Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Macs with Intel chips?

Author
Message
Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 09:37
Link
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8109913/

Sounds like a plan to me. One step closer to making MAC OS and Windows more compatible. The possibilties are interesting for the future.

Back to top
Profile PM Email
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 10:15
Link
Sounds interesting. It will be very sad to see the last bastian of Amiga technology falling prey in the Business/Personal Computing market.

Good news though to know that IBM fully intend to keep it alive with 3Core, Cell, and Broadway.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
indi
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Earth, Brisbane, Australia
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 11:59
Link
that will be an interesting change to the current hates loves of each platform.

If no-one gives your an answer to a question you have asked, consider:- Is your question clear.- Did you ask nicely.- Are you showing any effort to solve the problem yourself
Back to top
Profile PM Email
GothOtaku
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Nov 2003
Location: Amherst, MA, USA
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 12:35
Link
I think it's a horrid idea. They'll have to change everything and add compatability layers to maintain backward compatability. Plus, as the article pointed out everytime they change technology their market share drops and this will significantly hurt their existing user base.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 13:25
Link
Yeah but it will be true x86 processing so all windows programs that are not actually windows dependant (don't use parts of windows to run) will run on the new MACS allowing more software sales to those who are willing to go that extra mile. No more developing for 2 types of hardware. I think this may turn Apple around.

Back to top
Profile PM Email
Phaelax
DBPro Master
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Apr 2003
Location: Metropia
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 13:58
Link
Quote: "It will be very sad to see the last bastian of Amiga technology falling prey in the Business/Personal Computing market."


I thought Amiga used a Motorola chip?

PETA - People for the Eating of Tasty Animals
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
indi
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Earth, Brisbane, Australia
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 14:03
Link
i read anther article in wired that stated that apple is using a start up silicon company that can convert any application for any platform.


http://blog.wired.com/cultofmac/

What's new this time is a fast, transparent, universal emulator from Transitive, a Silicon Valley startup.

Transitive's QuickTransit allows any software to run on any hardware with no performance hit, or so the company claims.



http://www.transitive.com/




this means that if it works very well we could port DBP apps to Apple Based OSX machines today.

If no-one gives your an answer to a question you have asked, consider:- Is your question clear.- Did you ask nicely.- Are you showing any effort to solve the problem yourself
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 14:05
Link
I doubt it'll make much difference really.
All we know is that they will be using Intel, no one at any point said that they would be x86-Based IA-32.

Remember that it isn't the only processor type that Intel make.
Another thing to take in to account is unlike other x86-Compatible Operating Systems, Microsoft themselves are going to be backing Macintosh.

It is already common knowlage that a variation of Microsoft .NET Framework 1.1 will be available for the next Macintosh Operating System. If this Operating System is also going to feature Multi-Processor capabilities along the lines that Windows NT 3.5 had then this is likely to be a very good move in-part for Apple.

Rather than dropping support, they will be more adding support.
In previous MacOS incarnations 'backward support' was not a term you could use, without the word 'Not a chance of' in-front of it.

MacOSX expanded to be compatible with the older hardware, rather than purely for the machine it was release on.

I do have mixed feelings about what will happen. Though I do agree, that given Apple's recent problems with thier Processors; particularly the monumental failiar of the first generation G5, they do need to do something.

If this is a move for the better we will only see. It is good to see a company isn't seeing this as an instant integration, forcing users to choose one or the other.

This is what lost them so much when they moved from 68K to PPC. Simply because they gave users an ultimatum. A large portion of users decided to call it a day and move to x86-Windows.

It is certainly interesting though. Because Microsoft Windows XP Embedded was designed to run on both x86, and G4/G5 PPC.
When you choose your .NET Processor Architecture, you again have the option to output x86-32, x86-64, IA-64, PPC 4xx, PPC 9xx.

