2x the price of an equil windows box.
I do plan to buy an Apple of some sort this fall but geeze, why not go to intel, licence X to Apples new buddies, HP and thus show the masses how great Mac is, just imagine: Mac/OS would no longer reside only in the small shaddow in the back corner at COMP USA.
Sigh.... people constantly seem to confuse Apple with Microsoft - I'll make this really simple for you: APPLE MAKES ALL ITS MONEY FROM HARDWARE SALES!! They are not a software company, they are a hardware company that uses flashy software to sell its machines. Panther sells iMacs and G5 towers, iTunes music store sells iPods. In the latter case, and probably in the former too, the software makes zero or near-zero profits because it keeps people buying new Apple hardware.
Certainly the hardware is slick enough that some people would still buy it even if you could get Panther for x86 machines, but business and education customers could not possibly justify buying Apple boxes when Dells cost half as much.
Even if we presuppose that Apple could solve the issue of PPC emulation for legacy apps (which would be a prerequisite to porting OS X to Intel), by doing this they would be automatically sentencing themselves to bankruptcy.
They might gain a few million software sales at virtually no profit at the cost of a few hundred thousand hardware sales at up to $1000 profit per unit.
The thing about software is that the price is mostly sunk into the cost of development - if you can sell 1 million copies of FooWare for $100 and break even, you can sell 2 million copies of FooWare for $100 and make around $100 million dollars. Now, that's not entirely true because there are *some* marginal costs associated with each peice of software, but still..
The question is, would people pay the price of OS X *plus* the amount of profit that Apple makes on each machine just to be able to run OS X on thier PC?
(Not that I'm saying OS X will be ported to the PC, but there *is* a price at which it would become viable, if people were actually willing to pay that price)
According to Google (http://www.google.com/press/zeitgeist.html), Linux has about 1% market share as compared to Mac OS which has about 4%. it is reasonable to assume that the potential user base for Mac OS X on X86 is comparable to the Linux user base - indeed more likely than not it would be the exact same users. Since Linux is free it will be impossible for Apple to compete on price, so the chances are that the only significant user base for OSX on X86 would be people who currently buy Apple hardware but would prefer to buy cheaper X86 hardware.
If there would be no significant new user base, but instead only a group who currently buy mac hardware switching to X86, then Apple has nothing to gain by porting OSX.
Under those circumstances, if Apple charge enough for OSX X86 to compensate for the loss in hardware sales then they would eliminate all potential customers in the process.
By definition, if it is cheaper to buy OSX and a Dell than to buy OSX and a Mac then Apple is losing money, if not then why would anyone bother?
Also, by relying on software sales, Apple becomes vulnerable to piracy - not only would potential Mac users not be buying Apple hardware, some of them wouldn't even bother buying OS X either, they would just copy it off a friend or the internet.
But as a hardware vendor this is almost a non-issue for Apple at the moment, anyone who wants to use OS X has to buy a Mac, period. Whether they then pay for subsequent OS upgrades or pirate them, Apple is still up on the deal.
If Apple wished to branch into the software market, their first step would be to allow Mac clones again. It makes way more sense for Dell to manufacture cheap Mac clones than for Apple to try to find a way to support its entire software base on another processor. But I see no evidence that they are planning to do that.
Comments
dont mind me, just too much time on my hands
Originally posted by ThunderPoit
so i wonder what happens if you take pearpc, load panther, load vpc, load pear...
dont mind me, just too much time on my hands
Your PC crashes!
As for what people are reporting about usability, You have to bear in mind that people have a tendency to exaggerate in all their excitement. Let's see some benchmarks and then we can see just how well performance is.
If you poke around the website you will note that the 500x slower ONLY applys to the GENERIC CPU code set they use, which is for porting. The x86 only coded CPU runs much faster (then 1/500th of a true PPC) at 40x worse!
That is impressive!
PearPC emulates the following hardware:
* CPU GENERIC: Sort of G3, no altivec yet. A portable (but unported :-) CPU. Using this CPU, the client will run about 500 times slower than the host. It features a modest command-line debugger.
* CPU JITC-X86: Sort of G3, no altivec yet. A very fast CPU for x86 systems that translates PowerPC instructions into x86 instructions on-demand. By caching these translations, a lot of speed is gained. Using this CPU, the client will run about 40 times slower than the host. Only works on x86 hosts.
