Jump to content

OS X on Intel Still Not Complete

Swad

By Swad,
in Front Page News and Rumors

 Share
143 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

johnsmith1882
johnsmith1882
Posted
Posted
JohnSmith, thanks. That makes a lot of sense. The question is though, were those mac-edition cards they were using or standard ATi/nVidia cards? If it's mac edition, it's useless.

 

Well, they sure aren't using Mac edition PCIe cards in them (unless there's a forthcoming powermac revision they've been keeping quiet :(). However, I guess they could pop in a regular old PCI video card, which there may be Mac versions of. Of course, a Mac video card of any kind won't work in a PC without being reflashed (where possible) no matter the operating system being used.

JaS
JaS
Posted
Posted
No one has said other cards are working.  People have been guessing what the OpenGL improvements imply.

 

Thank you,finaly someone has said the obvious.Although you cant blame them,its just there desire to get these cards working thats making them jump the gun and assume.

Guest terry
Guest terry
Posted
Posted
Women love windows, you ever tried to teach a blonde how to use linux?
No sexism, please!

 

linuxchick7sn.th.jpg

 

:)

 

And no need for you to teach them, they're already teaching themselves:

 

http://www.linuxchix.org/

 

People *are not* prepared to {censored} in the wind
Cool kids - ones who fancy something different, or those with plain sense who are not in the mood to {censored} around
Ar video professionals - by the time you {censored} around
I ran a shop for 6 years and I came home and used a mac.. why? because after pissing about with {censored} PCs
I mean why pay 10 people to do something that you can get thousands of people to do for absolutely {censored} all?

We're not talking about sanitary hardware in this thread, are we? :(

pandy
pandy
Posted
Posted
Remember that women do read the board. :P

 

Sorry if that sounded sexist, it certainly was'nt meant to be..

 

My wife, like me, loves pc's..

 

However, the other day when I was installing suse onto my now tri booting system I said to her "here sweety, do you fancy a play with linux? all the real IT bods need to know how to use this..."

 

Her reply? "nah, I'll learn that if I really *need* to, for now I'll stick to windows."

 

Ahh, the good old fashioned cop out :)

macgirl
macgirl
Posted
Posted
Remember that women do read the board. :P

 

And again, I don't see what is so hard about reading the 1st post in this thread and keeping the topic on what it was about.

 

Indeed, and some are no just using Linux, Mac OS X on X86 too, :):P

 

What was the topic? :P

pandy
pandy
Posted
Posted
No way Intel's going spin to a custom CPU for apple. The economics simply don't work. Plus, you can see how well that scenario worked already with the SSE3 instructions -- they simply got emulated away.

 

/blkblt

 

 

A floating point here, a new instruction there and you have an entirely new chip.

 

I have little doubt that SSE3 had nothing to do with Apple and was merely an extension to intel's long running line of updates into their CPUS.

 

I mean, streaming simd has been an intel thing since P3's, so it's logical they'd keep adding new ones as time goes on..

Cowboy Mike
Cowboy Mike
Posted
Posted

Running 10.4.2 for 2 days now, this weekend i'll try to change hardware, etc... I'll start a new topic with screenies on sunday. But, no more questions of seeding to the community, please. I don't like to get kicked-ass by apple. Their feet are very large, weighing billions of Dollars B) If there comes up a torrent - it must have been from another dev...

 

greetz

 

==============================================

 

Meanwhile get this:

 

ADC Select Membership with Developer Transition Kit just US$1,499

 

Get the software, hardware, technical support, and hands-on instruction you need to develop for both PowerPC and Intel-based Macs. Ordering this product entitles you to receive one Developer Transition Kit and a one-year Select program membership that includes:

 

Mac OS X and Xcode Tools on Disc

One (1) ADC Select Mailing Subscription

Two (2) Technical Support Incidents

One (1) ADC Select Hardware Discount

ADC Software Seeding Program

ADC Compatibility Labs Access

ADC Select Technical and Business Discounts

kuau
kuau
Posted
Posted
Running 10.4.2 for 2 days now, this weekend i'll try to change hardware, etc... I'll start a new topic with screenies on sunday. But, no more questions of seeding to the community, please. I don't like to get kicked-ass by apple. Their feet are very large, weighing billions of Dollars B) If there comes up a torrent - it must have been from another dev...

