Slashdot Mirror

Firstly, it dual-boots between PPC Linux and PS3's internal OS Secondly, PowerPC MacOS can be virtualised on PPC Linux using MacOnLinux so this console can be an (dubious legal status) PowerMac too..

MOL is a true work of genius. Even on pretty old PPC hardware it functions with almost no slowdown. (Linux host, OS X and Linux clients). Compared to contemporaries it had no equal - the current generation of products on x86 are just starting to catch up. I'm most impressed with the way my powerbook can sleep (close the lid) under Linux and all of the hosted sessions quietly pause themselves with no problems. They even resume a network connection perfectly on waking up.

It'm glad to see similar happening on x86, finally, as it's one of the things that really made PPC based machines special. (There is some documentation for MOL and Kubuntu here.)

MOL (Mac-On-Linux). Sure it's PowerPC, it's still virtualization.

It's not exactly what you asked, but I just wanted to point out that, if you run Linux on a PowerPC Mac, you can run OS X (and OS 9, and earlier) apps. Using Mac-on-Linux, you can boot other Power Mac operating systems in their own virtual machines.

A few years ago, I had my PPC Mac booting to Yellow Dog Linux and ran MacOS under Mac On Linux.

It wasn't perfect but when it did run it ran well.

All my "usual" apps like OpenOffice and browsers ran in Linux without the Mac overhead. When I needed a Mac app, I could fire it up under MacOnLinux.

MacOnLinux hasn't been updated in a couple of years now. With the demise of the PowerPC Mac I wouldn't hold your breath.

it'd be easier to just do Mac-on-linux instead

http://www.maconlinux.org/

I used to have a powerpc G4 untill the motherboard died before that I ran Yellow Dog (basicly redhat for the PowerPC mac). Virtual PC the app I needed that was Windows only, Arc GIS ran at nearly native speed. Then again since ArcGIS is so slow anyway I probably didn't notice . You might also want to checkout http://www.maconlinux.org/ internet is a known area they have some tricky issues-but so many other things worked I was fine.

I set up Mac-on-Linux (MOL) to run Canon's proprietary driver in OSX and export the printer to the network from the MOL virtual host. (MOL makes that all fairly easy.) Now I can print from any host on the LAN. The only drawback is that I need to have both the physical and virtual hosts up to print. Right now I do that manually, but I am working on running MOL at boot time so I only need start the physical machine, which is what I would have to do even if there were Linux drivers for the printer.

I haven't tried running the Windows driver (since I have a Mac hardware), but I am pretty sure one could also set up an x86 emulator, such as Qemu, to run the proprietary Canon driver in Windows to achieve the same effect. For all I know, it might work better. I'm not sure how easy it would be to export the printer to the LAN, but I suspect it would involve Samba.

Sure, it was a pain to set up, but it works and works well. Long term? I probably won't buy another Canon unless they start supporting open source drivers like they used to. HP and Epson still support open source drivers, but HP seems to be taking a beating for reduced quality, judging by the comments above. Fewer comments seem to condemn Epson's quality so that is what I will likely buy the next time. Either that or I will finally save up for a postscript laser printer.

Can virtualized operating systems take advantage of GPU acceleration? Seems like that would be necessary for such an application, as OS X is somewhat less impressive for demo purposes without its GPU-accellerated eye candy.

http://www.maconlinux.org/overview.html


Mac-on-Linux is a linux/ppc program which makes it possible to run Mac OS in parallel with Linux.

MOL is primarily intended to be used by those who run linux/ppc as their main operating system but still want to be able to run that occasional Mac OS application.

What about Mac-on-linux? http://www.maconlinux.org/

This will enable you to run Mac OSX on a machine with the likes of YellowDog installed as the host OS.

Why would one bother using Linux if OS X offers all the features (well ok, most) of Linux

Well, it depends on what you mean by "all the features". I have a G4-based PowerBook, and I dual-boot Linux and OSX. Let me explain why.

First and foremost, I'm a developer and tester; not just professionally, but also as a hobby. This means testing in multiple environments, and having Windows, Linux, and OSX handy is a boon (even if I only get Windows via slow emulation). Not to mention that things like Rational Application Developer, that are required professionally, don't run on OSX. (To be fair, they don't run on PPC Linux either, which is why I keep a ThinkPad around -- but on an Intel Mac...).