Originally posted by ineedanapple123
Is an x86 like a Pentium 4 processor?
More like a Pentium 4 is like an x86 processor.
But yes... that is right.
The Apple experience is the sum of both hardware and software.
Originally posted by talksense101
The project is ok as a proof of concept. It does not have any useful application nor is it legal. Isn't OS X meant to be run on Apple hardware only as per the license agreement? For one thing, I would like to see someone render a movie 40 times slower (assuming Altivec is implemented).
The Apple experience is the sum of both hardware and software.
Not legal??? Err how is the project not legal? They provide software that emulates the PPC arch... you can use this to run PPC based Linux and other PPC OSs (MorphOS, *BSD) on x86 hardware. Yes OSX seems to run on it, but that is the user's choice to use OSX on non Apple hardware, so the project is in the clear. Providing tools that 'can' be used to do something illegal is not illegal in itself. Is it illegal for weapon manufactures to sell guns knowing people could do something illegal with it? There are many legal applications for this this project, and I personally think it's a great example of good programing.
And nobody will be using this software to render movies... think porting on a budget.
Originally posted by a_greer
If I buy a $129 copy of Panther, why cant I run it on PPC emulators? Long before VPC was bought by M$, the mac guys were emulating windows, and there are other non-M$ wintel emmulators for PPC, so why the anger when the wintel guys turn the tables?
Because when you buy a license for Windows you can use it as you wish... but when you buy a license for OSX part of the license prevents you from running it on non-Apple hardware. Apple is a hardware company, their license is a smart move for them.
Originally posted by \\/\\/ickes
Because when you buy a license for Windows you can use it as you wish... but when you buy a license for OSX part of the license prevents you from running it on non-Apple hardware. Apple is a hardware company, their license is a smart move for them.
There have been 68k emmulators for years, why, if this is true, did apple not bust them?
AND>>>>
OSX panther was installed on a windows box live on techtv the other day, on TSS, and something tells me that a lawer read the EULA before he did it, breaking laws,rules,contracts on national tv is bad news for the network, and giveing a step by step tutorial would be like salt in the wound.
Originally posted by a_greer
There have been 68k emmulators for years, why, if this is true, did apple not bust them?
Well back then all you had to do is own an Apple computer to use the OS. By extracting the ROM from the computer and using it on your PC (which is needed to emmulate a 68k) you were still fallowing the license. Today's Macs use Open Firmware, so the license was altered to reflect the changes.
Originally posted by a_greer
OSX panther was installed on a windows box live on techtv the other day, on TSS, and something tells me that a lawer read the EULA before he did it, breaking laws,rules,contracts on national tv is bad news for the network, and giveing a step by step tutorial would be like salt in the wound.
What do they care? TechTV was sold off and most of the staff are getting the axe. They can pull some crazy shit if they wanted. Also, I have seen many TechTV shows that teach you how to do many things "illegal"... hell have you seen The Broken? Once again, it is the user's choice to do this, the program has many other uses.
Here you go
http://www.neowin.net/forum/uploads/...1084436892.jpg
Originally posted by \\/\\/ickes
....What do they care? TechTV was sold off and most of the staff are getting the axe. They can pull some crazy shit if they wanted. Also, I have seen many TechTV shows that teach you how to do many things "illegal"... hell have you seen The Broken? Once again, it is the user's choice to do this, the program has many other uses.
Well..they would care because they don't want to be named in an apple lawsuet...THATS what kevin cares, don't piss off the fruit, their lawers are better than anything the hosts could afford and comcast doesnt give a rats ass about the TSS cast so they would just as easily cut them loose, not to mention, comcast is liable for allowing that on one of their properties.
Now, how many pages will THIS thread go?
Originally posted by drewprops
It's been awhile since we've had a devout pissed-off-that-Macs-don't-run- on-PeeCee's-person on these forums. Technical reasons aside, it usually takes about five pages of red-in-the-face flamewars to get the thread locked without once cracking it through their skulls that to allow the Mac OS to ported to the free-for-all world of PeeCees would result in the complete and utter downfall of the company.
Now, how many pages will THIS thread go?