I was asking a while back about the recently take up of the Macintosh processors in .NET and Windows. The response I was given was because .NET 1.1 (and the then concept 2.0) was going to be on the next Macintosh Platform. As part of thier Mactopia Division.
Yet it could well indicate that Windows NT 5.3 will be available Multi-Platform like Windows NT 3.5 was suppose to kick off.

It's definately another interesting thing about recent computer changes. Very termoil time recently, with many standards being userped and challenged.

There is no wonder why Microsoft have kicked off a new Windows XP advertisement campaign recently. If anyone was going to steal Microsoft's primary industry over the next 2 years would certainly be the Windows they have.

The new console processors again are begining to show true alternatives to the standards that have made the industry.
IBM PowerPC is set to come in to it's own over the next 5years.

Almost makes it amusing that it was originally an over-drive co-processor for the Amiga.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 14:18
Link
@indi Now that looks very interesting indeed. If the program works would the directx licensing limit us from doing that as directx would no longer be needed on the target machine? And I imagine even if it did work, then it would still be looking for directx as it is not bundled with our dbp exe's for translation.

Back to top
Profile PM Email
indi
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Earth, Brisbane, Australia
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 14:29
Link
and the same magazine WIRED debunks this whole myth as garbage. but time will tell.


http://blog.wired.com/cultofmac/


Monday, 23 May 2005
Apple, Intel Rumor Absolute Rubbish
Topic: Apple
The rumor that Apple is considering Intel chips for the Mac platform is nonsense. Literally. Non-sense. It makes no sense.

The rumor that Apple will use chips from Intel instead of its long-standing partner IBM is as old as the Mac platform itself.

Year after year the rumor keeps popping up. Today's version is in the Wall Street Journal, which means it's getting wide play.

"The computer maker has been in talks that could lead to a decision soon to use Intel Corp. chips in its Macintosh computer line, industry executives say, a prospect that may shake up the world of computers and software," the WSJ reports.

But why would Apple switch from IBM, which is kicking ass, to Intel, whose heyday may be over?

Intel's chip technology trails both IBM's and AMD's. IBM's dual-core processors are a couple of years ahead of Intel's, which is why all three next-generation gaming consoles will be based on variations of the IBM's PowerPC chips -- the same chips used by Apple.

The irony is, it's Microsoft that's starting to switch platforms, starting with the XBox. Not Apple.

Update: Slashdot's resident Apple expert, "As Seen on TV," whose insightful comments have people believing he's a bone fide Apple insider, hasn't weighed in on the issue. In a comment posted today, he claims to be out of the office this week.

If no-one gives your an answer to a question you have asked, consider:- Is your question clear.- Did you ask nicely.- Are you showing any effort to solve the problem yourself
Back to top
Profile PM Email
indi
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Earth, Brisbane, Australia
Posted: 7th Jun 2005 15:15
Link
sorry that was old and this one confirms
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1112

If no-one gives your an answer to a question you have asked, consider:- Is your question clear.- Did you ask nicely.- Are you showing any effort to solve the problem yourself
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Metel Artz
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Apr 2005
Location: Vermont USA
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 11:00
Link
i never liked the mac at all just the way the keyboard is set up WAYY to jammed together and the mouse only has one button!!! it doesnt even have a little scroler thingy on it and its way to confusing to find things around on the mac. at least for me it is.

"Fade" To Be Released mid-2006
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
indi
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Earth, Brisbane, Australia
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 11:15
Link
you can attach any keyboard or mouse to your mac. your ignorance is so 1980's [insert silly insult here]

i use a 3 button kengsinton and a 2nd gen mac keyboard on my g5 and similar setup on my g4 but the mouse is a dual wacom pen and mouse.

sure i hate the clear one button mice they ship with g5s but you get used to resting your hand over the left side on the keyboard. however you can replace it or have it replaced at purchase.

If no-one gives your an answer to a question you have asked, consider:- Is your question clear.- Did you ask nicely.- Are you showing any effort to solve the problem yourself
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Metel Artz
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 13th Apr 2005
Location: Vermont USA
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 11:21
Link
well i know you can get new keyboards and mouses and things but can 3 mouse buttons work on a mac???