Secondly, there are tasks that are better suited to a Linux environment, IMO. For example, when I'm doing heavy document production, I like to use OpenOffice. OpenOffice on OSX is extremely limited (no access to font library, native printers, app-to-app drag-n-drop, etc.), and the "native" port NeoOffice/J has performance and some compatibility issues. So, I boot to Linux for such tasks (instead of forking over a couple hundred dollars for MS-Office).

Thirdly, there are a number of nice tools and applications available under Linux that are either not ported to, or incomplete for, OSX. Fink and the like are great, but there's a long way to go if the goal is "every Linux and BSD app working perfectly under OSX".

Also, while booted into Linux, I have access to Mac-on-Linux -- so I can have a virtualized (not emulated) OSX session in a window or on another vt/desktop. This is extremely happy for software testing!

I think you missed the point. Why rip out something that already works? Because you do not understand it or do not prefer it?

I would guess a version of Linux will be out for the Intel based Mac shortly but it does not seem worth the effort unless MythTV does something "super special" that you absolutely MUST HAVE.

http://www.maconlinux.org/

Also.. I have a Linux firewall & DB server because I am cheap like that ;)

Quickbooks is the sole reason I have any sort of windows install whatsoever to run my business and it's run via VMware on my laptop which is running Gentoo as it's sole OS

Taking it a step further, Mac-on-Linux should allow you to have both Quickbooks and Linux at the same time ... today.

It definitely sounds good. At least it removes another 'contra' from long list of IA-32/AMD64 and PowerPC differences. As many of you have known for some time people who run Linux on PPC enjoyed free ride with Mac-On-Linux project. Check http://maconlinux.org/

On side note, after seeing how easy virtualization can happen with Open Source kernels - e.g. User Mode Linux, Xen, Plex, coLinux, etc - me keeps wandering why M$ haven't done that with WinNT kernels. There are only few true obstacles in x86 "architecture" which prevent effective virtualization - VMware is solving all of them at very high level and of course tried in past to charge premium for that. Xen modifies kernel so that overhead of virtualization is negligible - it's not another computer emulator, it's just kernel running as a ordinary OS process. (Anyway, user tasks see computer only as it is reflected by kernel and device drivers (-: )

I know M$ likes only good cash cows (like M$ Office franchise) but as OS kernel concerned, the modifications to allow it to run in virtual machine are truly not that big. Check-out the coLinux - it's neat. http://wiki.colinux.org/cgi-bin/ConvertingDistribu tions

P.S. Or is it what M$ Windows Advanced Server for?

Forget installing Windows -- who cares? Let's get Mac on Linux running on these suckers, and then you can have your cake and eat it, too...

You already can.

I was usually running Mac OS X (full) on top of Linux (through virtualization) with Mac-on-Linux.

http://www.maconlinux.org/

iTux

The main point is: given the choice of Linux or OSX, nobody in their right mind would subject themselves to and flavor of Linux on a desktop PC.

Then there are a fair number of nutcases out there. Linus Torvalds is one of them, actually.

If I had a little bit of extra time and/or money, I'd buy a Mac.

Me too. I'd run Linux on it, though. I bought my wife an iBook for Christmas and have spent a fair amount of time fiddling with it. I'd like to have a Powerbook, myself, but I'd install Linux on it. I'd probably use Mac-on-Linux to run the occasional Mac app, but that would be the exception, not the rule. I'm not alone, either, as evidenced by the existence of Yellow Dog, Mac-on-Linux and Terrasoft's line of Macs with Linux pre-installed

If I had a *lot* of extra time and money, I'd *think* about using Linux on a daily basis.

Time, maybe, but why do you include money?

Mac-on-Linux already lets you run OS X at full speed within Linux.

You can ever try out Kino if you wish. Whatever. The best thing about Linux is that you can take it with you to almost any platform you touch.

No one from the project has said anything about this yet, but I would venture a guess that Mac-on-Linux could be ported to Linux/x86 from it's current Linux/PPC once Apple/x86 boxes start shipping (or I guess if a dev gets the Apple Dev Kit).