 

greetz

 

==============================================

 

Meanwhile get this:

 

ADC Select Membership with Developer Transition Kit just US$1,499

 

Get the software, hardware, technical support, and hands-on instruction you need to develop for both PowerPC and Intel-based Macs. Ordering this product entitles you to receive one Developer Transition Kit and a one-year Select program membership that includes:

 

Mac OS X and Xcode Tools on Disc

One (1) ADC Select Mailing Subscription

Two (2) Technical Support Incidents

One (1) ADC Select Hardware Discount

ADC Software Seeding Program

ADC Compatibility Labs Access

ADC Select Technical and Business Discounts

 

 

What hardware do you get for 1499.00? An intel developer white box? If so do you have to return the system to apple?

Cowboy Mike
Cowboy Mike
Posted
Posted
What hardware do you get for 1499.00? An intel developer white box? If so do you have to return the system to apple?

 

Well yes, it's one year of the so called "Select Developer Membership" and it contains the DTK. It's ugly, but you'll have to return it. But being in front of a new era, is worth it, isn't it. :-) I'm wondering if apple is comeing up with a new "Newton", as i found portable solutions in XCode 2.2.

 

(added) It's just steering of intel's enhanced speedstep (/added)

 

(cancelled) If yes I'll have something like Startrek's Tricorder in mind - a full implementation of OSX to intel's mobile solutions (PXA270) would be even nicer, wouln't it. (/cancelled)

 

==================================================================

 

Deisel -

What's your impressions so far? Any huge differences you can tell?

 

Well the performance is nice, running native software but rosetta still needs improvements. As i take a look to PearPC, which emulates a full G4 processor on a x86, i don't understand why apple doesn't emulate Altivec into SSE2/3 orders, that will improve performance by x-factor :lol:

 

Indeed, first intelmacs will come with 10.5+...

Cowboy Mike
Cowboy Mike
Posted
Posted
Are you sure ? At the WWDC Steve Jobs talked about an end '06- beginning '07 release for Leopard...

 

Sure? As far as i can be. I'm sure Leopard will come next Summer, ar least to developers - and first to intelmacs - for PPC late 2006/early 2007 seems true, this is for marketing the new architecture...

johnniecarcinogen
johnniecarcinogen
Posted
Posted

The Dev kits are definately not preproduction or prototype x86 macs, so I believe Apple will make thier own mobo with a proprietary chipset and develope the OS so that FULL functionality is only capable with the x86 macs.

cyrana
cyrana
Posted
Posted

DieselDandy... Rosetta doesn't do any Altivec at all, it just emulates the G3. Perhaps any Altivec to SSE3 translating was too slow to really be useable, so that is why they did this.

 

As for their integrated graphics. I'd be willing to bet that some new Apples do use them so it isn't a total wash. And they are definitely very very fast for non-gaming for sure.

 

Also, I bet we see another ABI change or two on the x86 side of things. Its not all feature-complete. But if you own (err are renting) a devkit, its no big deal anyway. hehe

pabloX
pabloX
Posted
Posted
Yep. From what I've heard so far, the dev kit looks like a major odd-ball when compared to other Apple computers. For one, its use of integrated graphics will never be utilized in any future Pentium 4 PowerMacs. Secondly, it's running an operating system that will never (or isn't intended) to be used by the general public. It's just a stepping stone to Leopard, which will be the first commercially available Apple x86 operating system.

 

Wouldn't make much sense to release Tiger x86 literally a few weeks before Leopard is due to debute anyway.

 

I'm eager to hear about how video cards work with this 10.4.2 build. Everything I heard could turn out to be disappointing hype. It probably is. Eh... we'll see.

 

What makes you say integrated graphics will never be used in future Mac's? It would make sense for Apple to use GMA900 or GMA950 graphics for their low end models such as iBook and MiniMac. Plus, they wouldn't send out devkits with a graphics chip they wouldn't even use, thats just stupid.

johnsmith1882
johnsmith1882
Posted
Posted

Edit: ^^ What PabloX said -- I forgot about all the time needed to make drivers for Intel's GMA900, they didn't do that for fun if they were going to stick to ATI and nVidia. It would have been cheaper to skip making the drivers and ship some midrange part from either of the vendors. Come to think of it, Apple may lend some prestige to Intel's graphics, which it sorely needs.

