Slashdot Mirror
New G3-Based Platform Runs Mac OS X
Worried writes "Pegasos is a new platform based on G3/G4 CPUs and it runs MorphOS and various Linux distros so far. This very interesting review of the platform over at OSNews points out that Darwin can play a significant role attracting new buyers. Another --possibly significant-- point in the article is that Pegasos can run Mac OS X via the Mac-On-Linux runtime kit. This is the *first* non-Mac platform that can run OSX without even the need for an Apple BIOS!"
Apple will have to crack down on these "meta-clone" boxes.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but since the second-rev G3 machines (blue and white towers), hasn't the Apple BIOS been unnecessary? Or am I confusing the Software-ROM (that the New World mac architecture introduced, ROM-in-RAM) with something else?
"Jesus saves, but everyone else in a 10 foot radius takes full damage from the fireball."
Is the giant horn that sticks out of the monitor. I can't tell you how many times I've tried to get a closer look at the screen only to have it poke me in the eye. The wings are cool, though.
Pegasos: A New Interesting & Sexy Platform
By Eugenia Loli-Queru - Posted on 2003-05-19 08:09:54
Genesi was very kind to send us in a fully featured Pegasos-based computer with MorphOS and Debian pre-installed. Here is our review with a number of screenshots of the supported OSes.
The Hardware, MorphOS
The hardware
First of all, we all have to understand what we are dealing with here. Genesi's business is to create a brand new platform. Not just OS software. And not just hardware. But a brand new platform based on the IBM/Motorola PowerPC G3 and G4 CPUs. In fact, the whole point of the Pegasos platform is for users to select the OS(es) that they want to run by buying only the motherboard & CPU and then adding supported hardware on top of it and literally building the system from scratch. Does it sound too geeky? Trust me, it is. And this can be the biggest strength of this platform or its main drawback for wider adoption. It depends how you see it.
The motherboard itself is a slick piece of hardware. It is a MicroATX mainboard (236 mm x 172 mm), 600 MHz PowerPC G3 750 CXe, (scaling up to a Dual PowerPC G4 MPC 7450). Two sockets of PC133 RAM (up to 2 GB), an AGP slot, 3 PCI slots, USB 1.1, Firewire 400, RealTek NIC, AC97 sound card, two ATA-100 channels, PS/2 mouse and keyboard. I was sent a G3 at 600 Mhz and except for the fact that the machine arrived with the CPU card floating around (it didn't have any screws or holders to keep the CPU in the slot during shipping-- so beware if you are moving houses), the CPU did deliver according to the expectations (glxgears -- just as an example -- delivers between 50 and 60 fps in software mode with an ATi Radeon 7500 AGP, while my dual Celeron 533 on Mandrake does between 80 and 90 fps with a 3Dfx Voodoo5).
If I am to pick my favorite feature of the system that would be its noise levels: the system is completely silent. Worse point: It's price. At around $450-500, it is pricey. For this amount of CPU power and motherboard, I wouldn't personally pay more than $250-300. But hey, Pegasos is exotic in many ways and that compensates a bit.
So, the hardware is slick, but what is the hardware without the actual software, right? Currently, with the Pegasos platform you will find two operating systems included and further supported: MorphOS 1.3 and a port of Debian GNU/Linux 3.x.
MorphOS
MorphOS is an interesting little operating system, but it is too little to lead the "platform" idea all by its own. The version I was sent (1.3) was problematic and nowhere near a true 1.0 commercial release, quality-wise. The main reason why someone would want to run MorphOS is to get access to the thousand of AmigaOS software via its emulation "A-BOX" kit, which enables MorphOS to run classic Amiga programs, 68k/PPC that do not depend on the Amiga's custom chips (there are no more than 80-90 native MorphOS applications/ports that I could find in one place). Unfortunately, except for a handful of supported AmigaOS applications, the rest wouldn't just refuse to run, they would completely crash the system (so much for protected memory). Reseting the system left me with an un-initialized keyboard that wouldn't work until I turned off the machine completely and left it off for 10 seconds or so. I presume that one of the ways MorphOS manages to boot in less than 5 seconds is by not initializing the hardware during boot-up. Yes, you read that right, it only takes 5 seconds to boot up to a fully functional MorphOS, and yes, MorphOS feels extremely fast (loading apps, UI responsiveness etc). UAE (Amiga Emulator) runs on MorphOS, but it is not a real solution in this case, as we could run UAE on our Windows too if we need to. The whole point of MorphOS is to load AmigaOS software easily and painlessly interacting normally with the native apps. But that part is not worked out perfectly yet.