"Fade" To Be Released mid-2006
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
indi
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Earth, Brisbane, Australia
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 11:26
Link
of course they can, i switch mice between my pc and mac regulary, your opinion of macs is so misjudged, all your doing is rattling off diatribe from other jaded wannabes.
that makes you look ignorant and foolish amongst your peers.

you know the 3rd fastest computer in the world at 5.2 million is a cluster of 1100 G5s with twin cpus calcing over ten teraflops of data when required.
they all run OSX and are clustered in storage racks in a university in america.

the 2nd largest computer is about 350 million and the largest is about 500 million. the mac cluster is 3 times slower then the fastest computer in the world, however compare the prices from 5 million to 300 million i know what i would choose

If no-one gives your an answer to a question you have asked, consider:- Is your question clear.- Did you ask nicely.- Are you showing any effort to solve the problem yourself
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Mason
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: Arizona
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 13:13 Edited at: 8th Jun 2005 13:16
Link
Quote: "your opinion of macs is so misjudged, all your doing is rattling off diatribe from other jaded wannabes.
that makes you look ignorant and foolish amongst your peers.
"


No offense Indi, but relax dude. I'm sure Metel Artz is just saying that because he is used to a Windows computer instead of a Macintosh. He never insulted you or anything so please don't take it so seriously. Honestly I've always used Windows computers because thats what I wanted I guess. I've used a Macintosh and a PC and I think they both have there ups & downs. It seems like Mac is way better for media n such, but I find windows better for gaming...

Quote: "you know the 3rd fastest computer in the world at 5.2 million is a cluster of 1100 G5s with twin cpus calcing over ten teraflops of data when required.
they all run OSX and are clustered in storage racks in a university in america."


Holy Crap, thats extremely fast, I haven't even heard of a "teraflop". How fast is that?

I'm just trying to say relax a little, its not that big of a deal ya know

¤§Mason§¤

http://www.geocities.com/blacklab_studios
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
indi
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Earth, Brisbane, Australia
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 13:21
Link
thanks for the advice,ill take it into consideration but i may not act on it.
you will know however when im cranky. that is very mild in regards to replying abruptly. I guess im just a little more passionate when it comes to macs and yeah the ignorance does get under my collar a little, but thats far from insulting australian style, which would be illegal on this board.
you might notice however when a question relating to solving an issue im normal again. just chalk it up to my 2nd less communicative head.

If no-one gives your an answer to a question you have asked, consider:- Is your question clear.- Did you ask nicely.- Are you showing any effort to solve the problem yourself
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Mason
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: Arizona
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 13:41
Link
Quote: "but thats far from insulting australian style, which would be illegal on this board."

Lol, im not sure how Australians insult, but from what it sounds, I could only imagine. Yeah I know what your talking about (I might have been warned by a mod a few times )

So Macs moving to intel chips better for Mac users, or is it only better for the company? It seems like a good Idea but I'm not sure because I haven't seen any cons with it yet. Seems like they have many of the problems covered like converting the older applications to work on the intels.

¤§Mason§¤

http://www.geocities.com/blacklab_studios
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
indi
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: Earth, Brisbane, Australia
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 14:57
Link
only carbonized applications which might add a few weeks mazimum, mathimatica 5 however only required 20 lines of code to be changed, if thats an indication, java works out of the boz etc.

If no-one gives your an answer to a question you have asked, consider:- Is your question clear.- Did you ask nicely.- Are you showing any effort to solve the problem yourself 
Back to top
Profile PM Email
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 20:18
Link
If Macs will now use Intel chips (why they didn't got for AMD is beyond me), that means that there will be no real difference between an Apple and a PC, which leads to the question : Why buy a Apple ?


Atomz is at http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~nickk
http://spaces.msn.com/members/BouncyBrick/
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
TKF15H
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 21:09
Link
Quote: "Yeah but it will be true x86 processing so all windows programs that are not actually windows dependant (don't use parts of windows to run) will run on the new MACS allowing more software sales to those who are willing to go that extra mile."