They've already done a lot of work in getting a virtual machine (via a Linux kernel module) to look enough like a Mac that Mac OS X runs in it (I'm guessing it's emulating Apple's firmware??), and I would think that the Mac architecture isn't going to change drastically other than the processor, so theoretically it should be possible to replace the processor-specific bits and have a working Mac-on-Linux for x86. Which would be very cool :)

Full featured java is possible using IBM JDK (SDK and JRE) for power architecture. I dunno if they ship version 1.5 yet. Run it in xnest if it crashes your hardware accelerated X.

Wine is not possible as mac on linux is not possible on i386 linux, I'd say it's an architectural, not OS matter.

If you'll need a proprietary machine, I'm not sure what you're supposed to run your 10.4.1 preview on then.

Even so, I'd be willing to bet you'd still be able to get MacOS to run on your commodity Intel box at near-native speeds with a clever modification or two to Mac On Linux (MOL). Okay, I don't write code so it might not be that simple, but it sounds reasonable, no?

http://www.maconlinux.org/

My guess is that they'll have this ported in relatively little time, or that Apple will sic the lawyers in relatively little time ;) Or that the OS will be very tightly bound to the CPU.

If Apple doesn't squash it, their OS sales will far exceed their hardware sales.

jh

Not to mention, the PowerPC processor is the only edge Macs have left on PC hardware.

Personally, I think that is a load of crap. I didn't buy my Mac Mini because of the chip, I bought it for iLife (in the interest of full disclosure, I'm an "adder", not a die-hard Mac user).

Apple's chip strategy leaves me baffled. How can the PPC provide an edge when users are still waiting for the "promised" 3.0 GHZ chips that were supposed to be available within a year of the G5's release? Even the XBOX360 alpha units, which are G5 towers, are said to be only a third of the power of the console. I might add that we're talking about console that will likely cost only $300. The thing that has always bothered me about Macs is the length of the "speed bump cycle". The x86 world is abuzz about multi-cores and such, and here we are, still stuck with "Power"-books that don't even have G5s.

Offtopic aside: How cool would it be to see Mac on Linux run on an XBOX360 hacked to run Linux?

Fabulous hardware design, a remarkably stable and well thought out OS, and excellent (sometimes unrivalled) media software are the Mac's edge. I like Windows and Linux, but I don't think they do quite as good a job as Apple does in all three of those areas. Change the guts of a Mac and you'll still have more than "an overpriced PC running a pretty gui on top of BSD".

There is infinitely more to the Mac than the CPU that it runs on.

Maybe you can run outdated OSX on it with mac-on-linux but not sure if you'll still get builtin wifi and bluetooth support with that.

Well, if someone gets Linux running on it, then you might be able to pull off Mac on Linux.

The Linux PPC devs have a narrower set of hardware to support - you know pretty well what's in a iBook. The same cannot be said for x86 systems. I have a year old Dell D800 that still has a bit of trouble regarding ACPI events.

As well, iBooks aren't too terribly over priced, they are normally very well constructed - IOW it's a nice notebook. The icing on the cake is Mac on Linux - where you quite literally get to have your cake and eat it too.

Soko

Proprietary? You mean something other than Mac-on-Linux?

MOL isn't an emulator; it's a virtual machine like VMWare. It actually runs the OS X kernel and GUI inside the VM. See http://www.maconlinux.org/faq.html. That said, it works great - but only on PowerPC hardware.

After that, a simple re-compile of MoL should make the rest almost trivial...

It will be short order 'till the enterprising get LinuxPPC up on this rig - then it's a matter of MoL...

Looks more and more like the nice way to run Linux apps on those (and no, Fink hasn't ported *everything*) would be Linux-on-Mac -- does this exist yet?

Any operating system being run on another operating system will require emulation.

I don't think your USB virtual privacy machine 1. comes with 20GB of storage, 2. Runs apps as fast as dual PPC, 3. prevents malware on the host from just formatting its hard drive, 4. can be pulled out for instant suspend or 5. comes with a commercially supported server for VPN, backup and centralized administration.