The OS came with a media player (Frogger) that can play divx and mpeg, there are three browsers available for it, with similar page rendering
From the article: On this G3 600 Mhz, it would take 1-2 seconds for a MacOSX button to respond after pressing it.
I don't know about anyone else, but I use my Macs to get work done, not to be waiting 1-2 seconds for clicks to respond. Therefore, I think I will keep using boxes made by Apple.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
No, MOL only runs on PPC based Linux distros. It's simillar to Vmware or Wine on Intel/AMD boxes.
It might, assuming you have access to all the source code. But not all of OS X is OSS. Significant chuncks of it are closed and proprietary. Without the source for that stuff the best you could do is hope to emulate G3/4 hardware on X86, which isn't really an attractive prospect.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
The SSL certificate is not from one of the "trusted" providers, nor does the name on it match the site name, since they're using an IP.
I decided to go through the rigamarole of creating an account to find out the price when they DO get them in, only to find out that while they are sold out, you cannot even list a price.
In other words, this is a non-product. They made a small run of them apparently, but you might as well just call it a beta test, because that's what it seems to be. They have announced that they're bringing out a G4-based replacement, and a G4 upgrade for the current G3 board. All of this will be neatly swept under the rug by dramatically more powerful systems based on next-generation 64 bit PowerPC.
If you need a cheap system to run MacOSX, buy a used Mac or one of those ATX systems based on Mac motherboards. Both are available now and not very expensive, all things considered, plus faster than this unavailable hardware.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Man, I have been waiting for this! A computer that will run MacOS X and Linux slower than the slowest Apple Macintosh. Now where is my wallet?!?!?
fp!
Why would you want to run Mac OS X under MOL?
It completely defeats the purpose of MOL... and Mac OS X. MOL is designed to allow you to access your mac os x programs when running linux on a dual boot mac, but as far as I know you loose most of the flashy speed that you would get from a standard OS X install.
I say just run linux and be happy.
This is just sig!
Couldn't you run OS X on MOL on an IBM RS/6000, er pSeries? And what about the Briq?
From the Mac-on-Linux FAQ:
You are paying $500 for a 600MHZ PowerPC G3 motherboard at the entry level. Not exactly a bargain by any stretch. We're talking Celeron-esque performance here for considerably more money, not something that's going to attract a lot of customers in my opinion. This is similar to the problem we saw in an article here awhile ago about building one's own Macintosh: high cost of parts made the project rather unreasonable for anyone other than financially-stable tinkerers. And moreover, judging from the author's conclusions, the OS isn't exactly stable either. Someday, in a happy world, there will be inexpensive Mac clones and we will even be able to build them ourselves from a vast and inexpensive selection of parts.
Loomis
"The television is the retina of the mind's eye" - Videodrome
I would definitely love to be able to run adobe products on my linux box.
Why does Slashdot insist on posting anything "PPC" under the Apple category?
One of the interesting points with the Pegasos is that it's a PPC based consumer-oriented (as in non-workstation/server á la IBM) system that's NOT from Apple, it comes on a nice micro-ATX mobo, and it comes with a rather new non-Apple OS! The POP concept has come to fruition, and hopefully the Teron PX (a.k.a. "AmigaOne XE" when marketed to AmigaOS users) will also do well.
That running Mac-On-Linux on Linux on a PPC system let's you run MacOS isn't all that sensational IMO...
People might be interested in hearing a new Pegasos system has been announced for this autumn(?), which won't be hampered by the currently buggy Articia S northbridge. This will have a Marvell Discovery II northbridge (366(?) MHz DDR, gigabit ethernet...).
Help savingAmigaOS and a free PowerPC market
I'm very familiar w/ OS X on a G3 400 iMac, a G3 400 PowerBook, and a G4 450 Cube, and on none of these boxes is performance even close to that bad. The iMac can have its moments, but nothing like that.