Even using the command prompt requires interaction with the OS. Running windows' software on a MAC just because it has an intel processor is the same as trying to run Dark Basic on Linux.

I do not see any advantage in changing the processor. Probably speed, if Intel can do a better job than IBM, but the x86 is by concept slower than the PPC so I doubt it.

WarBasic Scripting engine for DarkBasicPro
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Kentaree
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Oct 2002
Location: Clonmel, Ireland
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 21:13
Link
What the worrying thing is is that microsoft actually own parts of Apple, so if they're going to move to x86 architecture, it wouldnt surprise me if they're going to try and get a serious grip there aswell >_<

Desktop: AMD Athlon XP2800+,Radeon 9800 128MB, 1GB DDR RAM
Laptop: AMD Athlon 64M 3000+,Mobility Radeon 9700 128MB, 512MB DDR RAM
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 8th Jun 2005 23:59
Link
You can't run Dark Basic on Linux because it is DirectX/Windows dependant. If the software had been written using stand alone pure x86 machine code it would run on Linux. But it wasn't, most of DBP programming is actually DirectX code and relies on DirectX to be installed to run. You just have to write your programs correctly to be OS independant. If you use windows functions directx or otherwise it will not like running in most other OS's. But if you do all the work yourself instead of relying on others' code you can make a program that will run on either. It will require more complex programming and alot of hard work but can be done.

Back to top
Profile PM Email
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 00:10
Link
Quote: "i use a 3 button kengsinton and a 2nd gen mac keyboard on my g5 and similar setup on my g4 but the mouse is a dual wacom pen and mouse."


I pre-ordered mine with the current Mac Keyboard, Microsoft Explorer (2nd Gen, not as nice as the 1st imo) and Tablet TFT.

I really like how you can order your Mac with just about any hardware they're capable of and they turn up ready to plug-in and use right away. Benefits from paying more and it being a smaller company no doubt; but still that's why I go for Alienware PCs too.

You can get exactly what you want rather than having half a room full of crap you'll never use, but looks impressive to people who've never touched a computer before.

Quote: "Holy Crap, thats extremely fast, I haven't even heard of a "teraflop". How fast is that?"


FLOP is, FLoating-point OPerations per second.

1 Flop = 1 FLoating-point OPerations
// for some reason there is no such thing as a KiloFlop, dunno why.
1 MegaFlop = 1,000,000 FLoating-point OPertaions
1 GigaFlop = 1,000,000,000 FLoating-point OPerations
1 TeraFlop = 1,000,000,000,000 FLoating-point OPerations

To put this into terms you can understand, right now I'm running an AMD AthlonXP 3000+ this Processor is capable of 3,000 MFlops or 3.0 GFlops

It would take around 334 of my processors to calculate the same amount of data. That would be assuming that, that's how CPU Scaling/Linking worked; which it doesn't heh
Your looking at with a total processing capacity for your Processors to work around 5% slower each CPU you add. So there are only so many you can add before at some point rather than calculating together they're just calculating how to share the data.

heh pretty cool huh?

Quote: "If Macs will now use Intel chips (why they didn't got for AMD is beyond me), that means that there will be no real difference between an Apple and a PC, which leads to the question : Why buy a Apple ?"


Apple MacOSX is more stable, and just as easy to get to grips with as Microsoft Windows XP.

Quote: "I do not see any advantage in changing the processor. Probably speed, if Intel can do a better job than IBM, but the x86 is by concept slower than the PPC so I doubt it."


It is more down to cost. PowerPC is a specalist chip because so few are required, as such the CPU costs more; then the hardware to get it to all work is in-house so again costs more; then again the software needed to run it is in-house so again costs more.

The end result, really is that Apple's just plainly cost A LOT more.
I think Jobs wants to bring down the cost while not sacrificing the speed. There is also the fact that IBM have been 'unable' to deliver what Apple have wanted on-time. Motorola were never too forth-comming with thier PPC chips either.

So the end result was that Apple not only could supply less but had to ramp up the cost and were constantly behind the development curve.

As has been said, neither Apple or Intel have said that this is a move to x86 Processors. Only that they're looking to have thier programs compatible with Windows programs.

If you think about it, the x86-64 isn't a true x86 Processor, AMD just have an x86-32bit stuffed in there as an additional core.
The 64-bit aspect of it is a completely different core in it's own right.

So it may just be a case of making a processor that is compatible with both hardware. With Intels' Dual-Core technology it would be possible to have 2 Completely Seperate Cores available to do the same job based on what the BIOS and/or OS tells it.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 03:29
Link
Quote: "Apple MacOSX is more stable, and just as easy to get to grips with as Microsoft Windows XP."

Not exactly a lot going for it then...


Atomz is at http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~nickk
http://spaces.msn.com/members/BouncyBrick/
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Mason
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: Arizona
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 04:09
Link
Quote: "heh pretty cool huh?"

Yeah thats very cool

¤§Mason§¤

http://www.geocities.com/blacklab_studios
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 04:19
Link
Quote: "Not exactly a lot going for it then..."


Yeah, but this as I keep trying to repeat is provided the go for an x86 Solution. Intel doesn't just make x86-based Processors, thier IA64 is a completely different design and still compatible with Microsoft software.

Still if it does come down to almost purely to OS (given the price will no doubt hugely drop), then I can see Microsoft and Apple vieing for the market. They're both extremely good Operating Systems.



Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 04:51
Link
I cant see Apple staying around long in the computer industry - their computers would have to come down to more or less the same price as a PC if they want to sell machines.


Atomz is at http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~nickk
http://spaces.msn.com/members/BouncyBrick/
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
John Y
Synergy Editor Developer
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 05:33
Link
Not necessarily, when I bought my powerbook I looked at it from the console perspective.

Windows based laptops are made by thousands of different firms, and are updated every month. This means if you need support or anything the company probably won't even remember what the model number was

But with a powerbook, the hardware is set for like 6 months, and you know that you are going to be looked after. The other feature I require is that it looks cool, and with the other 'plasticy' laptops, my powerbook wins down any day!


Http://www.DigitalOmega.Net
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 06:18
Link
They can't afford the profit hit in order to keep up with technology though. It's a vicious circle.

Ironically thier suprior technology from a graphics standpoint is almost literally all that keeps them in the game.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
TKF15H
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 10:33
Link
Quote: "You can't run Dark Basic on Linux because it is DirectX/Windows dependant. If the software had been written using stand alone pure x86 machine code it would run on Linux."

If software used pure stand alone machine code it wouldn't do much. Pretending Linux could read PE files, and Windows could read ELF files, they both apply P-mode to the code they run, which would keep you from running certain instructions. And without the presence of drivers (as "stand alone" code can't call drivers) you'll have to write all the device interfacing and management (which while being almost impossible due to all the different hardware, becomes fully impossible because of the OS's intervention). In the end, all you can do with "stand alone pure x86 machine code" is add numbers, jump around, and exit.
So I still don't see any way of running Windows programs on a MAC, despite the same processor. Since MacOS X has BSD code in the kernel, I think it's more likely you can run POSIX-compatible apps.

WarBasic Scripting engine for DarkBasicPro
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
GothOtaku
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Nov 2003
Location: Amherst, MA, USA
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 10:50
Link
Quote: "If Macs will now use Intel chips (why they didn't got for AMD is beyond me), that means that there will be no real difference between an Apple and a PC, which leads to the question : Why buy a Apple ?"

Intel's chips are more reliable typically and it looks like Intel's going to keep the chip leader position with their recent technology push.