This is actually perfect for universities. Work from home or any lab, don't worry about hacked or infected public PCs (passwords can be entered with on-screen keyboard), for(;;) fork(); will not kill some central public server.

The only curious thing is the choice of non-Intel CPU. I wonder what kind applications they run on this thing - Mozilla and OpenOffice? I know what I would run when I have to use other people's computers.

MMmmmm! USB drive-chain.

MOL is primarily intended to be used by those who run linux/ppc as their main operating system but still want to be able to run that occasional Mac OS application.

Oh, and soon it would be possible to run linux on top of Mac Os X too.

Anthony

--
Bellua Cyber Security Asia 2005

... http://elgato.com/ for an outstanding array of HDTV to computer solutions.

Of course there's a catch ... they are only aimed at Macs -- so it's not a bad catch unless you've adopted the x86 architecture or Microsoft operating systems as a religion.

I'm delighted with my EyeTV 500, pulling in broadcast HDTV, MPEG2 encoding it, and passing it through Firewire to disk, with easy editing, scheduling future recordings, and export to Toast or iDVD.

I'm sure that if you want to wait, Microsoft will eventually get their Media Entertainment Center to smoothly mesh and do all the things Macs will have been effortlessly doing in the interim, and in only a short time after that the Linux folks will have managed to adapt the Windows solution to their needs.

I'm not trolling for flames here, just pointing out that this is an option. I believe you can run Yellow Dog Linux (or other PPC-flavored Linuxes) and use something like Mac-On-Linux to run OS X alongside Linux, if Linux is a personal must-have, but I wouldn't divide the computing resources between 2 systems without a fast dual processor, and I don't believe Mac-On-Linux supports the G5 yet.

Of course, if you'd rather not reboot to use your favorite Apple apps., the MOL (Mac On Linux) project is phenomenal.

Apparently the guys over at Mac-On-Linux have been working on porting their code to Mac OS X, so you'll be able to run Linux on Mac OS the same way you can run Mac OS on Linux. Check their mailing lists and such for development information.

Arch separation (yes... mol will soon run under OS X)

I believe that crazy people are attempting to port Mac-on-Linux, a PPC virtualization app for Linux, to Mac OS.

I still say I need MoL running in OS X... Unlike before, the new one (at least the dev snapshot) will now configure build and install under OS X. However I have yet to get it to run (no time to play with it). Anyone else seen it done or done it them selves?

There are no Mac ROMs, and there haven't been any since at least 1998.
Even the classic Mac OS didn't need the ROMs anymore in its last incarnation.
The less-than-modern Macs had driver support for booting in its ROM, and loaded the Toolbox from a file in the system folder (it's named "Mac OS ROM", though). Modern Macs use OpenFirmware, which is, as the name says, open. Moreover, it's easily emulated, allowing for running OS X on arbitrary PPC machines (with MOL). Yes, that means e.g. Genesis or AmigaOne boards. Or anything with a PPC, really.

Yeah...and you can already do Mac on Linux for free.... Mac On Linux

When the XBox 2 will come out, it will probably be modded to run Linux, too. Then mac-on-linux http://www.maconlinux.org/ will provide us the cheapest gaming macs ever.

Then you would be hacking the OS instead, becaus AFAIK Mac OS is limited to the chips that Apple want to run it on.

There's always the VMware-like, non-emulating Mac-on-Linux - if Linux gets ported to the Xbox2, I wouldn't be surprised if other software gets ported too. :-)

The changelog of recent Mac-On-Linux releases show that the developer is moving toward a release that will build and run on both Linux and OS X. The latest development snapshot compiles cleanly on 10.3, but fails to run (perhaps it's just my inexperience that prevents it from running). I've seen reports in the Mac-On-Linux mailing lists that other users have gotten Mac OS 9.1 to run in MOL on OS X 10.2.

The changelog of recent Mac-On-Linux releases show that the developer is moving toward a release that will build and run on both Linux and OS X. The latest development snapshot compiles cleanly on 10.3, but fails to run (perhaps it's just my inexperience that prevents it from running). I've seen reports in the Mac-On-Linux mailing lists that other users have gotten Mac OS 9.1 to run in MOL on OS X 10.2.