Don't hold your breath for an x86 OS X that will run on commodity hardware, but that would be cool.
After OS X came out I reasearched the slowest cheapest PPC it would run on--even considering MOL for non Apple platforms--and hunted for good deals on eBay. Old PPC equipment that can possibly run OS X or Linux ain't cheap!! I thought I found a decent deal on some RS/6000 PPC's, but the chip and architecture of that model (I forget which) made it unable to run Linux...only NetBSD and AIX would run on it. Plus it was missing some RAM that turns out to be orders of magnitude more expensive than their PC counterparts, even on eBay.
PPC stuff just isn't commodity hardware; it's expensive, even the old stuff. I just haven't yet been able to justify spending that kind of money on Apple when I see what it can buy in x86.
(I'm speaking for personal use purposes, so none of that "comparable hardware" stuff applies here. Two weeks ago my cheap power supply went out so I ran to the store and picked up another for $45. Not what you want for a production environment, but fine for home.)
Wasn't the Amiga the first non Apple (certified) computer to boot MacOS? Besides, I thought that this would run on any PPC machine under Linux. What's the news here?
Apple is mainly a hardware company, so don't expect them to release an x86 version of MacOS X. And anyway, what's the big deal? You can get a eMac (w/ a G4 processor) for $749. That's pretty cheap and it's gonna work well: my G3 800Mhz iBook runs just fine. Stop crying about prices: iMacs, iBooks and eMacs are good machines and are pretty cheap (in price). On the other hand, PowerMacs and PowerBooks are power machines, and it's natural that they cost more
I would think that the manufacturers will be in the clear as they don't supply or load OS X on the system, but the actual owner of the installed copy OS X is in breach of the EULA...
Can't see Apple identifying infringments, and tracking them all down though!
(At least I hope they don't... they should be busy building the 970 Powermacs...)
Wow! I just tried this and it really works! I never thought it would be possible, but my mac now works just as well as my x86 box running windows xp!
you know your OS is bad when Linux is considered more usable than it is. :)
C - A language that combines the speed of assembly with the ease of use of assembly.
You keep going until you're running the fucking ENIAC. And don't forget the custom punched-tape reader either there, Nancy
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
From my Mac OS X license agreement:
"This License allows you to install and use one copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time."
It is illegal to run Mac OS X on a non-Apple computer. Even machines built from Apple parts are iffy.
N4st0r, trixx0r h0bb1tz0rz! Th3y st0l3 0ur pr3c10uzz!
The BriQ http://www.totalimpact.com has been able to run MacOS via MOL for ever so long, so this is in fact not great news itself. Question is: Why do so? Neither machines were intended for this purpose.
However it is nice to see companies supply motherboards based on the PPC processor because of the lower powerconsumption. More Power less Heat.
I have a 500mhz G3 iBook2. Aside from video access, it runs realtime. Hell, I've even used Bryce in it! Just try that with VMWare.
It could be that I run OS 9 in mol and OS X doesn't like the slower graphics functions.
On a sidenote, Amigas can also do this, as can Briqs. The mentioned system is not the first.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
Procedure... A
#1> Buy MacOS
#2> Don't tell Apple
Procedure B
#1> Buy PEGASOS motherboard
#2> Put Motherboard in old mac
#3> Call it an upgrade (The hardware {case} was approved by apple)
Procedure C
#1> Pirate MacOS
#2> Don't tell Apple
I'm not sure about the legal standpoints of running mac software on non-mac systems, but ya know, I don't give a shit. The SIAA isn't likely to go after *me* if I bought the software, no more then I've ever heard a case of mac emulation being pursued provided they bought the required ROMs. I should beable to put MacOS in my toster if I so choose to, dispite it being a violation of my license agreement. The worst thing I can see Apple doing is not support this alternative platform.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
I think it's more likely an issue with the emulation and video hardware. It's my understanding that Quartz (OS X's video rendering/compositing layer) is coupled with the specific sorts of hardware that Apple puts in their machine. Mess with that combo, and it's almost certain you're going to take a performance response hit as far as interacting with the UI or anything visual.