The reason I got a Mac for my job was the fact that the PowerPC was a cleaner architecture than the x86 so it would execute instructions faster. That plus Mac OS X is probably the best OS around now. Relatively POSIX clompliant, support for old Mac apps, excellent interface, great media and internet support, and it's fast and stable. Everything one could want from an operating system and more. The only thing that kept me from getting a Mac for home use was the recent shift to Intel processors. I think Apple's on shaky ground right now and I don't want to get something that won't be compatable with future apps and could possibly fail in the future. The other thing is that Apple hardware is supported by Apple so you know you can get drivers for their stuff. There's no Mac equivalent of Compaq or Dell it's just Apple which makes sure there's no incompatabilities.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
TKF15H
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 10:59
Link
Quote: "Intel's chips are more reliable"

How can a processor be more reliable? I burnt a PII once, so that can't be speaking very well of the PPC.

OT: Arg, I think my mousewheel just stopped working...

WarBasic Scripting engine for DarkBasicPro
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 11:50
Link
Quote: "If software used pure stand alone machine code it wouldn't do much. Pretending Linux could read PE files, and Windows could read ELF files, they both apply P-mode to the code they run, which would keep you from running certain instructions. And without the presence of drivers (as "stand alone" code can't call drivers) you'll have to write all the device interfacing and management (which while being almost impossible due to all the different hardware, becomes fully impossible because of the OS's intervention). In the end, all you can do with "stand alone pure x86 machine code" is add numbers, jump around, and exit.
So I still don't see any way of running Windows programs on a MAC, despite the same processor. Since MacOS X has BSD code in the kernel, I think it's more likely you can run POSIX-compatible apps."


All software and the OS is compiled to machine code (or interpreted by a program to machine code) to run. Or the machine wouldn't know how to run it. I know there are restrictions once the OS is started up but, if the machine architectures are matches( they use the same machine code), then it will be possible to run your software on the new macs and windows computers. You will either have to start your software before the OS or design your program for both OS's and let it choose which one to run (which will be easier as the architectures will be the same just the OS differences will need to be considered). I never said Linux could read PE files or that Windows could read ELF files. I simply said if the software was compiled to machine language (neither PE nor ELF or any other format like these as they are OS formats not machine formats) it can be made to run on any machine with x86 architecture. I never even said it would be easy. Yes drivers will be an issue for more advanced programs, but one thing at a time. I'll bet in the future they will make the 2 OS's more compatible for this reason once on the same machine architectures. This move is a big step in the right direction IMO. Especially once the decide microsoft has to give up alot more of it's source (which I am utterly against) to even out the playing field to prevent a monoploy. If I was APPLE I would.

The main problem with people programming these days (me included) is we rely heavily on programming languages that make it easier on us to program. This also limits us in our ability to work with more systems but cuts down on development time. Everything is a trade off I guess.

Back to top
Profile PM Email
GothOtaku
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Nov 2003
Location: Amherst, MA, USA
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 11:51
Link
Quote: "How can a processor be more reliable? I burnt a PII once, so that can't be speaking very well of the PPC. "

If an AMD overheats it's dead if an Intel overheats it shuts down.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 11:59
Link
Quote: "If an AMD overheats it's dead if an Intel overheats it shuts down. "


Bollocks

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
TKF15H
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 12:05 Edited at: 9th Jun 2005 12:08
Link
Quote: " I never said Linux could read PE files or that Windows could read ELF files."

I never said you did. I said, assuming they could, there would still be other things in the way.
Quote: "I'll bet in the future they will make the 2 OS's more compatible for this reason once on the same machine architectures."

How much you wanna bet?
WindowsCE runs on the DC's ARM4 processor. If MS wanted to make a Mac port of windows they could have done so a long time ago. I don't think they'd be interested in making MacOS and Windows compatible, much less Linux and Windows.

[edit]
Quote: "Quote: "If an AMD overheats it's dead if an Intel overheats it shuts down. "
Bollocks"

While that isn't the exact wording I'd use to disagree to a post, I do agree with Raven. I have a toasted intel in my closet, so that can't be right.