I love the apple hardware, but I can't build one for 600$, where as I CAN do that on the wintel side, makeing it work with pee-cees would be cool, but I can see the hell it would raise with software and driver compadibility and over all stability, my solution:
APPLE, PLEASE I beg you, releace a budget desktop without a built in display!!!!!!!!!!
it could be like 200$ cheeper than a comprable emac because all that is needed is a video out and no bulky display, for me, a PM is over-kill, and the low end is just a stupid buy when the DP is so close in price.
FTLOG: I HAVE GREAT MONITORS, I want to switch but I loath buying equipment that I do not need.
Very usable for certain tasks, not very much so for others.
Installation took about five to six hours (with only the essential system software - no BSD, no printer drivers, no iTunes, no nada).
Panther starts up in about roughly two to four minutes.
About This Mac reports "G3 at 0Mhz"; System Profiler reports "PowerMac G3 with G4 at 0Mhz". Hilarious.
Originally posted by a_greer
WOOOOO_HOOOOOO if apple will not do it, source forge will!
If I buy Panther, I can use it NOW and get used to it before I switch to apple hardware, if the open source people can do this, why the holy hell cant Apple. Smackdown windows by partnering with HP to get OSX into all stores and in front of the consumers, apple hardware is still sexier and cooler and HP boxes arent and will not be as cool, thus people will get an osx box on the low-end cheap and then be turned to Apple.
AW hell who the f**k am I kidding? this will never happen, the stogy, I-AM-BETTER-THAN-YOU-ARE mac community wouldnt have it, as eleitests, Apple seems to think that Mac/OS is only good enough for the people who can/are willing to shell out 2x the price of an equil windows box.
I do plan to buy an Apple of some sort this fall but geeze, why not go to intel, licence X to Apples new buddies, HP and thus show the masses how great Mac is, just imagine: Mac/OS would no longer reside only in the small shaddow in the back corner at COMP USA.
Sigh.... people constantly seem to confuse Apple with Microsoft - I'll make this really simple for you: APPLE MAKES ALL ITS MONEY FROM HARDWARE SALES!! They are not a software company, they are a hardware company that uses flashy software to sell its machines. Panther sells iMacs and G5 towers, iTunes music store sells iPods. In the latter case, and probably in the former too, the software makes zero or near-zero profits because it keeps people buying new Apple hardware.
Certainly the hardware is slick enough that some people would still buy it even if you could get Panther for x86 machines, but business and education customers could not possibly justify buying Apple boxes when Dells cost half as much.
Even if we presuppose that Apple could solve the issue of PPC emulation for legacy apps (which would be a prerequisite to porting OS X to Intel), by doing this they would be automatically sentencing themselves to bankruptcy.
They might gain a few million software sales at virtually no profit at the cost of a few hundred thousand hardware sales at up to $1000 profit per unit.
Read my lips: IT'LL NEVER HAPPEN.
Socrates
The question is, would people pay the price of OS X *plus* the amount of profit that Apple makes on each machine just to be able to run OS X on thier PC?
(Not that I'm saying OS X will be ported to the PC, but there *is* a price at which it would become viable, if people were actually willing to pay that price)
If there would be no significant new user base, but instead only a group who currently buy mac hardware switching to X86, then Apple has nothing to gain by porting OSX.
Under those circumstances, if Apple charge enough for OSX X86 to compensate for the loss in hardware sales then they would eliminate all potential customers in the process.
By definition, if it is cheaper to buy OSX and a Dell than to buy OSX and a Mac then Apple is losing money, if not then why would anyone bother?
Also, by relying on software sales, Apple becomes vulnerable to piracy - not only would potential Mac users not be buying Apple hardware, some of them wouldn't even bother buying OS X either, they would just copy it off a friend or the internet.
But as a hardware vendor this is almost a non-issue for Apple at the moment, anyone who wants to use OS X has to buy a Mac, period. Whether they then pay for subsequent OS upgrades or pirate them, Apple is still up on the deal.
If Apple wished to branch into the software market, their first step would be to allow Mac clones again. It makes way more sense for Dell to manufacture cheap Mac clones than for Apple to try to find a way to support its entire software base on another processor. But I see no evidence that they are planning to do that.