I've got a 333 Mhz Powerbook, and it runs OS X (10.1.5) at a sufficiently snappy speed to get plenty of stuff done. I *did* put a boatload of RAM in (320 MB total), which helps quite a bit, but if a 600 MHz machine isn't doing as well with half the RAM, the fault isn't the design of OS X or the hardware... it's gotta be something in how the emulation is done, or more likely, as I said, the integration between the OS and the video hardware.
Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.
This is sort of silly really. People who like apple, dont want a cheap fake apple. they might want cheaper apples, but they want it to work like an apple does. And that means the total experience.
There's no way a mac on linux clone will ever match the quality, ease of maintence, the no-surprises of hardware comaptibility or missing drivers.
Its cute but its not a mac in the ways that attract people to mac.
I think its main utility is for people who run Linux that occasionally need to run mac software
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Contrary to the article, there is no BIOS in any Apple computer. G3s and G4s use OpenFirmware. I suppose what the poster meant was "Boot ROM", not BIOS.
There is quite a cost issue associated with the method you mention - even if someone were able to successfully reverse-engineer the Boot ROM legally, and get a supply of compatible logic boards and processors, I highly doubt that Apple would license the OS to them. Because of the licensing terms of the OS, they couldn't package it with Mac OS X, so they'd have to leave it to the user to pay an additional $129 to buy Mac OS X.
Back in the mid-90s, Apple did license the OS to several clone manufacturers. It nearly drove Apple out of business, because market share wasn't increasing, therefore the clone manufacturers were taking sales away from Apple. Plus, it becomes an extra expense for Apple to have to support their OS on third-party hardware. Also, there really wasn't any compelling reason to buy a clone - they didn't look as good, the prices weren't much less, and they didn't really offer anything you couldn't get in a Mac. PowerComputing did demonstrate that you could use commodity parts and overseas manufacturing to be able to implement a faster bus and still charge slightly less. If I recall correctly, they had a 180 MHz 604 system with a 66 MHz bus, while the comparable Apple systems still only had a 50 MHz bus. Soon after that, Apple canned the licensing program, acquired PowerComputing and their engineers, and released the G3.
There is an intrinsic value in buying PowerPC Macs: the tight integration of hardware and software. Most of us are not willing to give that up even if an x86 box is cheaper. The PPC 970 will make the combination even more attractive. That revenue stream will not dry up--indeed, it seems to be on the upswing.
Apple will realize a NEW revenue stream the minute they announce for x86. People with conforming machines will pay the $100 for the software to see if they can get a better computing experience. If the release is good enough, enterprises will be more inclined to take a look. That will engender developer interest. We're already seeing the value of Mac OS X's open source roots in that there's a flood of software that "just works" on the PPC side. This will be true, too, with a predictable, standardized x86 configuration.
The timing of the announcement of "Athens"--the more tightly-integrated PC from Microsoft and HP--is no coincidence. Microsoft doesn't mention Apple when it decries its "open source" competition. But you can bet that Bill Gates knows what's around the corner. It's why "trusted computing" is also a big deal with Wintel now.
Apple could "die", but it's demise would be self-inflicted. The company has everything going for it right now. Things are about to get interesting.
Why would anybody use OS X if it does not come with a weird shaped colorful case?
It runs on several PPC platforms already and would provide a non-GPLed option for those so inclined.
Also, if they did this, binaries would be incompatible between the PPC and x86 versions, and fairly quickly most people would only develop for x86, making buying a Mac pointless.
Another thing: If they did this, they would be in direct competition with MS, which would be an insane thing to do.
Slightly more likely is OS X running on an Apple-only x86 system, but the OS 9 -> OS X transition is not totally finished yet, and it would be a major upset.
here is a screenshot of virtual PC on Mac-on-Linux on KDE. Very cool.
I bet you're happy to assume the GPL is valid, though?
Fairly pathetic troll, but it's Monday so: The GPL gives permission to do things that would otherwise be illegal. So what would be the point of invalidating the GPL? "Please! I'm begging you! I don't want to be able to copy this software. Take these onerous freedoms away!"
I do not have a signature
Darwin is Open Source. It would seem to me that if someone wanted to get OSX running without MOL (or Xpostfacto) on a non-approved PPC machine, they could compile a darwin kernel that does not exclude non-standard hardware.