WarBasic Scripting engine for DarkBasicPro
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Lost in Thought
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2004
Location: U.S.A. : Douglas, Georgia
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 12:07
Link
The Intel P4 will shut itself down as well as some P3's. The Processors slow themselves down as they heat up to prevent burning up. It may have something to do with the Chipset it runs on as well. I have confirmed this with my P4 2.8GHz 800MHz FSB processor running on an intel 848P chipset. I can remove the fan (leave the heatsink on) and it will barely crawl, put the fan back on and it takes off again. That is the sole reason why I moved over to Intel from AMD.

Back to top
Profile PM Email
GothOtaku
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Nov 2003
Location: Amherst, MA, USA
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 12:18
Link
Quote: "The Intel P4 will shut itself down as well as some P3's. The Processors slow themselves down as they heat up to prevent burning up. It may have something to do with the Chipset it runs on as well. I have confirmed this with my P4 2.8GHz 800MHz FSB processor running on an intel 848P chipset. I can remove the fan (leave the heatsink on) and it will barely crawl, put the fan back on and it takes off again. That is the sole reason why I moved over to Intel from AMD."


Yep, exactly. Same thing here, my friend's have lost a few AMD chips when a fan came loose when transporting computers to and from LAN parties. If you browse some gaming hardware sites they'll say the same thing. This is why AMD's are supposed to be easier to overclock than Intels.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 13:49
Link
Quote: "The Intel P4 will shut itself down as well as some P3's. The Processors slow themselves down as they heat up to prevent burning up. It may have something to do with the Chipset it runs on as well. I have confirmed this with my P4 2.8GHz 800MHz FSB processor running on an intel 848P chipset. I can remove the fan (leave the heatsink on) and it will barely crawl, put the fan back on and it takes off again. That is the sole reason why I moved over to Intel from AMD."


Really? Interesting. Without a fan on my CPU, it shuts down in 2 seconds, without a heatsink almost instantly. Oh but wait I have an AMD so surely that's not possible.

: rolls eyes :

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 13:51
Link
Quote: "WindowsCE runs on the DC's ARM4 processor. If MS wanted to make a Mac port of windows they could have done so a long time ago. I don't think they'd be interested in making MacOS and Windows compatible, much less Linux and Windows"


you check the complete list of processors for Windows XP Embedded.
it actually has the exact processor PPC models that Macs use

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 19:12
Link
As for compatibility of systems:
Back in the days of home computers and before Windows and MacOs, hardware architecture was a lot more important for compatibility, but these days it doesn't really matter. Since most OS's don't allow direct hardware access, having the same CPU or even identical hardware architecture doesn't make things more compatible or easier to port. Apparently the best example for that is MacOS 10 itself. According to Apple, it'll be relatively easy to create apps that run on both MacOS x86 and MacOS PPC. But porting programs from Windows to MacOS x86 will remain the same steep mountain to climb. In short, whether Apple goes for x86 CPUs or not doesn't affect the compatibility/portability much.


Play Nice! Play Basic! Version 1.073
Back to top
Profile PM
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 19:22
Link
Will you be able to install Windows on an Apple ? As they use pretty standard hardware, it should be possible


Atomz is at http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~nickk
http://spaces.msn.com/members/BouncyBrick/
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
empty
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location: 3 boats down from the candy
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 19:24
Link
Or perhaps MacOS on a standard PC...


Play Nice! Play Basic! Version 1.073
Back to top
Profile PM
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 9th Jun 2005 20:59
Link
Quite true


Atomz is at http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~nickk
http://spaces.msn.com/members/BouncyBrick/
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Raven
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Mar 2005
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 10th Jun 2005 04:07
Link
Quote: "Will you be able to install Windows on an Apple ? As they use pretty standard hardware, it should be possible"


you can install Windows on a Mac now.. but as I said above you need to have the XP Embedded version; because standard Windows doesn't support the Bios / Processor.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-27 15:56:57
Your offset time is: 2024-11-27 15:56:57