 

Yep. From what I've heard so far, the dev kit looks like a major odd-ball when compared to other Apple computers. For one, its use of integrated graphics will never be utilized in any future Pentium 4 PowerMacs. Secondly, it's running an operating system that will never (or isn't intended) to be used by the general public. It's just a stepping stone to Leopard, which will be the first commercially available Apple x86 operating system.

 

Wouldn't make much sense to release Tiger x86 literally a few weeks before Leopard is due to debute anyway.

 

I'm eager to hear about how video cards work with this 10.4.2 build. Everything I heard could turn out to be disappointing hype. It probably is. Eh... we'll see.

 

It seems unlikely that Apple will ever ship commercial Pentium 4 based Macintoshes regardless of video card. The whole public rationale for the switch was power/performance in a few years time. The PPC970 was 'good enough' in performance for desktop form factors, but was unable to fit inside an Apple-approved portable -- it ran too hot. The rumors have been that the iBook and PowerBook lines will get transitioned to Intel first, and that makes sense because the Motorola 7447 is horribly outdated both in terms of performance and power consumption. Given that the 7448 and e600 are perpetually 'real soon now', there is no future for Apple's portables. If this turns out to be the case, they will probably use the next generation Pentium M derivatives single core and/or Celerons in the iBook, dual core Pentium Ms in the PowerBook. I think Yonah is the one due out earliest, but there is supposed to be a much more tweaked version that comes out later that adds EM64T (Merom? I can never keep Intel's next generation code names straight. It's either that or Conroe).

 

On the integrated graphics side, I would be really surprised if Apple doesn't take advantage of Intel's integrated graphics solutions. First, Apple needs decent graphics cards in all their systems, as OS X requires one to be really useable. Right now, that means they have to pay extra money to ATI or nVidia for discrete mobile parts and integrate them into their systems. That will always be more expensive than integrated video, which will come with the chipset that you have to buy anyway. While most technically minded people scoff at Intel's past Extreme Graphics (and the i740... anyone remember that?) efforts, so long as they support CoreImage (and as we all know, the GMA900 does) they are good enough for low end computers like the iBook, eMac, and Mac mini. For anything higher on the Apple product matrix, they can integrate a discrete ATI or nVidia solution -- which costs more, but then again Apple charges more for them. Since nobody plays games on Macs, and there aren't likely to be any commercial games on OX X Intel for a good long while, I don't see any problem with Intel's current and future integrated graphics.

 

The first Intel based Macintoshes will also probably ship with a point revision of 10.4, just like the first G5 based PowerMacs got their own revision of 10.2. It may seem strange, but 10.3 came out not long after the 10.2 based G5 systems. The timeline says that the first Intel Macs should be ready by next year's WWDC in June 2006. That gives a few months wiggle room, but no matter how you slice it, there will have been relatively little warning of what 10.5 would offer developers in the way of features, or even for Apple themselves to implement said features. Since everyone is currently revalidating and porting stuff to OS X x86, tossing in another major release of OS X would be variously cruel or stupid. Also, word has filtered down that the release cycle for OS X is supposed to be slowing down as it matures, so a 1.5 year break between 10.4 and 10.5 is a bit quick. The only big change that could be ready if 10.5 is released with the Intel Macs at WWDC would be that it supports Intel Macs, which for their PPC systems (read: the vast, vast, vast majority of all Apple systems out there at launch) would be meaningless.

 

Just my $0.03 (lousy inflation).

arenared
arenared
Posted
Posted
The Dev kits are definately not preproduction or prototype x86 macs, so I believe Apple will make thier own mobo with a proprietary chipset and develope the OS so that FULL functionality is only capable with the x86 macs.

 

 

Well , that kind of defeats the purpose, that would mean that mac is going back to what they were doing before.. Proprietary hardware and software..

 

no change

Guest terry
Guest terry
Posted
Posted
It seems unlikely that Apple will ever ship commercial Pentium 4 based Macintoshes regardless of video card.
I already tried to explain that to Takuro in another thread...

http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=1977&st=0

...but obviously he prefers to keep up his own reality distortion field.

 

there is supposed to be a much more tweaked version that comes out later that adds EM64T (Merom? I can never keep Intel's next generation code names straight. It's either that or Conroe).
Yep, it's Merom. Conroe is its desktop counterpart and widely supposed to have a larger cache (nobody seems to know for sure yet what the exact differences to Merom will be, only that it will for some reason consume more power).
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...