For example this board has what appears to be a non-standard north bridge and south bridge (non-standard as far as apples go)but they work under linux. Someone could port the modules over to darwin, I'm sure. From what I can tell, there is not very much of a "community" behind darwin. Most seem content to let the apple guys do the darwin work. If I had any level of programming skill beyond 1 semester of C programming I'd seriously look into this myself.
Where do the major differences exist between darwin and Freebsd? Certainly FreeBSD is written to be portable since it runs on i386, alpha, and 64bit Sparc platforms. I'd think that some of the code could be inserted into darwin to add kernel level support for unsupported hw.
Apple stuff has pricedropped a lot, especially as of Quartz Extreme (QuartzGL) in Jaguar. In particular, old iMacs are now on price parity with old Pentium II hardware. (You may need to learn to distinguish the various models of iMac; if you don't know the difference between a DV and a Rev A/Rev B bondi, you'll see a lot of $800 pricetags and miss the real picture.)
The older hardware sometimes fetches *more,* because it was positioned higher in the product matrix (meaning people are trying to get back their $2,000 investments). Compare a Beige G3 to the iMac - both quite capable and comparable in speed, the former more expandable, but the latter much more OS X-ready - and you'll see the prices have only begun to level out. The Beige G3 towers take standard ATX supplies (and the desktop models can be made to do so, with the simple flip of a jumper), though you might need to redesign the cooling solution or switch cases with a swap.
The problem is that all the Apple hardware *previous* to that is suboptimal for desktop use in other ways- it predates SDRAM, and often PCI.
The Pegasos and AmigaOnes *are* a bit pricey now, but if they can get enough early adopters to create a market, there's no reason they can't reach rough price-parity with x86. The move to IBM chips should end the Motorola supply problems that have plagued previous attempts. So if you like PowerPC, the future does look brighter than it's been in years.
He meant an Apple ROM. New machines (OS X compatible) use what they call a "New World ROM." The information contained in them lets them boot into Mac OS X. Similar to a BIOS yet different. The OpenFirmware is contained in the ROM.
Actually, Apple used to sell a toaster that runs MacOS.
Check this out. Apple sued the hell out of them, so they eventually gave up. (well, not really them, but threatened, through the US government, brazilian exports, so the government made them give up) My professor have one of these machines in a shelf in his room at uni.
Actually I think flying might have been the only new feature they advertised.
So don't agree to the license agreement and figure out how to install OS X anyways.
The installer that displays the EULA can be thought of a device that effectively controls access to the copyrighted Mac OS X computer program and is therefore eligible for protection under 17 USC 1201, enacted as part of the DMCA. And if the DMCA is inconsistent with existing first sale and backup laws, the DMCA takes precedence because it was enacted later.
Will I retire or break 10K?
You can't breach a EULA as they are not binding contracts.
According to one interpretation, the EULA has been a binding contract since the DMCA was enacted in October 1998. (See how installers may qualify as copy-protection.)
To make a binding contract, both sides must give something up. You give up the right to reverse engineer the software, sue Apple, run the OS on non-Mac hardware, etc., and Apple gives you "the authority of the copyright owner" under 17 USC 1201 to run the installer that decrypts the computer programs that make up Mac OS X.
Will I retire or break 10K?
If you already have an Internet terminal, and you just want to add magical human flight, get a Gillette Mach 3 Turbo(tm) razor. It's a lot cheaper than a new operating system license, even at volume prices.
Will I retire or break 10K?
As far as I know, the courts view more recent acts of Congress as the more recent expression of democracy. If the United States Code is internally inconsistent, then the judge will tend interpret the law so as to follow those sections enacted later more closely than those sections enacted earlier. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which may make click-wrap EULAs binding, was enacted more than a century after the Sherman Antitrust Act.
I am not a lawyer, but I watch a lot of "Law & Order".
Will I retire or break 10K?
It's a strange slashdot obsession.
Putting together a system with this board will probably cost MORE than buying a mac, and running OSX under MOL reduces you to unaccelerated graphics anyway. I can understand firing up an OSX session on your pegasos machine to test if an app compiles/runs under OSX, but the usability of OSX under MOL is minimal.
I'd rather pay for Apple's workstation-class hardware than an obscure mobo running a VIA chipset, even if I have no intention of running an Apple OS.
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails